Having read most of Garrett Hack’s book, spent time fettling a #4 smooth plane and creating a good sized pile of shavings I have a question or two.
I understand that each plane is made for more or less a specific purpose, but a single plane can also adequately perform other tasks i.e – a #5 or 51/2 jack can reasonably joint short stock and will also flatten boards and panels accurrately, right? But can I reasonably expect to accurately flatten a small (10×16) panel with the #4? The reason I ask is because I’m trying to decide between a 5or 6 jack or fore plane and a small block plane.
I tried to flatten a small panel like the one above – hard maple, and was moderately successful using the 4. If it’s a matter of practice I’ve got lots of lumber, but if I’ll only get results with the ‘right’ tool then my mind’s made up. I’m doing ok on end grain and even getting good edges on short pieces, but flatness is also an issue.
I think I have a jointer coming from my father. It’s about 24″ long he says, so I’ll say it’s an 8.
So I guess I’m wondering if I’d be best to fill the gap between the 4 and the 8 or go down first. Any thoughts would be appreciated. For now all rough stock prep is done with power tools.
Thanks. Chris.
Replies
Chris,
I'll throw my $.02 in. Yep, your #4 should flatten that small panel reasonably well. A longer plane would make it easier, and probably a little quicker, but your #4 should work.
You asked about filling the gap between the #4 and #8, and I would, before going down in order. #1,#2 are kind of novelty items, and a #3 is awfully close to a #4 sizewise, so I'd get a big smoother, like a #4 1/2, and a #5, then that #8. #6 is usefull for a lot, and I use it in place of the #5 pretty often, just because I'm not a huge fan of the #5's dimensions. With a #4, #5 or #6, and #7 or #8, your pretty well equiped with bench planes.
Have fun,
15,
For the most part I'd agree with Dirt with an exception on the #3. Remember, varing he mouth opening and the chip breaker changes the depth of cut....so you could have several #4 or #5 etc. set up differently. The #3 is a narrower plane and because of that I have modified it for scrubbing...and another #3 for finishing. The #3 as a scrubber comes in vey handy when taking out cup or twist, etc....and because its narrower..much easier to work with than a 4,5,7 would be.
Lastly, lets not forget planes for joining too....
Thanks. I'll fill in with round numbers and maybe treat myself to a really good low angle block. I also need to re-read the cutting angle stuff a few more times before getting into too much low angle anything. If I buy it I want to understand why.
More practice flattening will probably help out a lot, too.
Thanks again. C
15Broad
I'm sure you already picked it up, but this is one of the most common mistakes that is made with anyone getting started with planes, IMO. The low angle planes have the iron bevel up and the smoothers and jointers go bevel down or toward the heel. Don't look right if you don't know, but it is. Beats me, I just push em. :>)
Of course I could never make a mistake like that! he.. he...
sarge..jtProud member of the : "I Rocked With ToolDoc Club" .... :>)
BG,
Not to disparage the #3, I love my 603, and use it more then a a #4 but if you've got a #4 though, the #3 is very similar. Good call on the scrub plane, Chris could also get a #40 for cheap off Ebay to cover that. Steve
Chris
If you do end grain, you're going to eventually need a low-angle block. Nothing will do the end grain as the low-angle will. Since you've got a #8 coming and already have a #4 smoother, here's a little spin-off to think about.
LN has a low angle #5 Jack which is 14". LV has one that will be out soon. They will do end grain but a tad long for short pieces. By adding another iron to the arsenal ground higher, you also have a regular 45 degree #5 which fills the void between the #4 and the #8.
Another take is a low angle smoother. You get the same low angle as a block but LN's is 9 1/2 long. LV's is 10 1/2" and they have an additional iron ground at 38 degrees for it that will give you 50 degree York Pitch capability for squirrely grain. These also do end grain, but are still a bit long on short pieces. Again, you will eventually need a small hand-held low angle block.
Bottom line: In your postition if I did a lot of short end grain I would go low angle block first. Then add the # 5 low angle latter to have some versatily. If end grain is not on your menu often, I would go #5 low angle jack and purchase an additional iron now or latter depending on your purse strings.
There are no real answers that are correct we can give you. It will depend on your uses and needs. Whichever you chose, you could always second guess it latter as again, there is no correct answer.
If in doubt, flip a coin. You'll need both eventually anyway!
sarge..jt
Proud member of the : "I Rocked With ToolDoc Club" .... :>)
Chris,
Before making any big-money decisions, finish Garrett Hack's book. With it fully studied and understood, fiddle with the planes you have, or soon will have, get them completely tuned up, with truly sharp irons and then go make some shavings.
