Thread: Order of using Handplanes minus the Scrub plane

G'day Sam

The blade on the #5 doesn't have to have a curve.....I've been using two #51/2s, one is a straightish edged blade and one is noticably convex. One for removing a bit of the initial roughness and bandsaw marks and the other to really gouge out some stock. Both planes have their mouths set quite wide.....much wider than the #7 and the #8.
Even if you did set up the Jointer so you could use it as a Jack....I wouldn't want to swing it for very long.

What sort of timber are you using......I'm just using Radiata for a start......it's cheap and you don't cry if it goes wrong.

cheers
Sean

Hi Sean,

I'm using Tasmanian Oak, recycled pallet timber and also radiata.

I'm fairly new to actually dimensioning timber with planes so havent really considered opening or closing the mouth of the different planes yet. I take it the narrower the mouth is, the less material you intend to remove ? Maybe that's where I'm getting lost because I feel like I'm doubling up by using the jack and then the jointer both set to take basically the same shaving.

Thanks for replying !

Sam

Sam, you'll probably get different bits of advice in every reply, but my take would be to look at what you're trying to do & use the planes you have to best advantage. As you become familiar with each step, you'll be better able to judge which tool is best suited to what you are trying to do, & you'll also be better placed to decide just which, & how many planes you really need. There's a common feeling amongst beginners in wwkng that you have to have at least one of every plane made - you most certainly don't need that many to do even quite fancy work.

Short-bodied planes will follow dips & curves, but are light & easy to weild as already pointed out, so you are actually better off starting with your smoother, but set up differently, i.e. with an open mouth (yes, that allows big chips to pass through), and a deep set to remove the high spots. A curved blade is best for this because it acts like a controlled gouge, which is why a scrub plane blade is sharpened so. You use it across the grain for maximum wood removal, at ~45degrees, but the angle isn't critical, just as long as you scoop off the wood fibres cleanly, with minimum tendency to split into the surface. You can do the same job with a square blade to some extent, but there will be much more effort in pushing it, & the sides of the cuts will splinter more.

A very satisfactory scrub can be made from any old cheap #4 by simply regrinding the blade with a curve & setting the frog as far back as you can without the blade fouling the sole. Something between a 75 & 100mm radius works well for me, but it depends on what you want to do, & what sort of wood you are likely to work with most. The more exaggerated the curve, the more "scoopy' the cut & so the more wood you can remove easily & quickly, but at the expense of a more deeply grooved surface, & of course more effort on harder woods. Only experience will tell you what radius works best for you. You'll be amazed at how much wood you can hog off in a few minutes with this tool. I made my scrub out of a very old (pre lateral adjuster) #4 which has a large chunk out of one side - it's light (the castings were a bit lighter in that era) & it does the job so well I've never felt the need for a 'real' scrub plane.

The scrub, should get you to an approximation of a straight, flat suraface free of winding, very quickly, compared with any other method. Now all you have to do is get rid of those grooves & any slightly high spots. If there are still high spots or the surface is deeply grooved from an overly-rounded blade, it's a lot easier to work these off with a lighter plane like a 5 or 5 1/2 than the heavier jointers, but you are still working with a sole length that will ride over the minor dips & dives. In fact you can finish the whole job with a jack, with a bit of practice - a jointer just makes it a little easier, particularly if it's a longish board.

For more years than I wish to remember, I worked with a single #5, which had to do duty as a scrub, jointer, jack & smoother. It was a pain in the butt to reset it for optimal performance on each operation, especially moving the frog, so I usually just left it at a pretty generous opening. With a sharp & well-bedded blade, you can get away with it quite well on many cabinet woods, but of course really gnarly grain can bring you undone. That's where it's nice to have a dedicated smoother with a really sharp blade & fine mouth, so that was the first plane added to my stable when I began to get really serious.

Working with a limited number of planes wasn't all bad, now I look back - it taught me what each step involved & what characteristics are need for each type of operation. In fact Eddie the Eagle, a long-time (I started to type "old" but he would probably object to that! ) professional cabinetmaker who posts here, advocates having just one plane, a #6, with which you can do all that's necessary to build furniture. For keen amateurs, having a few more specialised planes helps, I think, because they make some operations a lot easier, & we don't have the time to develop our skills so highly. However, having a cupboard full of the damn things can be a PITA when you are lazy & keep using the next-best one until the whole damn lot are dull.

