Thread: Review: The Veritas Jack Rabbet Plane

Derek,

rebate (carriage) planes have always been considered versatile planes, at least by me but surely everyone long before me, i think several months ago i suggested a number #10 rebate plane as an alternative to a jack or junior jack plane for someones tool kit where they wanted perhaps only one plane and bare minimum tool kit. for a one plane kit a #4 is a good choice (there's an awful lot you can do with a #4!) or the afore mentioned #10 , 10-1/2, or 10-1/4 (the later two you didnt mention in your review), with any of these planes you could have completed the same project, the number 4 some annoying fiddling with technique required but its strengths can make up for it on other jobs, the #10 also a fiddle because no nicker (not hard to add btw) , the last two (3 if knicker added to #10) could have completed that project pretty much on a par with the Veritas rebate plane, it matters little about the fence although a useful addition..

low angle jack planes are a welcomed addition to the tool kit but i find them limited in practice, thats not to say they cant be adapted with steep blades etc to work in some situations but for long term or prolonged use they arnt the best tools for a large majority of non traditional jobs asked of them nowadays imo, a short term get out of trouble thing, fine, but a proper BD plane in the kit first, which in todays climate (fad) might be going against the grain but that leads to my developing theory that BU planes are mostly sold and promoted to newcomers and novices because they are simple machines to look at and explain (promoter simply makes it look wonderful by saying look just change the blade and now it does this, etc), they are intuitive to use for the uninitiated compared to a newcomer understanding the apparent complexities of BD plane workings (cap iron for example which is a benefit not a hinderance, except to someone that hasnt developed the skill or knowledge yet) and how to use and fully understand them, it takes longer to learn to use a BD competently but well worth the effort, they generally do the job better (easier to adjust on the fly as well) unless you have the perfect piece of timber, the LA plane obviously works easier on end grain (which makes it a nice addition to a kit) but standard bd planes have been used multiple billions of times over hundreds of years on end grain just fine producing perfect results, in fact i wouldn't have bothered using the shooting board for that project, even if i didnt have to go to the bother of screwing the piece of timber on (which i would find annoying), i would have simply flipped the panel on end as i was planing the other edges, however i appreciate you may have been wanting to promote another aspect for the LV plane. truth is, that can be done to any plane! as a side note for a long time i have thought that adding a triangular (wedge shaped) piece to the side of #6 (or any other plane) would be an interesting way to go (i have been waiting for someone to come up with it on the forum), if you see where i am coming from it would then work as a skewed blade running in a track, making it a cheaper alternative to buying a number #51, thats just me daydreaming while i'm doing something else, ...back to the LA jack rebate plane


in your article you mention the main competition to the LV jack rebate plane is the LV LAJ but your forgetting the Lie Nielsen LAJ, the LN LA Jack rebate plane and their #10-1/4 bench rebate plane (or was that intentional, it does read a bit like an advert in return for a free plane so perhaps you didnt want to mention the other manufacturer ) which tilts both rear handle and front knob (has a better nicker too), it might be open to argument or personal preference but i find the #10-1/4 to be a much better choice if just one plane had to be chosen, in a workshop situation luckily thats an unrealistic likelihood, even in a mobile tool kit one would fit in some sort of block plane in addition to a bench plane, more than likely a LA block plane. if you are only wanting to add a low angle jack plane (butchers block plane) to your kit then its fair to compare it to the LAJ's from either of the big companies and particularly the Lie Nielsen LA jack rebate

anyway its not a bad plane, quite a versatile supplement imo, wide blade for basic plain raised panels, even though its easy to do without i like the choice of using the fence, something i wish they would add to many planes (its only a couple of threaded holes after all), it would have saved me drilling into them myself on a few occasions over the years.