What I'm trying to say is for you to acquire some expertise in fettling and using planes, and a handle on why planes look different and why one works better than another doing certain things. Believe it or not, that will give you a much better notion of which planes you need and which planes you can do without.
Buy planes only when you have a reason. In tuning, sharpening, and using the planes you already have, you will soon discover the work you want to do with Armstrong-power planes, but cannot because you don't have the right tool.
In short (at last!): acquire planes to do the jobs you need done; buy the best plane you can afford; and don't buy planes and then look for things for them to do.
I wouldn't dare advise you what plane you ought to next acquire. That's really a question only you can answer. If you can't answer that question, you need to spend some more time studying and using whatever tools you already have;, i.e., become an informed consumer--not the kind that makes on-commission salespersons drool when they see your glazed expression, your awed admiration, and your covetous stare as you look at the pretty tools in the cabinet.
BTW, and for various others, I've managed to get along quite well without a low angle block plane. People say their low angle blocks work better on end grain, and I believe them. But my standard block's performance on end grain completely satisfies my needs and expectations--to the point that I feel no need to look for a low angle block.
My block plane is a Lee-Nielsen, and that may be why I have no complaints. It certainly is a huge step up in quality from the other block planes I've had.
Alan
>>Buy planes only when you have a reason.<<
Good luck, they are highly addictive, besides, whats the fun in that?
Seriously though, some of my favorites are "good deals" that I never would have thought I needed, but now that I have them, they get used all the time. For example, that neat little Preston bullnose. My molding plane fetish started that way. I had no "reason" for that huge tool box full of planes, but sure is fun to fiddle with them. My plane aquiring philosophy is more like, try as many as you can, and use the ones you like.
I suppose something in between our approaches is most common, no? Have a good one,Steve
Buy planes only when you have a reason.
That's my motto, and it's led from my first #4 to a #5 and then #78 and a #6 and a #3 and another #6 and another #4 and a #7 and a wooden fore plane, a wooden smoother, a #71, and about 20 wooden molding planes.
In short, if you buy one, you'll end up owning them all eventually.
When people 100 years from now see my work, they'll know I cared. --Matt Mulka
Alan
There are certain instances I discovered by just piddling that the standard block works better on end grain than the low-angle. I have cheap Stanleys that the irons are very sharp, but they are not that thick on the new style Stanley. Chatter can result. The standard block works better on hard-woods that are more wild grained woods (maple for instance) than the l/angle. Not totally sure why, don't care to know. Just know and I'm glad I know.
Soon I will throw a monkey wrench in what I already know as I've got one of the more expensive blocks on the way. I don't know what the results of that transition will be. But after a little piddling I will know and be glad I know even if I don't know why! he.. he...
Regards...
sarge..jtProud member of the : "I Rocked With ToolDoc Club" .... :>)
15,
I haven't seen Mr. Hack's book, I'm sure it's very good. I recommend Jos. Moxon's "Mechanick Exercises" reprint of a ca. 1740 how to book as a reference to hand tool technology.
I personally prefer wooden planes. I have a smoother (coffin) plane I made myself, its a York pitch with an old Auburn tool co. blade. Also an old (probably 19th cent) shopmade foreplane (common pitch) w/Ohio tool co. blade. And a try plane (Ohio tool co). Have another old smoother (common pitch) that I seldom use. My Stanley jack plane (Help me someone what's the correct#?) I use to knock the gluelines down so I don't scratch up the soles of my good planes. Have an old (bought new in 1972) Stanley low-angle block plane (dang what's that #) on its second iron that I haven't used since I got my Primus block plane (now on its second iron). And, a shopfull of power tools.
You have to decide for yourself what you are about. Do you want to primarily be a worker of wood? Collect a complete set of (X)brand tools? Justify their presence on your bench by using them?
I've been earning a living by building reproductions of/ repairing period furniture since I was 19 (1971), so it's a bit difficult to relate to the mindset of hobbyist woodworkers. Frankly I'm somewhat envious. I haven't had the luxury of pursuing avenues much beyond what's necessary to getting the job done in the most expeditious manner. So my philosophy is a fairly minimalist one. (1)How did they do it ? (2) What's the best way to duplicate that today? Your approach will doubtless be different, depending on your desires.
I've got a buddy who built a Queen Anne highboy just with hand tools. He wanted to learn the techniques required to do so. He taught himself to use a bowsaw and cut out the legs. Worked them out with drawknife and spokeshave. Dressed out the lumber (cherry) and joined it for the cases. Learned to dovetail by putting the drawers together. Etc. etc. The highboy was not the goal, it just happened to be what was left over when he got done learning how to build a highboy. What's your goal, 15Broad? Go for it!