Bit of a long-winded reply, but I hope you get my drift...
Cheers,

Thanks for the ‘long winded’ reply Ian it’s very informative and much appreciated.

I did read the post where Eddie the Eagle said he only used a No.6 and I’ve heard about other experienced blokes doing similar things. This intrigues me – do they do this just to keep it simple or does the accuracy in their work negate the need for as much planing ? I do like the idea of having one plane to sharpen and look for amongst all the mess !


Thanks again,

Sam

Originally Posted by Sam

I did read the post where Eddie the Eagle said he only used a No.6 and I’ve heard about other experienced blokes doing similar things. This intrigues me – do they do this just to keep it simple or does the accuracy in their work negate the need for as much planing ? I do like the idea of having one plane to sharpen and look for amongst all the mess

Not sure what all of Eddie's reasons are, Sam - you can PM him & ask him to chip in to this thread - he always has a good take on the issues.

I guess the aim would be to keep it simple, and make trainees concentrate on gaining skills rather than filling a toolbox with unnecessary ironmongery. It's quite amazing what human hands can do with the most basic of tools when sufficiently practised - have had this emphasised many times when I used to work in some Asian countries & saw what folks made with tools that seemed extremely crude. Granted, much of what I saw was hardly high-end cabinetry, but it was amazingly good - & all done with home-made tools, with bits of metal scrounged from all sorts of sources for cutting edges, & not a bench in sight!

I suspect a lot of the tool accumulation that goes on in our ranks is conspicuous consumerism, but to be fair, there are also many people on this forum who simply enjoy old tools & skills as their hobby. That's perfectly legitimate & the fact that they also make nice things with them is a bonus! However, beginners look at all the luverly gear that gets displayed & think they must have one of everything to do good work, when more often, they could do just as well with what they already have. Been through that! I'll never stop liking nice tools, but am more honest about what is necessary & what is desirable, nowadays. (I swear. )

Cheers,

I will PM Eddie.

Fortunatly I've only had to buy a few bits and pieces as my father collected enough tools over the years that when he downsized both my brother and I received a giant wooden chest full of good quality tools each.

You're right about producing good work with the tools you have. No doubt it's alot easier and quicker to use mostly power tools but there cant be as much satisfaction by just pushing the wood through a machine and then assembling all the pieces together. Then again perhaps the satisfaction of people admiring your finished pieces instead of saying 'Havent you finished yet ?' is the pay off !!!!!

Thanks for the conversation !

Sam

Originally Posted by Sam

I will PM Eddie.

My ears must have been burning. Thanks fellas.

My reasoning/experience is:

1) Modern stock is thicknessed by machine, it's already near straight in any case. THe really rough work is not required these days.

2) If you're cabinetmaking to tight tolerances, the boards have to be flat/straight anyway on the day you make the joints. No use trying to make something square out of something that isn't.

3) If your work is flat, then the plane length is of less importance.

4) The No 6 is long enough to joint with and has a wideish blade, so it takes a reasonable cut/will cut a flat surface with no plane tracks on a 2" board.

5) If your work isn't quite flat, either put a few shavings under the board where you need to flatten it (raises it a smidgeon,) or skew the plane so the effective length of sole is less.

6) The heft of the plane keeps it going through minor knots and other imperfections.

I find that one plane is all that's really necessary. After the plane comes sandpaper for work that needs it. I'm sure that there's no coincidence that the old tradesmen's bench planes are the same length as a No.6. It's an ideally sized plane that can do everything from smooth to joint, providing the stock is reasonably flat.

I'm sure that there's more that I've forgotten.

Trust that this helps.

Cheers,

eddie

edit: Sam asked if one plane was to keep it simpler - yes, in part. Having to worry about one plane is a lot easier and it's a lot easier to carry and sharpen one plane. I find myself very rarely needing anything else bench plane wise (I use a shoulder plane regularly, but that's a different function.) I sharpen my blades without any intentional camber as well - ie: straight blade.

Originally Posted by eddie the eagle

It's a lot easier to carry and sharpen one plane.

