Thread: Record #4 Smoother

Originally Posted by GraemeCook

Have just been given a Record No.4 in quite good original condition. Parts are complete, and they seem original. Some cosmetic issues with "swirl marks" on the blade and frog - possibly some pre-restorer used a 9" angle grinder and a belt sander - but not serious.

So far I am actually impressed by the quality of the plane and so started some basic research - I know nothing about Record, but as far as I can tell my plane was probably made between 1945 and 1952.
Record Hand Tools

Record #4.jpg


But I have a problem; all references that I have consulted say the the Record #4 had a 9 inch sole, but my plane is 9⅜ inches long.

Any ideas????

The 3/8" is probably the length of the little heel under the rear handle.
A beautiful pane - well made - it should serve you well
Tom

Originally Posted by Scribbly Gum

The 3/8" is probably the length of the little heel under the rear handle. ...

Possibly; but I presumed LOA meant LOA!

Originally Posted by Scribbly Gum

The 3/8" is probably the length of the little heel under the rear handle.
A beautiful pane - well made - it should serve you well
Tom

That's exactly the case with my Record 4. 9" long and the little heel is angled up out of contact.

record_len_sml.jpg

I also have a couple of more modern 4s, a Faithfull and a diy superstore own brand. Both slightly longer and the little heel is not bevelled up on either of these.

group_sml.jpg

Regards Jim

Graeme, I don't know much about Record's history but I did a bit of delving and found this:

When Record Tools became Record-Ridgway the bodies of these planes were lengthened by 3/8″ to measure 9-3/8″ in total. Some time around 1972/3 the bodies were again lengthened by another 3/8″ to allow for more room around the handle, giving a total length for these later planes of 9-3/4″. here.

Record merged with Ridgeway in September 1972, so it would seem your plane fits with a post-1972 date, which better fits with the spanking condition of your plane, methinks!

The shaping of the grip of the tote isn't as nice as the pre-war Rosewood totes, and not something I would like to hang onto for long sessions (particularly with that thick lacquer coating which is peeling on the knob, as it likes to do). Your plane is in such amazingly good nick, even I would hesitate to tamper with it, but I hate the "high" knob they slavishly copied from Stanley, particularly on a #4, & I prefer a more oval shape to the grip. If it were my plane & I intended using it a lot, I'd very promptly replace the knob & tote & carefully store them somewhere so they could be replaced if you ever decided to on-sell it. It might be a smart move in any case 'cos that intact decal on the top of the tote and original lacquering might be worth more than any of my planes in toto.
Cheers,
Ian

Hi all. Nice plane. If later date is right then Record kept using timber handles and knobs a lot longer than Stanley.

I am an unabashed admirer of Record planes; some say I own too many…

Here are my “go to” smoothers; the one on the left was made between 1945 and 1952, the middle one was 1952-1955 and the one on the right was made in 1979 (ex WD and stamped with the supply date). Despite David Lynch saying that rosewood furniture stopped at the war the LH plane definitely has a rosewood handle and knob, both lightly varnished. The middle plane has very darkly stained beech but I’m open to suggestions as to what lurks beneath the thick varnish of the last plane.
11749995-D56F-41EC-B4A0-74E086459D83.jpg

As for length; up until 1957 they remained the same length, give or take a few mm. Here is one compared to a Type 16 Stanley, definitely the same designed length. You might also note the more chunky casting of the Record, it is noticeably heavier in the hand than the Stanley.
37F830FE-2D26-46E6-8645-B38806C9D899.jpg

The 1979 plane does have a longer sole, this would have occurred sometime after 1956 when Record followed Stanley’s lead and adopted the cheaper-to-make ogee shouldered frog.
5019D056-2EB0-4C6D-9CDB-1E77580384AB.jpg

So; from what I can see in the photo it has post-‘52 furniture and a pre-‘57 solid frog. For it to be a beech handled ‘45-‘52 model the lateral adjustment lever would be plain and unstamped, if yours is stamped “Record” it’s a 1952 to 1956 model.

Originally Posted by Mountain Ash

.... If later date is right then Record kept using timber handles and knobs a lot longer than Stanley.....

In general, they did, if my memory is to be relied on just a little. However, Stanley did use wood on some models well into the 80s because I bought a new #3 (in Canada) in about 1983 or 4 & it had beech "furniture". It was also the worst POS I've ever encountered - it looked like a #3, but that was about as far as it went....