Best wishes,
Ray
Ray,
#5 and #9 1/2 I bet. Your right about the hobbiest having a different mindset. I think I'd not like woodworking as much if I had to make a living exclusivley working wood, just because you have to stay focused on the bottom line. It's nice not having to justify every tool purchase. Steve
Ray
As I've seen your work and admire it, I do think you and Dirt hit a often over-looked point. There is a major diffence between those that have dead-lines and those that don't. We hobby folks can take our time and piddle with different angles that sometimes can lead to rewards and sometimes to dead-ends. If we snag a dead-end we have only lost a battle and not the war. Those that WW for pay can't afford that luxury.
I just think that everyone should realize that there are two sides to the same coin. I see many post here that are based on only viewing one side and basing an answer on that view.
Regards from down the road a peice...
sarge..jt Proud member of the : "I Rocked With ToolDoc Club" .... :>)
Sarge,
Yeah, I agree 100% Many folks seem to be of the opinion that there is only one correct answer/solution to a given problem--their own! Having worked in three shops before starting my own, I found that there are usually three at least! Remember the heated discussion years ago in FWW on "the correct way to hang a door"? Or "how to fit a drawer to its opening"?
I try to frame my responses along the lines of here's what worked for me, rather than here's how you need to do it. More than one way to skin a cat, as they used to say back home.
I've many times talked to woodworkers who will speak with pride on the huge number of hours spent on this or that project. Totally different head from someone working against a calendar or cost of labor deadline. Not wrong, just different.
Vive la difference!
Regards,
Ray
Ray
Yeah, surprisingly enough I do remember. Now that brings back memories. I think it boils down to the fact if there were only one WW his way would be correct. When you get two or more with varying views, you got several ways and usually an argument. ha.. ha...
Well, that's at least two confirmed that understand the different views, only several hundred thousand to go! :>)
Regards...
sarge..jtProud member of the : "I Rocked With ToolDoc Club" .... :>)
Sarge,
Right, I'm glad we both understand that MY way is the best way. Ha,ha.
Take care,
Ray
Ray
I bet your wife disagrees and most likely she's mot even a WW. But I suppose that's another forum. ha. ha...
sarge..jtProud member of the : "I Rocked With ToolDoc Club" .... :>)
Sarge,
Mind if I ask what plane you shelled out the big bucks for?Steve
Steve
I have a Stanley low-angle block and regular block that are fine tuned. They work fine on soft-wood, but the thin blade will chatter a bit on hard-wood. I have been shopping for an replacement or alternative to that situation as I do a lot of end-grain work and shooting mitres.
I have weighed the results of the info I gathered to meet my needs and have also weighed the cost of various products. My conclusion was that the best choice for me was a low-angle smoothing plane. I can do the end grain, mitres and also use it for panel smoothing in selected situations. Longer and a bit more weight than a block. By changing irons to a 38 degree bevel I also can get a York Pitch for curly maple and the like. 48 degrees achieves a 60 degree "high pitch".
So, this narrowed my search down to LN or Veritas. $75 difference in price. I chose the Veritas as I have several and think the quality matched with the reasonable price is a lot of "bang for the buck". I have not been let down with a purchase of a Veritas yet, but each purchase is a new venture. Buying without using is like a calculated "crap shoot". You do your charting, follow the trend, put your money down and take the risk. So far the Veritas has been coming up "7's and 11's". Hopefully the "roll" stays hot for me. ha.. ha...
sarge..jt Proud member of the : "I Rocked With ToolDoc Club" .... :>)
Thanks again everybody. I realize now that I worded my question poorly. My main goals - for now - are accurate edge jointing, accurate flattening/levelling, and truing to final dimension of long grain and end grain as the case may warrant. I'm sort of trying to get away from the 'fork tailed screamers'... except to dress rough stock, for now that still needs hydro.
As I stated in my original post, I have a smoother now and a jointer coming. My concern at the time was whether or not a panel could be accurately flattened with the #4 or if I definitely need a 5 or 6. If, with practice, the 4 will do then I can save a few dollars for now. If all the practice in the world won't make up for the shorter sole then I'll pick up the bigger tool before too much more frustration sets in.
I guess I'm trying to dig my heels into the upper edge of this slippery slope to keep the decent as slow as possible.
Thanks for the help.
