Results 1 to 8 of 8
  1. #1
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    1,220

    Default Stanley Bailey No7

    This followed me home today.
    Not sure if it is a Frankenstein.
    Handle, and blade holder not original???
    What about the frog???
    Can anyone tell from the photos?
    Date???
    Any info appreciated.
    Thanks
    Lyle
    Attached Images Attached Images

  2. # ADS
    Google Adsense Advertisement
    Join Date
    Always
    Location
    Advertising world
    Posts
    Many





     
  3. #2
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Bundaberg
    Age
    54
    Posts
    3,402

    Default

    English made 7, made sometime between WW2 and 1972. Can’t really pinpoint it better than that without seeing the yoke, adjuster and the tolerances between the base and the frog but I’ll take a stab at late 50’s judging by the colour of the front knob. The rear handle looks like a replacement but could also have been someone’s attempt at restoration.

    The lever cap is wrong; that’s been stolen from a 4 or a 5. It should be wider. The blade is a goody; it’s an Australian made Stanley with a HSS tip. Correctly sharpened it’ll breeze through Aussie hardwoods.

    What you have there is the makings of a good user. Get hold of a correct lever cap and make your own rear handle and you’re halfway there; flattening the sole, sharpening the blade and fettling the cap iron is the other half. which one you pick first is up to you!

    Keep an eye out for a junk 4-1/2 with a good handle; they are relatively easily found and will supply all the bits you need to get the 7 running smooth.
    Nothing succeeds like a budgie without a beak.

  4. #3
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    1,220

    Default

    Thanks for that.
    I'll scrub it clean and get some more photos.
    I'll start looking for the bits you suggested.
    Lyle
    Attached Images Attached Images

  5. #4
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    1,220

    Default

    Thanks again Chief.
    A couple of more photos after clean up.
    I see what you mean re the lever cap, it is too narrow.
    The frog I think is ok because there is minimal gap between it and the body.
    Photo of yoke assy.
    Lyle
    Attached Images Attached Images

  6. #5
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Bundaberg
    Age
    54
    Posts
    3,402

    Default

    Hi Lyle; regarding the frog I was looking to see how close the machining is on the gap in the middle where it straddles the central rib on the sole. All the prewar US Stanleys and the early English ones were closely machined so the frog maintained lateral alignment when adjusting them back and forth. When the frog receiver changed to a "Y" shape they stopped machining those parts and just made the gaps in the castings massive instead. This is why setting up later Stanleys has pitfalls for the uninitiated as they don't realise the frogs can be quite badly skewed across the mouth.

    Now that you've cleaned out the dust that was packed under the frog can I get a photo of the bottom of the frog and the section of the sole where it sits?
    Nothing succeeds like a budgie without a beak.

  7. #6
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    1,220

    Default

    Thanks for your help Chief.
    I hope these photos are what you need.
    Lyle.
    Attached Images Attached Images

  8. #7
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Bundaberg
    Age
    54
    Posts
    3,402

    Default

    Looks like the center rib has the machining on either side of it so I'm going to stick with my previous guess of 1950's era. Dating English Stanley's is very hit & miss as basically they picked a late design and just spent less and less on quality control as the years went by.

    You've picked up the makings of a good user plane; I hope you enjoy it!
    Nothing succeeds like a budgie without a beak.

  9. #8
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    1,220

    Default

    Thanks. I am going minimal work on this. A good clean up, virtually no rust. Blade sharpen. Look for a correct lever cap. Cleaned up the woodwork and shellaced it, then buffed up. The handle is missing the "lambs tongue", but I'm not worried about that.
    Then good to go.
    No to build up some muscles to push it around...
    Lyle

Similar Threads

  1. Stanley Bailey No 4 Type 16
    By ShoshinJoe in forum ANTIQUE AND COLLECTABLE TOOLS
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: 26th September 2018, 10:20 AM
  2. Stanley Bailey No 4 Plane - I just don't get it !
    By Ozziespur in forum HAND TOOLS - UNPOWERED
    Replies: 8
    Last Post: 16th October 2012, 06:17 AM
  3. Stanley Bailey No. 3 or ????
    By watson in forum HAND TOOLS - UNPOWERED
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: 10th January 2007, 10:15 PM
  4. Stanley Bailey No5
    By sam63 in forum HAND TOOLS - UNPOWERED
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 22nd February 2005, 06:42 PM
  5. Stanley/Bailey No 5
    By alf t in forum HAND TOOLS - UNPOWERED
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 6th July 2003, 05:12 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •