Replies

1. 
   Ronaway | Apr 17, 2006 08:13pm | #1

   That little plane is so compeling that I would imagine one would find themselves reaching for it as soon as they saw it. 3.6 lbs. in that size package, that's quite impressive and I can certainly see the "Mack Truck" comparison. It appears that the shape of the rear infill would nest quite nicely in your hand. Very nice.

   Ron

1. 
   Malcolm | Apr 18, 2006 12:03am | #2

   Thanks

   I'm wondering about managing-down the weight! Mostly it comes from the big lump of bronze and the 6mm metal sides and sole. The Gordon iron is quite weighty as well. Next version will have a different rear 'tote'.

   I do like the way the lever cap has worked. By fairing it into the shape of the upper profiles it becomes part of the handling experience, and the smooth sweep catches the light nicely!

   I'll do some useability tests next week, and put up some pictures of shavings!

   Malcolmhttp://www.macpherson.co.nz

2. 
   philip | Apr 18, 2006 09:12am | #3

   Malcolm,
   That is not a Mack-too small. I suggest you designate them like Caterpillar do for their bulldozers-maybe that one is a D2, so you have got some leeway before arriving at a D12.(;)
   You must take a salute or two there - you have also beaten me to it with the reversible iron concept, which has been lurking in my mind as a "definite" one of these days.
   Re the lever cap-you could try a wheel typethat screws in from the bottom, and shape the top of the cap so that it is fitting to the hand- and that one has been lurking in my mind for some time too!
   Ithink I know what you are going to do with the rear of the tote....
   Cutting up micrometers? To me a most unappealing idea.

   Philip Marcou
1. 
   Malcolm | Apr 18, 2006 12:06pm | #5

    > you could try a wheel type that screws in from the bottom, and shape the top of the cap so that it is fitting to the hand <

   I've thought about that. That's a viable solution for a low-angle block plane configuration, and is commonly used of course, but with a high-angle bevel down there's no shortage of space for grip behind the iron. This series of 5 will all use Terry Gordon's quarter inch irons. I also have a couple of Hock sets, and recently bought a small collection of standard-length 2 inch irons (without backirons - I'm thinking about decorative backirons)

   I am going to try different shapes behind the iron, and may even use the knifemakers' approach (as in the Deco concept plane) to create a slim, strong, closed or semi-closed tote.

   Malcolmhttp://www.macpherson.co.nz

3. 
   philip | Apr 18, 2006 11:11am | #4

   Just a quick question- why did you choose that relatively fine pitch thread for the cap screw?

   Philip Marcou
1. 
   Malcolm | Apr 18, 2006 12:09pm | #6

   > why did you choose that relatively fine pitch thread for the cap screw? <

   Two reasons:

   because I had a length of threaded rod in my bin, and

   because I wanted to try a thick fine pitch screw, and it does what I'd hoped - turns smooth, runs in slowly, is easier to back off so that the screw just engages, and the iron slides into place without shooting right through. One of the down-sides of an uncapped iron is that if you back off the screw, the iron can shoot straight out the bottom!

   Malcolmhttp://www.macpherson.co.nz

1. 
   C_R_Miller_Planes | Apr 20, 2006 12:29pm | #7

   Very nice, Malcolm. Very nice indeed!

   Handplane Central

1. 
   Malcolm | Apr 24, 2006 10:28am | #8

   Actually, Cameron, I've taken to it with my bandsaw and remodelled it extensively!

   Problem, revealed when playing with this tool, is that it's too heavy to use comfortably without something to hang on to. So I've junked this approach and 'bench-engineered' a version 2.0

   Will finish during the week and post photos

   Malcolmhttp://www.macpherson.co.nz

1. 
   Malcolm2 | Apr 26, 2006 02:37am | #9

   Teaser: I've removed most of the rear infill (down flush with the brass) and grooved-in a brass tang, onto which I've rivetted a couple of pieces (scales, in knifemaking terms) to make a free-standing open tote like the one on my Deco smoother.

   Malcolm

2. 
   Ronaway | Apr 26, 2006 05:19am | #10

   I can't imagine that this modification changed the weight of the plane, but it sounds as if it may make the weight easier to manage. Is this a correct assumption?Ron

3. 
   Malcolm2 | Apr 26, 2006 05:50am | #11

   Yes, if anything it's a bit heavier!

   The next version will be a little lighter, but the only way to make light infills is to minimise metal thickness (fab with say 3mm steel and brass) and use a lighter infill material and much thinner irons. Or make them very small!

   I don't think weight is a problem. These are tools for finish planing, and the important characteristics are ease of adjustment, ability to set for super-fine shavings, and balance and feedback. You'd only be taking off a shaving or two, and working quite slowly in very good light.

   Malcolm