Evening Sarge,
I like your logical approach, and I bet you just rolled another 7. You know, I don't have any Veritas planes. Don't know why. They certainly look like well engineered tools, and that cabinet makers rabbet really looks good. Have you tried it? Steve
Steve
Just came up from the shop. I am not familar with the rabbet you refer to. They do list the medium shoulder plane under their rabbet plane heading on the web-site. There is a difference in a shoulder and a rabbet most definitely.
I do have the medium shoulder plane. IMO, it is the best shoulder plane on the market period in it's width. I also have the Veritas #4 1/2 and #6. I cannot say enough about the way they designed the mouth to close instead of having to move the frog forward. I also like the two screws on the side. Once you adjust lateral, they are snugged to the outer edge of the iron and it is fenced discouraging lateral movement even with heavy strokes.
Regards...
sarge..jtProud member of the : "I Rocked With ToolDoc Club" .... :>)
Sarge,
That's the beast. I goofed on the rabbet only description, I guess a shoulder plane is a rabbet plane but not necessarily the other way around. Stanley called their 92, 93, 94 cabinet makers rabbet planes. I couldn't remember what LV called that plane, so figured the Stanley system was close.
Anyhow, looks like a good plane in the photos, and I've been thinking about sending for one. Glad to know you like yours. What do you think makes it better then any of the rest?
Have a good evening,
Steve
Dirt
"looks like a good plane in the photo's".
It's a great plane in your hands. It fits perfectly with the adjustment of the rear knob, the finger hole and the over-all balance.
What makes it good? The above plus good machining, the two side set screws to lock lateral movement and the price is right.
I believe Mark bought one. He was skeptical of LV quality, but loves his also. I have had excellent luck with the Veritas line of planes so far.
Regards...
sarge..jtProud member of the : "I Rocked With ToolDoc Club" .... :>)
I'd like to jump in and ask a question about a purchase that I am considering.
I currently have a Stanley No. 90 that I have been using to clean up the shoulders on my tenons and while it gives satisfactory service the size is a little small for some work. I have been considering the LN larger shoulder plane and after reading your positive comments I have looked at the lee valley. However, I also noticed that LN makes an adjustable, low angle rabbeting block plane that the LN website says is flat and square within .001. My current thinking is that the LN block plane might offer a nice upgrade and provide a lot more functionality. My current view point is that is that it's longer than the No. 90 that I'm currently using and therefore should offer more stability; and it's wide enough to clean up the cheeks of the tenons ( lately it seems each one is about 1/32 to thick), and from what I've seen it's less expensive than the shoulder planes while being of a roughly similar size.
What are your thoughts on this vs a medium or large shoulder plane and am I missing something important in even considering this?
Regards
utternovice
There's more than one way to skin a cat! That is a viable alternative IMO. The only thing I can think of negative about it is the LN low-angle rabbett block plane (60 1/2R) doesn't have an adjustable mouth s thier standard 60 1/2 block.
I don't know how much of a factor that would be, but I do prefer an adjustable mouth on a block plane. The opening may be perfect, but if you needed a smaller or larger one you have no where to go.
I would suggest opening a post and ask someone that actually has one what their take is or if you can use one you have an even better read. All in all, it's a great idea though.
Regards...
sarge..jt
Proud member of the : "I Rocked With ToolDoc Club" .... :>)
Sarge,
Thanks. I completely missed that the throat wasn't adjustable - I was looking in an old catalog that indicated that it was and at the time it didn't register that to make an adjustable mouth rabbet block or bench plane that worked well would be an interesting engineering exercise. As you suggested, I've opened a new post.
Edited 3/25/2004 9:09 pm ET by utternovice
utternovice
I hope you get some takers on the new thread. I have my doubts that many have the rabbett block. Too many others we need before that and we can't afford what we got now.
ha.. ha...
sarge..jtProud member of the : "I Rocked With ToolDoc Club" .... :>)
>> The opening may be perfect, but if you needed a smaller or larger one you have nowhere to go.
For a smaller opening, you can shim under the blade. Not an ideal solution, but if it makes the difference between going forward and not going forward ...
Dunc
Yep, I bought a set of a multitude of fender shims used by Auto Body Shops just for such purposes. But when you buy a block plane that sells for $150, you would think that the seller would have been inovative enough to do the sellee a favor and add the adjustable mouth.
H*ll, they don't even throw in a little plastic bag of various thickness metal shims. Go figure!! ha.. ha... ha..ha..ha..
