I’ve decided that I would like to buy No. 4, 5, and 7 Bench Planes. I’ve read several discussions which recommend these as the “standard” set. I already have a No. 3 made by Sargent, and your basic stanley 220 (two actually) I have used the No. 3 to true wide boards, but suspect I would have better luck with the larger planes, and besides I just gots to have ’em.
I have decided that I can get the most bang for the buck by buying these planes used. I’ve noticed a cornicopia of information on Stanley, Sargent, Record, and Miller’s Falls planes, but have not been successful in finding information on Footprint planes which look quite nice (on the web). Can someone point me to a good write-up on these planes. It seems they’ve been around almost as long as Stanley so they must have made good planes at some point (right?).
Thanks-
WS
P.S. Any reco’s or comments w.r.t. this post welcome, don’t feel limited to the footprint question.
Replies
Just like you I wanted to buy the 4,5,and 7. I was planning on buying Stanleys made in the U.K. because a supplier right down the road carries them and they are supposed to be much better than those made anywhere else. But when I posted an inquiry, like you, I was deluged with responses.. most of which waved me off in favor of one good plane. The one that came the most highly recommended, and the one I purchased, was the #5 Lie-Nielson. It costs slightly more than the three Stanleys combined.. but it is supposedly versatile enough to do the work of all three. It also has the added merit of being ready to use right out of the box. The guy who sold it to me unpacked it and went to work straightaway on a red oak plank. Big, gorgeous shavings curled forth before my very eyes. I haven't used it yet, but I take it out and look at it alot.
bill
Bill-
Thanks for the response. I think you must be referring to the Stanley Bench Planes thread I ran across this afternoon. I read most of the thread, and I can see why you went with the lie neilsen plane. (Clearly I will need one of those someday.)
Right now, I've kinda got my heart set on the three. (not for any really good technical reason) However, for 1/2 the price of the lie-neilsen #5 and a little elbow grease, I should be able to get all three planes on e-bay.
I think I might enjoy tuning up the older planes as well. I'm currently only looking at Sargent's and Stanley's Made before the 60s. Seems to be an incredible selection of them out there. I wish I could find out more about some of the other planes that are out there, but I'm only comfortable bidding on the two right now.
Happy Shavings-
-WS
WS
I'm a bit like you. I looked at my dad's collection of Stanleys and started to buy my own. Hence bought a Stanley #6 (new UK manuf), sharpened the blade and off I went. Though I was doing OK. Then I got a LN #5, and spent the next year or so just looking at it. Got to dress a piece of 3x4 rough sawn eucalyptus (very dense Australian hardwood, exact species not specified) last weekend. Attacked it with the #6 followed up with the #5. Thought the Stanley was doing a good job until I switched to the LN. Talk about chalk and cheese. The Stanley plucked bits of wild grain that the Lie Neilsen just sliced through. As far as I can judge, both planes had the same mouth opening, same amount of blade showing, were equally sharp (both blades sharpened using the same set-up and shave my thumb nail). If nothing else, the LN was worth the considerable extra just to get a reference standard to tune the Stanley to. I've a few hours work ahead flattening the base, tuning the chip breaker, and working on the frog. Oh well, have to find my copy of the Plane Book.
You may like to seek out a range of bench planes made by Clifton - a UK manufacturer, better known for their shoulder planes. I think Garrat Wade and the japan Woodworker carry them. The Clifton #5 was compared to a LN #5 in a recent issue of Australian Wood Review (issue #36). The reviwer rated both planes as much better than a well tuned Stanley. The final verdict was that for half the price, the Clifton was probably the better buy. However, for my money the LN is better looking.
thin shavings to you
Ian
Ian-
My sense is that I will end up purchasing a lie-neilsen or a clifton eventually, and I may end up keeping a collection of planes (even if they sit as showpieces on my mantle). But having had to work with an old 220, and an even older Sargent 408 with a chip breaker that can't slide far enough forward because it's the wrong chip breaker, I'm going to get a lot of satisfaction from a well tuned Stanley. And when I start complaining about the Stanleys, maybe it will be a good time to step up to the better planes.
Fortunately, the Stanleys are incredibly cheap and they have an excellent resale value so...
Thanks for the reply-
WS
P.S. That other WW Mag (AmW in the U.S.) did a review of some planes in 1996 (Jack Planes) and they seemed to imply that the newer Stanleys were not as good as the older Bedrock and Bailey Planes. I've only seen the older planes, but it would be interestiing to see both a pre-WWII and a newer No. 5 side by side to see if there is a real difference.
Edited 10/30/2002 11:17:57 AM ET by woodshark
>I've only seen the older planes, but it would be interestiing to see both a pre-WWII and a newer No. 5 side by side to see if there is a real difference.
I was at the local Woodcraft strore the other day and was curious about that same thing. So I asked the clerk if I could take a look at a Stanley #5. Then, I asked about a screwdriver to take a look at the frog adjustment and seat. So here I am with this plane all in pieces before she could say anything. :) On the base there were four small pads to support the frog. On a turn of the century plane, there is a solid pad from side to side. I also have one from the Stanley 'blue' period. That plane has two pads for support.I would have to think the reasoning is there is less machining to do on the newer planes. Therefore there is less cost to machine the newer planes.Maybe this week I will take in a 1910 plane and compare it to the LN. If they let me near one with a screwdriver.
Jay
Way to go Jay!
I get a grin just thinkin' about that poor clerk at the woodcraft store. I'm not so sure you want to push it with the LN planes, they cost a pretty penny. However, if you do, maybe you could sneak a hidden camera in so we could all get a chuckle.
lol-
WS
Bill,
" I haven't used it yet, but I take it out and look at it alot"
I'm sorry to tell you this but you have to use those planes as soon as you can after the box has been opened. If you don't they go bad right away. They have a VERY short working life. Yours has probably deteriorated to the point of no return already.
Too bad. But I'll tell you what - pack it up and send it to me. I'll send one of my old Record planes instead. They don't go bad so fast. You'll be fine with it. Glad to help!
R
Oh, man! This is the kind of stuff that always happens to me. Thanks for the heads up. Tell you what.. give me your address and I'll send you the LN straightaway.. and even spot you the postage for being such a good egg. BTW.. I've also been sitting on a new PM66 I haven't used since I bought it a couple of months ago. Do they go bad, too?
bill
"I've also been sitting on a new PM66 I haven't used since I bought it a couple of months ago. Do they go bad, too? "
Do they ever!
Man is it a good thing you let me know about that! You get that puppy packed up and sent to me before it gets any worse. I'll send you a fairly well used Grizzly contractor's saw. You'll be in real good shape then.
R
Don't forget about Lee Valley/Veritas. Excellent tools, Canadian made, and much less expensive than Lie Nielson.
Jeff
This forum post is now archived. Commenting has been disabled