As a learner, I find it easier to concentrate on working out how to sharpen and what to do with one plane. Each plane can take me a month of stolen 5 minutes to tune and sharpen a plane, so only using one is virtually a necessity. My current choice is a fairly modern #5, because that's what I've got, but I'd like to get something heavier and longer, but will probably get one of each, say a #6 for general work and a #7 or #8, or even one of those beautiful wooden jointers to go with it.

I find that one plane is all that's really necessary. After the plane comes sandpaper for work that needs it.

Hi Eddie

I think that it is fair to say that there are many different ways to work and that these depend on what wood you are given to work, and what your time constraints are.

For example, there are those who work, as you do, with machines to prepare all the material, and then there are those that use handplanes to prepare the material. This is not about right or wrong. This is a choice.

Given someone working with machines to prepare nice, flat boards, then it may be perfectly OK to recommend a #6 or, as David Charlesworth (notable British teacher) uses a #5 1/2, or as the late Alan Peters (notable British cabinetmaker) was famous for using a #7.

On the other hand, if one were to prepare boards with handplanes, then recommending a #6 to do everything is just plain silly. I'd hate to remove excess waste with a wide blade - it would require a huge amount of brute strength. I would hate to smooth a long panel that is not perfectly flat with a long plane - it would create a thinner board than desired.

There is a good reason why Stanley made planes in a variety of lengths. There is a reason why the cabinetmaking world used planes of different lengths and blades of different curvitures and different widths. All of these made working with handplanes that much easier.

I am a hobbiest. I could use power but I prefer to use handtools - time is not a big factor in my furniture making. You, on the other hand, need to meet deadlines. To prepare your boards by handplane would be suicide. In your context one plane (if at all - you probably sand more than you plane) makes sense. In my workshop it would be very hard work if all I had was a #6. I could make it work (I have done so), but there is no necessity to be that frugle, if the choice is yours.

The OP asks about handplanes, what to use. He is a newby. But he has handplanes. And over time he will come to discover that each has its place and does a specific job, and that this makes sense ... and that this is important if the world is to be in balance ...

Regards from Perth

Derek

Well there you go, Sam, wise words from two highly respected woodworkers, & quite different. This is good - it makes you realise (if you haven't done so long ago !) that there are always many ways of skinning the proverbial cat. On the one hand you have the commercial imperative to get the job done as efficiently as possible (which, btw, drove the invention of all the hand tools we appreciate as well as the screaming, roaring kind). On the other hand, you can have the satisfaction of doing it all with quiet potatoe-driven power (or perhaps the occasional stream of expletives when you bang your fist or something ) helped along by tools that are designed to work best in limited applications.

I'm probably somewhere between Eddie & Derek - I would definitely not like living with a single plane, even though I have a fair amount of powered equipment for stock preparation, but I can do what I need to with a relatively small number, of which 3 or 4 get heavy & constant use. The others spend a lot of time just sitting in the cupboard, but when their moment comes, they are greatly appreciated. For example, I often enough need to square up a large solid-wood panel. Since I don't have a panel saw, being able to rough it out then quickly plane to square & true with my LV bevel-up smoother is a real boon. There are other jobs at which it excels, too, but for many more years I did the same tasks with my faithful #5 workhorse, just not as easily, perhaps. I think this is the point Eddie is emphasising - you can do a lot, & do it well, with a single, multipurpose tool after a bit of practice.

So if what you are doing is more hobby than serious production-line work, it's all about weighing the advise, then mucking about, trying different things, & eventually coming up with your own conclusions as to what works best for you. Go at it, have fun, & in a little while, you'll be offering opinions on planing, too, I hope.....

Cheers,

Thank-you all for your contributions, I’ve learnt alot.

Ian has summed it up very well in all his posts and hopefully in many many years I’m skilled enough to have the choice as to work with one plane or as many as I can sneak past SWMBO !

I'm sure there's a rule somewhere that says the number of planes you need is equal to the number SWMBO has allowed you, plus one!

Originally Posted by rhancock

I'm sure there's a rule somewhere that says the number of planes you need is equal to the number SWMBO has allowed you, plus one!

What!!! Only plus ONE.

I guess I've broken yet another rule... (several times)

Cheers, Vann.