when i saw you mention thicknesser as one of its uses i was looking for something inevitably i didnt find but have been waiting for someone to come up with it on the forum sooner or later. , that is the rod & fence (with some timber cleats attached) lends its self to being used as a thicknesser (although you would need a second one on the other side and i dont know if they sell them separately) in a similar way i have adapted bench planes to thickness timber to make chess boards, butchers cutting blocks or accurate dimensioned timber for small box work, boat parts etc, making jigs works as well for thicknesing but the rods and fence that work like ski's across a flat bench can be handy, even for wide timber, not sure how strong the LV rods are for this purpose though, i use to use quite thick steel in one piece



cheers
chippy


oh, ps. working to a line for depth is easy of course, but fwiw you could add a depth stop of a sort easy enough to the vacant threaded holes into the opposite side of the plane to where the fence is, its another thing to do though

Hi Chippy

Wow, do you raise many points and ask lots of questions! All good

First of all, the comparison of the Veritas Jack Rabbet with its sibling LA Jack was deliberate and the other plans were not omissions by stealth (or whatever). When I review a plane, as you are aware, I include a reference plane with which readers will be familiar. In this case it is the LA Jack. Why the LA Jack? Simply because I am presenting the Jack Rabbet as an all-rounder, of which the LA Jack is one of the best.

Secondly, I do not care to pit Veritas/Lee Valley against Lie-Nielsen. This is fraught with all sorts of complications, the main one being that it ignites conflict on the forums from die-hard followers from each. In any event, Veritas and Lie-Nielsen have differences in their offerings. The LN #10 1/4 Bench Rabbet Plane is a BD plane with a 45 degree bed ..



It has a tilting handle/knob and nickers. Whether the nickers are better, as you state, is your opinion. They are not adjustable for projection in-and-out of the body, as the Veritas are. The cutting angle of the LN can be altered by using a back bevel on the blade (to suit interlocked grain) but it cannot cut at a low angle for cross grain work, as can the Veritas.

LN have a LA version, also newly-released, the LA Jack Rabbet - same name as the Veritas offering. That is where the similarity ends. The LN is a different plane. It is shorter (12 3/4" vs the 15 1/8" of the Veritas), slightly narrower (2 1/8" vs the 2 1/4" of the Veritas), and has a lower bed, which is not really significant (12 degrees vs 15 degrees). It has the traditional Stanley/LN (non-adjustable) nicker, but lacks the tilting handle of the Veritas, and does not have a fence (the #10 1/4 also lacks a fence). The fence counts for a lot in my book as it vastly simplifies rebates and raising panels. The Veritas would be the easier plane to use, by far.

LN:

Veritas:

Can you attach a depth stop to the Veritas (remember, I criticised the absence of this in the review)? Not that I can see a way to do. The existing bolt holes (that are used for the fence) are too low on the body. I think the body would have to be drilled to take a depth stop.

Why use the Veritas Jack Rabbet as a shooter? Ditto thicknessing. Why not? Remember, this is just an option for someone wanted a Jack-of-all Trades. Personally not for me as I have a bunch of separates, but ideal for the woodworker who wants one good plane for all occasions. Am I selling this plane? In a manner of speaking, yes of course. My intention is simply to show what it can do. That is what I do in all my reviews - see the other recent review of the HNT Gordon Dado plane (you know the one - you pulled a face at the use of "dado" ).

Incidentally, the idea of a tapered panel for the plane when shooting is a good idea. this would create a skewed blade and a true slicing cut, which works better (ala #51).

Did I leave anything out?

Regards from Perth

Derek

Originally Posted by derekcohen

Did I leave anything out?

well sort of ...

Hi Derek
in the photo above there are two holes in the side of the plane roughly in line with the angle of the blade
I don't recall you mentioning in your review what those holes are for.


Now I'm really torn between the (sort of traditional) look of the LN version and the fence on the Veritas version

My son recons the Veritas looks less like a shark or dolphin and more like a cartoon character with a big smiling mouth

Hi Ian

Those holes ...

