Thread: Ebay Droppings Thread.

I think that this is a bit optimistic.

TT

Love the description "in excellent vintage condition" I'll have to remember that next time I want to sell something in really bad condition but old

You didn't like the excellent vintage brazing?

HUGE lot? HUGE Lot of Vintage Hammers Saws, Baler Clamps, Level, Hand Tools & MUCH MORE!

Umm. Unusual interpretation of huge. And the price... reduced by 33%! Dream on.

Regards
Paul

Interesting brass caliper though

and a rabbit (rabbet?) trap

Originally Posted by Sawdust Maker

and a rabbit (rabbet?) trap

A little known woodworking device, fallen from favour, that produces stopped dadoes (dead ends).

Regards
Paul

I thought for a moment I should have gone to Specsavers when I saw this one.

ANTIQUE 1858 DISSTON & MORSS NO. 43 COMBINATION SAW SQUARE IN HANDLE RARE TOOL | eBay

Granted, it does have the awl, which is often long gone down a crack in the floorboards and it is impressive sporting nearly as many medals as the No.99, but the handle has been chewed by a desperate rat. I think it is being offered at about four times the price I saw for the last one.

US$1999.99.

Plus postage! (You'd think they would throw that in wouldn't you? As a little sweetener. )

Disston No.43 combination handle.jpgDisston No.43 combination.jpg

Regards
Paul

This has got to be one of the most blatant misrepresentations I've ever come across. The seller is trying to sell some (Luban?) bronze number 3 frogs as low angle replacements for regular plane frogs. The problem is that what he is trying to sell is a "Bedrock" type frog that won't actually fit anything else.

Can anybody tell me what the normal bed angle on a Bedrock is? I'm hazarding a guess at 20 degrees which with this frog would give a total pitch of 45 degrees but there is a possibility that these frogs are actually made to give a higher pitch and the seller just doesn't know... or care.

Hi Chief,

I don't see any representations in the title or product description that say it will fit a Bailey pattern plane. It does say that the buyer will need to determine if it's the right frog for their plane and will suit a number of makes. This is true as it should fit LN, Luban, Woodriver, Stanley and any other make that use the bedrock style.

Also, "low angle" is a pretty hard concept to pin down. It might refer to anything less than 45 degrees.

Just my two cents.

Zac

Hi Zac

I tend to agree with Chief.
Either the seller doesn't know what they have (which makes the assertions uninformed and hence misleading) or it's blatant misrepresentation.

As far as I know, Stanley and LN bedrock frogs are not interchangeable, and unless they come from the same factory, Luban and Woodriver frogs are very unlikely to be interchangable.
And going back to when the Chinese copies of Lie Nielsen planes first hit the market, I can't recall anyone suggesting that parts on the copies were interchangeable with LN originals.

As to the "low angle" claim -- bovine excrement !!
The angle demonstrated in the pictures does not represent the bedding angle. From here they look a lot like standard angle frogs to me.

It also begs the question: where did they come from?
An in new condition standard frog is not something I would normally consider to be a spare part. Typically one would order a higher angle frog to convert an existing plane to a higher cutting angle, or very occasionally the reverse, to convert a purchased higher angle to standard angle.
But three? and all sized for a #3? Very odd.

Originally Posted by ian

As far as I know, Stanley and LN bedrock frogs are not interchangeable, and unless they come from the same factory, Luban and Woodriver frogs are very unlikely to be interchangable.
And going back to when the Chinese copies of Lie Nielsen planes first hit the market, I can't recall anyone suggesting that parts on the copies were interchangeable with LN originals.

I would have thought that if Woodriver planes really are a direct copy of the Lie-Nielsen, then the frogs would be interchangable (if you're copying something that closely, why change that aspect?). However, that's just a guess.

What I do know for sure is that an L-N 1 3/4" frog does not fit a Clifton No.3 (the frog I tried was out of a LN No.5 1/4) and a LN 2 3/8" frog does not fit a Clifton 2 3/8" plane (both planes were 4 1/2s) and vice versa. In each case the pins were at different spacings. As for Woodriver/Luban/Quangsheng (which all come out of the same factory I believe) - I don't own any, and don't know anyone who does. I do have a Stanley Bedrock but with a 2 5/8" frog I doubt I'll find a LN or Woodriver to compare anytime soon.

Originally Posted by ian

As to the "low angle" claim -- bovine excrement !!
The angle demonstrated in the pictures does not represent the bedding angle. From here they look a lot like standard angle frogs to me...

I have to agree. I can't recall to bedding angle of LN and Clifton bedrocks (they were the same), but I'd be very surprised if fitting one of these frogs would result in anything lower than 45*. My Lie-Nielsen No.4 1/2 came with a high angle frog (55*). I suspect the seller is trying to say this is not a high angle frog (but the term "low angle" is just SO incorrect if he means "standard angle").

I see the auction has been pulled by the seller due to "an error in the listing". I guess he is just ill-informed, rather than purposely misrepresenting the item.

Cheers, Vann.

Originally Posted by Vann

.......I see the auction has been pulled by the seller due to "an error in the listing". I guess he is just ill-informed, rather than purposely misrepresenting the item......

I tend to agree, Vann - more likely simple ignorance than criminal intent.
Someone not familiar with the 'bedrock' system could easily look at the isolated frog and think it's 'low angle' compared to a standard Bailey frog. It is, but because it sits on a ramp and not parallel to the sole like the Bailey, the blade bed ends up at a pretty ordinary angle when in place.

Hands up those who haven't made the occasional mistake...
Cheers,