Thread: Stanley No.5. What era?

I agree Paul, type 13. The knob is rosewood but I'm not sure about the tote

Thanks Mic

It also has the larger adjuster for the blade. I forgot to mention that before.

Regards
Paul

Agreed; it’s a Type 13 “Sweetheart” circa 1925-1928.

To the all knowing ones, does Paul’s plane have a patent date stamped in the brass adjustment wheel, or is that a Type 11,
I think it’s the Type 11, tho I’m happy to be corrected before the end of the year, the corrections re set too zero 1 January.

Paul if your plane does have them you will need too clean the inside of the wheel, very well too see them.

Cheers Matt.

Matt

I don't think the Type 11 had the larger, 1.25", blade adjuster. This is some info from the dating site for a Type 11:

" Type 11. Planes made by Stanley 1910-1918.

• All of the features of the previous, except:
• APR-19-10 patent date appears with the others patent dates cast behind the frog.
• A new trademark is adopted, where "STANLEY" "NEW BRITAIN" "CONN." "U.S.A." forms a v-shaped logo.

Click here to go the Plane Feature Timeline for this type."



My plane only has a single stamp and none that other gubbins in a "V" shaped logo.

Regards
paul

Originally Posted by Bushmiller

Matt

I don't think the Type 11 had the larger, 1.25", blade adjuster. This is some info from the dating site for a Type 11:

" Type 11. Planes made by Stanley 1910-1918.

• All of the features of the previous, except:
• APR-19-10 patent date appears with the others patent dates cast behind the frog.
• A new trademark is adopted, where "STANLEY" "NEW BRITAIN" "CONN." "U.S.A." forms a v-shaped logo.

Click here to go the Plane Feature Timeline for this type."



My plane only has a single stamp and none that other gubbins in a "V" shaped logo.

Regards
paul

Paul,

I use this site

What Year And Type? Stanley Bailey Hand Planes: Types 11 And 12

Cheers Matt.

Now you have got me curious to date Dad's Stanley #5.

I have found this calculator to be quick and easy
How To Identify Stanley Hand Plane Age And Type (Type Study Tool) | Wood And Shop

Just scroll down the page a bit until you get to the question of how many patent dates are behind the frog, tap the number for your plane, and go from there. It keeps asking simple questions until it arrives at your plane type.
I didn’t do it for your plane Paul, but I suspect you are right with type 13.

I ran the numbers through Brad's link, which in fact is the same as Matt's link (Matt had jumped a step so it looked different at first glance, but it was the same site). All of the links question as their first step the number of patents behind the frog. With my plane there is only one. It could be a 13 or a 14. This leads to the question does the front knob have a cast ring around the base in which the knob sits. My plane does not have that making it an earlier model.

Hence my plane is a Type 13. QED

I read that the ring around the base was to give extra strength or rather support (the timber still has the same strength ) as they were prone to damaging, which is exactly what has happened to the knob (it is a tall version) on my example.

Thank you everybody for checking out my supposition.

Regards
Paul

PS: Matt, the Type 11 and 12 planes had three patent dates behind the frog. Otherwise, they were very similar. I think the larger 1¼" adjuster was introduced with the Type 12.

Originally Posted by Bushmiller

...... PS: Matt, the Type 11 and 12 planes had three patent dates behind the frog. Otherwise, they were very similar. I think the larger 1¼" adjuster was introduced with the Type 12.....

Yep, I've got a type eleven 5 1/2 with the 3 patent dates & small brass adjuster knob - I think the slightly larger knob on the later types is definitely an improvement unlike some of the more dubious 'improvements' Stanley made as the years rolled by. What I particularly like about those earlier planes is they had a somewhat lighter casting. It makes them a little more delicate & not so good for those who like throwing their planes on cement floors, but I find that small difference in weight adds up to a big difference in a long planing session.

Michael, I'd make a small bet the handle/tote is a rosewood (i.e. a Dalbergia of some sort) as well - the colours & grain patterns of old rosewood handles can be quite variable, but as I understand it, it was the only wood used on US planes up 'til WW2. Of course, handles are easily replaced, but that one does look like it matches the plane's age. The knob looks like it could be repaired pretty cleanly if you have any rosewood kicking about (I might have a little bit that would be a reasonable match if you want to try). The ring cast on the sole is supposed to prevent the breakage noted on this plane - I think it works 'cos I've seen quite a few old 'low' knobs from 'rimless' planes busted around the edges like that, but can't recall having seen any broken ones on planes with the ring.

That's potentially a very nice plane you have there Paul - I'd happily offer you $20 for it (c'mon, that's 100% profit! ).


Cheers,

Paul it will come up nicely. I restored a type 13 as a prize for a comp on here way back. Was a #6 though. Ian's right, the casting is much finer on these.

The #6 has landed

here's some of the photos lost from that thread
IMG_1003.jpeg
IMG_1005.jpeg
IMG_1008.jpeg
IMG_1009.jpeg'
IMG_1011.jpeg

Types 13/14 are generally considered to be the best type for Stanley bench planes. They have all the best features and the degradation in production quality began shortly afterwards. Plus folks really dig the Sweetheart logo on the iron.

Personally I prefer the low-knob and smaller brass adjuster of a Type 11.

V

Originally Posted by IanW

The knob looks like it could be repaired pretty cleanly if you have any rosewood kicking about (I might have a little bit that would be a reasonable match if you want to try).
That's potentially a very nice plane you have there Paul - I'd happily offer you $20 for it (c'mon, that's 100% profit! ).


Cheers,

Ian

Thanks for the extra info and the offer of the Rosewood. I know I don't have any but the broken portion can probably be positioned towards the rear and I may see first if I can repair with a similar colour timber. I am not overly precious about the plane although it is beginning to grow on me.

As for the 100% profit, I will have to think on that one . I don't think things are that tight yet.

Regards
Paul

Originally Posted by mic-d

Paul it will come up nicely. I restored a type 13 as a prize for a comp on here way back. Was a #6 though. Ian's right, the casting is much finer on these.

The #6 has landed

Mic

If my plane turns out half as nice as that No.6, I will be well pleased.

Regards
paul