Anyone familiar with Veritas/Lee Valley planes immediately recognises that the holes are set screws, used to align the blade when sharpening. You set the screws once the blade is in its ideal position. Then the blade can be returned to this position after sharpening. An important factor in my opinion (although not recognised as such by Chris Schwarz). The other aid these screws offer is as a fine adjuster for the blade angle.

In an ideal world one would be able to try out the LN and the Veritas alongside one another. It is not an oversimplification to argue that Lie-Nielsen steal your heart while Lee Valley steal your mind. The styling of a LN sways traditionalists to the point that they do not mind using a plane that lacks the sophistication of the LV. However there are those for whom the innovations brought by LV carry the day.

Regards from Perth

Derek

I'm not really asking questions Derek, so much as filling in some gaps of information you missed out, sorry i dont think mentioning LN should be a problem at all, generally people dont want half the story.

Originally Posted by derekcohen

Whether the nickers are better, as you state, is your opinion. They are not adjustable for projection in-and-out of the body, as the Veritas are

just so you know...the LN bench rebate plane (10-1/4) has retractable knickers, as i say they are a better design than the LV, i calls em how i sees em, i dont get anything free or have association with anyone



the LN LA rebate plane has the standard round knickers that are functional (i prefer the one on the 10-1/4 but the round type work), they rotate to retract out the way, but they do in fact retract so you might want to have another look at them again

i'm well aware of the bed angles of the different planes but my point is that all those planes would all do that project of yours, and if just wanting one plane then a BD plane is wiser choice than a BU imo . intentionally purchasing on a low angle plane to smooth at an effective angle around 50 or more is just not a great idea (folly) , use a BD plane better suited to the task, there are a number of reasons why but i dont want to divert the topic too much

45 deg bed still cuts end grain, always has, low angle planes do it easier and if you have a lot to do (such as butcher blocks) then its welcomed, if you dont have lots to do but have money to spare its welcomed too, funny thing is the low angle jack plane to you as you say might be a great al rounder but on the other hand its a plane easiest to do without.

did i leave anything out ? perhaps, not sure if you got my idea of using the rods and fence, one on each side to thickness timber, its not a negative, its adds value to the LV


cheers
chippy

i dont get anything free or have association with anyone

Hi Chippy

I know you are being provocative, but your insinuation and innuendo is off base (comments made in each of your last two posts). I have never hidden my relationship with Lee Valley. And I do not get tools for free. I get tools for working on them, providing feedback on design, sometimes from inception of the concept. The end "payment" is worth considerably less than I value my time. I do it for the fun and enjoyment, not the tools. Indeed I pointed this out in the first paragraph of this review, including my surprise that Lee Valley would honour this relationship when I thought I had offered so little this time around. The question is "am I biased as a result of this relationship?". The answer is of course I am. But bias is not a problem - not recognising, and then not controlling for bias, is the problem. My day job requires distinguishing between bias and objectivity all day long. That is why my reviews tend to resemble research projects. I do all I can to provide an objective report. It is not perfect, but the best I can do. Incidentally, I am not the only woodworker providing feedback to Lee Valley. There are others. I am the only one that writes reviews, which I do as I believe there are those that find them interesting and useful.

if just wanting one plane then a BD plane is wiser choice than a BU imo

You will need to qualify that comment. Anyone can say what they prefer or believe as though it were a fact, but then they are expected to substantiate it for it to have any value.

I would argue that a BU plane is by far the better choice if one seeks to have a single plane. For one, it has a wide cutting angle range, generally from 37 degrees upward. The BD plane generally can only manage 45 degrees at the lower end. This is relevant when planing across the grain.

Simplicity of setting up is not a factor for me, but may be for a beginner. In this case, the BU plane wins out again - no chip breaker to deal with. In the case of the LV planes, there is a set screw to return the plane to the original set up after sharpening.

There is one area especially where a BD planes bests a BU plane, and it is the reason I use BD planes more than I use BU planes. This is in sharpening blades. My preference is to freehand on a hollow grind. The BD plane takes its cutting angle from the bed angle. However, since a high cutting angle in a BU plane requires a high microbevel - one that only can be achieved with a honing guide - I find honing a BU plane blade tiresome. This is not a problem with the plane, only with my preferences. It is also not a problem for those that use a honing guide anyway.

Now, can you substantiate why you believe a BD plane is the better choice?

Regards from Perth

Derek

Originally Posted by derekcohen

i dont get anything free or have association with anyone

Hi Chippy

I know you are being provocative, but your insinuation and innuendo is off base (comments made in each of your last two posts). I have never hidden my relationship with Lee Valley. And I do not get tools for free. I get tools for working on them, providing feedback on design, sometimes from inception of the concept. The end "payment" is worth considerably less than I value my time. I do it for the fun and enjoyment, not the tools. Indeed I pointed this out in the first paragraph of this review, including my surprise that Lee Valley would honour this relationship when I thought I had offered so little this time around. The question is "am I biased as a result of this relationship?". The answer is of course I am. But bias is not a problem - not recognising, and then not controlling for bias, is the problem. My day job requires distinguishing between bias and objectivity all day long. That is why my reviews tend to resemble research projects. I do all I can to provide an objective report. It is not perfect, but the best I can do. Incidentally, I am not the only woodworker providing feedback to Lee Valley. There are others. I am the only one that writes reviews, which I do as I believe there are those that find them interesting and useful.

not being provocative at all, you simply seem to get all out of joint because i made some reasonable comments that differ from your own, i added in some planes and info that you neglected to mention is all, from your article it read as though they didn't exist so i mentioned them..if you take it as insinuation or innuendo then thats on you, the fact is you admit you end up with tools remains a fact, i take your point that they dont reimburse you in monetary value to what your accustomed to but you still get them. as you say you cant help but have a slight bias, you seemed to get all out of joint about the nickers so i pointed out your error and added that i dont have any agenda or allegiance so i wasn't mentioning it due to that, because i mention "i" dont get free tools or have an association with any of the manufacturers doesn't mean you should take it personally , its just a fact. i notice you havnt mentioned further about the nickers retracting? a diversion?

Originally Posted by derekcohen

if just wanting one plane then a BD plane is wiser choice than a BU imo

You will need to qualify that comment. Anyone can say what they prefer or believe as though it were a fact, but then they are expected to substantiate it for it to have any value.

i dont 'need' to at all, at some point i might when your not all upset, there seems little point at the moment

Originally Posted by derekcohen

I would argue that a BU plane is by far the better choice if one seeks to have a single plane. For one, it has a wide cutting angle range, generally from 37 degrees upward. The BD plane generally can only manage 45 degrees at the lower end. This is relevant when planing across the grain.

you might want to read through some of the info i already wrote, there are clues in amongst them relating to angles etc, there gets a point (angle) where the BU plane just doesnt match the BD plane over a period of time, wont hold its edge as long and wont (cant) be as sharp and a few other things, by the way fwiw BD skewed is probably about 40 deg or less, i dont measure these things, i just use them and they plane across the grain just fine

Originally Posted by derekcohen

Simplicity of setting up is not a factor for me, but may be for a beginner. In this case, the BU plane wins out again - no chip breaker to deal with. In the case of the LV planes, there is a set screw to return the plane to the original set up after sharpening.

chipbreakers (cap irons) are not in slightest bit difficult to set up, they are a benefit not a hinderance (BU lose out not having one), but i said in an earlier post that it takes longer to learn and become proficient or comfortable with them. you were only asking about them a few months ago so perhaps you have not yet got them working for you well. use a clifton cap iron and you can sharpen and return to plane without adjustments or undoing screws so thats arguments a wash, conversely adjusting depth on the fly while your actually using the plane and the BD plane is much nicer/easier/quicker to use than a BU

Originally Posted by derekcohen

There is one area especially where a BD planes bests a BU plane, and it is the reason I use BD planes more than I use BU planes. This is in sharpening blades. My preference is to freehand on a hollow grind. The BD plane takes its cutting angle from the bed angle. However, since a high cutting angle in a BU plane requires a high microbevel - one that only can be achieved with a honing guide - I find honing a BU plane blade tiresome. This is not a problem with the plane, only with my preferences. It is also not a problem for those that use a honing guide anyway.