Chief, it just goes to show that ye canna rely on a single source for information on the tangled web of dating planes! If the statements I copied above were both true, then the length increase to 9 3/8" had to be after Sept 1972. But if your planes are of incontestable known dates then it would seem to blow one or the other out of the water. I think your suspicion that rosewood was still in use for a while after WW2 may be well-founded, too. I cannot prove it, but certain things lead me to suspect my rosewood-handled 07 is post WW2. The tote is better-shaped (i.e., a little more towards an oval cross-section) than later Record totes, but not as nicely-shaped as the pre-war Stanleys were - a ~1918 Stanley tote that I found with half a horn & the elongated bottom part snapped off is still my go-to as a model for totes!

My limited experience of the various Records & Stanleys that have passed through my hands leads me to believe that Record maintained the standard of their machining of the frog & bed longer than Stanley, as well as the use of wood....
Cheers,

Thanks everyone. I thought that this would be a simple exercise, but the more I look, the more inconsistent the record becomes. “All research is only as good as the sources”.

Ian, I have verified from several sources that C & J Hampton Ltd (owners of the Record Tools factory and brand name) acquired 50% of William Ridgeway from William Marples and Sons Ltd in 1963, and they acquired the remaining 50% in 1972 or 1974 to become Record Ridgeway Tools Limited. So far I have not been able to find anything definitive on the lengthening of the sole by adding that little heel extension. Chief’s photos shows planes both with and without that heel.

My plane was given to me about a year ago and it just sat there. It is in quite good original condition:

• · Body has medium blue enamels in excellent condition,
• Body is embossed “RECORD No o4” on the toe and “MADE IN ENGLAND” on the heel.
• · Tote and knob are heavily lacquered and dark stained over a light coloured, fine grain timber, consistent with European Beech,
• · Frog is unbranded and is enamelled except on the bearing surfaces, the number “3” is impressed under the enamel top and bottom,
• · The blade has non-rounded corners and is engraved “Record – made in England – Best Crucible Cast Tungsten Steel”,
• · Chip breaker is engraved “Correct Angle for Cutting Irons (Diagram) 25° - RECORD”,
• · Lever cap is plated – possibly nickel.

Initially, largely because of its condition, I presumed that it was fairly new, then I increasingly became aware of the dichotomy between its inherent quality and the decline of mass produced tools. Basically; it’s too well made to have been recently made so it must be older. How much older? Started research.


I will do separate posts on my research endeavours, and some photos of the component parts.

Some photos of the component parts of my Record No o4.


Body.jpg Body; enamel is lighter blue than in photo.


Tote & Knob.JPG Lacqueur is thick!


Blade & Chip Breaker.jpg Blade length is still 7.5 inches.


Frog - Top View.JPG Frog - Bottom View.JPG Frog - Top & Bottom Views.


Lever cap.JPG Lever Cap

Hi,

I purchased a No 5 last year.
There is no Record logo on the plane just No 5.
The blade is the same as Graeme s but that is all.
It is black japanned but I do know it is an older
model plane. The lever cap has no markings on
it so I wonder if it is a replacement, I will post
some pics up.

Martin.

So CT, did Record also keep the better frog design for longer than Stanley also?

Graeme, this gets curioser & curioser! Your pic of the woodwork is much clearer than in the original photo & I'd bet half a stubby that the tote is rosewood:
Tote & Knob.JPG

It certainly isn't beech & it has a distinct look of rosewood to me. I wouldn't offer a firm opinion on the knob, but it doesn't look like beech, and I think it's a good chance it's rosewood too. So you seem to have a number of anomalies with your plane. If the wood is rosewood & original to the plane, it suggests a date much earlier than the date given for the sole extension. I suppose someone could have found a pre-1940s rosewood handle & put it on a later model, but the general condition of the wood matches the rest of the plane, so that doesn't seem likely to me.

I reckon you are going to have a hard time pinning this one down, but it'll be fun trying.....
Cheers,

I have too many planes. I started collecting Record planes and have heaps. I found the late David Lynch's site recordhandplanes.com to be far better than the record-planes website.

Yours is a type 3 - 1945 to ~1952 in VERY good condition.

Although they stopped importing rosewood at the start of WW2, rosewood handles would show up from time to time long after that. My theory is when stocks got low the rosewood handles at the bottom of the barrel would get exposed - then somebody would dump another truckload on top and the rosewood wouldn't emerge again for another year or two.

More later (got to go to the supermarket before it closes).

Cheers, Vann.

Originally Posted by Mountain Ash

So CT, did Record also keep the better frog design for longer than Stanley also?

Yes, Stanley changed to the ogee shouldered frog design in 1936, the Type 16. Record kept the solid faced frog until 1957; 21 years later.