Regards...
sarge..jtProud member of the : "I Rocked With ToolDoc Club" .... :>)
I have a Stanley 60-1/2. I think it's a UK Stanley. Paid $25 for it at a flea market, hardly used. Still had lacquer on the iron. From the condition of the iron and the sole, it appeared that the original owner had taken it out of the box and without even honing it, tried to plane off some nail heads. Decided it was no d*mn good and got rid of it.
All of which leads up to, I can understand why L-N might have decided to omit the adjustable mouth. I don't like the adjuster on the Stanley. It's not a positive adjustment, like the depth of cut. The lock comes loose (I admit I could fix that.) But when I try to think of a mechanism I'd like better, all I can think of are ideas that would be WAY expensive to manufacture.
$150 is a lot for a block plane, but if L-N built one to my design, it would be up in the $500 range. And they'd only sell a dozen of them, to the truly hard core L-N fans. So I can see that given a choice between a plane with no adjustment at a price they can expect to actually make some sales, and a plane with an adjustment worthy of the L-N name at a price that will not send them flying off the shelves, they might pick the one without the adjustment.
U D
I would immediately send in an application to LN for their marketing department. Sounds convincing enough to me that I just called and ordered a gross of 60 1/2R's and I don't even need one! ha.. ha... ha..ha..ha..
Ya da man..
Regards...
sarge..jtProud member of the : "I Rocked With ToolDoc Club" .... :>)
Sarge,
When the wife and I have a disagreement, I ALWAYS get in the last words....
"Yes, dear"
Have learned a few things in 31 yrs of marriage!
Regards,
Ray
Don't start with maple or Garrett Hacks book. Start with pine. Get Mario Rodriguez tape and relax. You are making things too hard. I had the same problem. Garrett Hack is toooooo advanced for anyone that does not already know how to use a plane. He really seems to write for acceptance from his peers rather the than the great mass of beginners. Planes are really fun and make woodworking worth while. Watch Mario Rodriquez's tape. He is a master teacher.
Thanks, lynn. The maple is awfully hard. I'll google the Rodriguez tape and hope for the best.
That'd be "Handplanes in the Workshop" right?
Edited 3/28/2004 11:31 am ET by 15Broad
Yes, Make sure your planes are sharp. If you cannot cut the hair off the back of you arm you blade is not sharp enough. Once you get them sharp it is relatively easy to keep the irons sharp.
Lynn Roy Porter
I am often mistaken for a women on the net.
Thanks again. Found the tape online, but would rather purchase it from a store if I can. Sharpness is not really a problem, I think it's more an issue of trying to do too much with not enough equipment. There's a reason why one plane is called a smoother and another is called a jack, etc. I have a pine cabinet that I've been working on so I'll try flattening it once I pick up a bigger plane.
If you can spare the time, though, please tell me if I'm at least going about the flattening process the right way.
1) Place the work on the bench and butt it against the stops
2) Starting from the bottom in the middle, plane at an angle to the work (say from left to right), then plane in the other direction(center bottom, right to left).
3) Check with straightedge
I've tried going 90* to the grain with marginal success if the panel is reasonably flat to begin with, but I don't think I'm doing it right. Should I take down the high spots first as if I'm trying to flatten a piece of rough stock?
I know these answers are probably laid clearly out in the video, but I want to work now. If you can spare the time I'd really appreciate a 'Readers Digest' version.
Thanks again. Chris
Chris,
As you wait for your video, check out Jeff Gorman's websitehttp://www.amgron.clara.net/index.htmlIt's really an on-line woodworking course. Free, expert, and better that most books. Click on "planing notes" for answers to a lot of your questions.
Jeff
HOLY COW!! Thanks, Jeff for the site. Lots and lots of really good info. I read it until the boss came... I'll finish up later. Apparently I'll have lots of time for reading soon. I wonder what he meant by that...
I am far from an expert but I usually do the following:
1. Get a scrap of the wood in question.
2. Try to plane the edge that looks easiest. i.e. I look for a piece that does not have any knots and the grain run in a straight line. I try the plane on that piece. If it grabs I retract the iron and try again until the plane takes off a nice long smooth shaving.
3. Next I try the plane on the opposite long grain. I again adjust the blade until I get a nice smooth cut of shaving.
3. Then I determine the direction on one of the sides of the board and try to get a good shaving. Usually I will need to retract the iron until I get a workable shaving. I may have to be satisfied with scrubbing the plane in a rapid motion to get the shaving I need.
Try these steps on pine and then poplar, cherry, walnut, and even my least favorite wood red oak. You will be getting the hang of it by the time Mario's tape arrives.
L. Roy Porter
This forum post is now archived. Commenting has been disabled