Now, can you substantiate why you believe a BD plane is the better choice?

i think i given you enough to go on with for a while, BD does the majority of work more effectively, BU (BU jack) is good supplement but not essential

one thing i dont get is how you can be so adamant that BU jack is the best thing since sliced bread yet you yourself apparently dont use them for a majority of work, go figure!

Originally Posted by derekcohen

Regards from Perth

Derek

cheers
chippy

OK, I'm stepping in here as moderator of this thread.

I think it might be wise to leave the discussion rest, for the moment. Derek & Ch!ppy have both made their cases, enough for the readers to make their own decisions on the relative merits of the review object, plus a few others thrown into the mix.

I am firmly of the opinion that tool selection is a largely subjective process for thee majoritry of us. We may read reviews and make comparisons, but like buying motor cars, we tend to make our final choices from our hearts rather than our minds. Most buyers of expensive toolery these days are not earning their living with them, so it's good to be passionate about our preferences, but we can't expect everyone to agree on what's 'best'....

Cheers,

Derek, thanks for checking out the fit of the rabbet iron in the LAJ. Appreciated.

Cheers, Vann.

Originally Posted by derekcohen

Hi Ian

Those holes ...

Anyone familiar with Veritas/Lee Valley planes immediately recognises that the holes are set screws, used to align the blade when sharpening. You set the screws once the blade is in its ideal position. Then the blade can be returned to this position after sharpening. An important factor in my opinion (although not recognised as such by Chris Schwarz). The other aid these screws offer is as a fine adjuster for the blade angle.

Thanks Derek

Funny, I'm so used to adjusting the blade in a BU block plane with either my fingers or light hammer taps that I don't even think to use the set screws on my BUS. Maybe I have too many block planes

Hi Derek

I am making my first woodworking workbench out of bunnings pines for the top.

Can I use this rabbet plane to flat the top of the bench? 1.750mm x 645 mm size top.

Thanks
Hoey

Originally Posted by Hoey

Hi Derek

I am making my first woodworking workbench out of bunnings pines for the top.

Can I use this rabbet plane to flat the top of the bench? 1.750mm x 645 mm size top.

Thanks
Hoey

Hi Hoey

The short answer is that the ideal plane to flatten the top of a bench top is a jointer plane, such as a Stanley #7. The Jack Rabbet plane is the same length as a Stanley #5.

The other issue with the Jack Rabbet, as set up, is that it comes with a straight blade. This will create tracks on a wide face. You would need to get a second blade, which you can camber, to avoid tracks. You would also ideally use a higher bevel angle as the standard 25 degree bevel would leave a low cutting angle, although you may get away with this on pine.

My preference for this task (which I am about to do at home) is a #5 (if you need to remove high spots) and follow with a #7 to level.

Regards from Perth

Derek

Thanks for answering my questions, Derek.

I did get a delivery of a low angle rabbet jack plane and an extra A2 blade (for camber set up) and a pm-v11 blade yesterday.
That can be use as a #5 plane then.

Look likes i have to get a low angle jointer plane and a 38° or 50° blade to level the workbench properly

Hoey

Originally Posted by Hoey

I did get a delivery of a low angle rabbet jack plane yesterday.
That can be use as a #5 plane then.

Look likes i have to get a low angle jointer plane and a 38° or 50° blade to level the workbench properly

you don't need a low angle jointer plane to flatten your bench.
A properly setup (and sharp) standard 45 degree Stanley or Record will do the job flawlessly.



not that I want to discourage you from acquiring additional planes, but you may find a standard angle bevel down plane more useful in the long run.