Thread: Type 7 #4 Bailey

Ebay or Michael Jenks on Facebook.
I doubt you'll ever locate such a rare part in Oz for sale that isn't attached to a plane.

I would hang on to it and just keep an eye out. Is there enough frog to still use it? Before lateral adjusters it was tap tap here and tap tap there as in old wooden planes.
Good luck
John

Brett, I'm not sufficiently familiar with the frog changes Stanley made over the years, some were subtle, some more radical which meant they could not be retrofitted to older models (at least not easily) but in some cases at least, later frogs are compatible with the previous model or two.

Are you sure the top of the frog is snapped off? If it's a type 7 I don't think it should have a lateral adjuster, that came a type or two later. My oldest Stanleys are both type 11 (which does have a lateral adjuster), and the frogs have the fully-machined, flat blade beds like the type 7, but I'm not sure if the part that mates with the sole is compatible. Somewhere I've seen an article on the frog changes & what will fit what, but can't for the life of me remember where it was. But the message is, you may be able to fit a later type frog as a direct swap - I'm sure you could learn to live with a lateral adjuster, & only Stanley type-tragics will spot the ring-in....

Cheers,

According to the No. 4 type codifiers out there, a Type 7 definitely should have a lateral adjuster:
IMG_20220507_090348.jpg

Thanks dubrosa - I couldn't open the site I go to regularly & settled for a pic of a type 7, which didn't show the lateral adjuster clearly so I made the wrong guess...

I also could not remember when the slot on the toe came along (your reference says 1902) - that will prevent an earlier frog fitting on a later model unless you make a slot, but the slot won't affect the fit on your plane. It's always best to find a frog from the right era if possible, imo, but you may have a long search on your hands & if/when you find one, it's likely not going to be cheap. However, depending on your own tastes (& budget!), it might be worth spending a bit extra to keep it "original".

It took me at least 15 years to find a 'proper' lever cap for the type 11 #5 1/2 I inherited, & when I finally did find one, it cost me much more than I expected! However, I'm glad I got it - the shiny new thing I used in the interim, with a comma-shaped 'keyhole' instead of the old straight type just looked so out of place on the old girl:

Late LC.jpg Proper LC.jpg

The plane doesn't work any better though....

Cheers

Unless your sole has the central rib you won’t be able to use a later frog without some modifications. The vertical distance between the two machined receiver surfaces on the early models was quite low; when the central rib was added to improve lateral alignment the rear machined receiver had to be raised higher up. So if you try to fit a later frog you’ll find there will be a large gap under the back. You could easily apply packing to take up that gap but then you’ll run into snags getting the longer screws required; from memory those screws used Stanley’s uncommon thread pitch (will have a look to confirm a little later on). It might be possible to slip a washer or two under the back and cut down the front “foot” of the frog.

Another thing to bring to mind though is any change to the frog will include a change to the vertical height of the yoke relative to the sole… which means the cap iron won’t be in the right place. Not necessarily a problem; you can make a new cap iron to fit and Ian has made mention of this in several of his posts in the past.

Yeah, I vaguely remember from the article I read that there were other less obvious alterations to the frog.

Messing with the mating surfaces on the frog or bed is something I would not attempt myself. I'm happy to clean off burrs or minor imperfections but my hand-fitting skills are not up to shaving mms of entire surface. Shimming is a lot less fraught, and doesn't cause any permanent alterations. A bloke on the UK forums was recently spruiking how he 'fixed' a frog by shimming it (in a rather crude fashion too, imo!).

But the frog is the heart of a Bailey plane, and it really needs to sit very solidly if the plane is to work at its best - the least instability will spoil your day for certain sure. It keeps pointing to the best solution being to hunt down the real deal. There's sure to be one around somewhere looking for a good home - finding it is the only problem....

Cheers,

For the life of me I cannot see where or how to edit my post to include some pictures.

So I have replied to my own post with some pictures below

Maybe it is not a Bailey ??

Ow; there’s a lot less frog than I was expecting… right now she’s cactus. Sorry. You can hang out for a replacement frog but in Oz they’re rarer than a very rare thing; you’d find one in the US fairly easily but shipping it out here would be exxy.

What condition is the sole in? If it’s badly pitted then I’m afraid the iron bits are scrap value only but that rosewood front knob on its own is worth between $20 and $50 on Ebay depending on condition and how manic the bidders are on the day.

Originally Posted by Brett57

For the life of me I cannot see where or how to edit my post to include some pictures.

So I have replied to my own post with some pictures below

Maybe it is not a Bailey ??

Brett - you can only edit a post for a limited time, which is why you can't see the 'edit' option any more. But it's quite ok to 'reply' to your own posts...

Just as a matter of semantics, your plane is indeed a "Bailey". A Mr. Bailey was the original designer of that frog system - he sold the design rights to the Stanley company, who went on to produce the range of "bench" planes we know today using Bailey's design (with a few modifications along the way, as noted, some of which were done purely to extend the patent life, according to the cynics). For quite a while, Stanley made no mention of Bailey, but then they started casting his name on the toe, & the only mention of the Stanley name is on the stem of the lateral adjuster & the lever-cap. This has led to some confusion when folks first start 'collecting' older Stanleys...

As CT said, that there frog would need something more than a miracle to bring it back to life. If the sole is in reasonable nick, it is worth hanging on to & searching for a compatible frog, but you might be looking at a very long wait. Pity - it could have been a very nice bit of kit...
Cheers,

Thanks Ian,
I will hang onto it as I am u likely to find another one that old. Fingers crossed I can source a frog from the US, costly but I hope it is worth it.

I found a YouTube channel called Just Plane Fun; the owner is supplying Stanley parts across all years and types. He has also studied inter-type compatibility so he may know if a different frog can be used. He works mainly through his Bookface-thing site; drop him a line and see if he has something for you.

Here on Fleabay is a type 7 number 5; all the metal bits are correct but the wood is from a much later Made In England model. A bit exxy at $125 plus shipping but it shows there are a few out there still.

Chief, that's not an unreasonable price for a good old #5 - I suspect it would be more if it had its original wood & quite a bit more if it didn't have the rust pits (which should have very little effect on it as a user). It looks like it has good bones & if I was after a #5 myself (got 2 already, thanks), I would be tempted. I'd certainly replace the woodwork right smartly, as you say, what's there now is from a much later model. Besides the less-shapely tote, the "high" knob is a total anachronism...

Cheers,