Went to what I think was the worst woodworking show of all time in the UK last week, for to get something for my birthday. The show used to be the best, but for various reasons it has sunk, little commercial support and almost a total absence of hand tools.
There were a few demonstrating planes, and it struck me that, notwithstanding the tool being used, they without exception were showing what a thin shaving could be achieved. If I had asked to see a scrub being used they would do the same!
This is some sort of sickness. It is time to face reality, planes are to remove wood and should be seen to do the designed job. I did ask to see a multi-plane perform but the bloke just showed a pre-planed bit of wood. The plane costs about £650.
For the first time ever I came home having spent nothing.
Replies
For that kind of money, they should have allowed you to take it out for a test drive!
I'm with you - I think too many people are enamored with shavings they can see through. That's swell for a smoothing plane, but a jack or jointer should have a thicker one than that, and a scrub should almost look like you took a hatchet to the work!
Tom's Workbench
http://tomsworkbench.com
Mufti, our local shows also have gone down hill for a variety of reasons like the show producers changing hands, the manufacturers relying on local or regional distributors to represent their wares and then the distributors cheap out with few to no demos in much smaller booths. On the other hand the few national level shows are done up big time by the tool companies, just short of dancing girls.
Being an amateur mulit-planner I an curious if Clifton(clico) did the show or left it to a distributor(like Axeminster). I am sure at that price that it was not Anant, the only other Mfg. of a multi-plane that I am aware of from a USA perspective.
I share your disgust as the last show that I attended Lee Valley was indeed the bright star and after test driving their scraper plane, I bought one. I didn't spend another cent elsewhere at that show. Paddy
The tools being demonstrated in this case were Clico, and good tools they are too. I have a Clico multi-plane and like other makes they are difficult to set and use, by comparison moulding planes are a doddle. I have considered ways to fit soles to the multi.
Axminster are very very good, they have fantastic bargains but you have to visit to find out what they are. As a matter of fact I went to their store in Kent and bought a Lie-N rip cut carcass saw and a few other goodies, so am a happy bunny. They run their own show and do not do others.
Mufti
Hope this makes you feel better...... I spent about two hours today hacking away at a 12/4 slab of cherry 34" wide. It's air dried, and has been in my woodshed for about 7 or 8 years. I had to remove about 1/2" from about 1/3 of it, as it has developed a nice twist. I think I would have made a tree shredder quite proud, as the floor around my bench was covered in wood chips about 1/16th inch thick. I gave my 606 and 3 jack planes a real workout, and my wrist is killing me right now. But, that danged slab is flat enough to proceed to the #7 now. I hope it stays that way. I'm gonna let it sit for a couple of weeks. Eventually, it's gonna be a tabletop. I'll be quite happy when I'm at the stage of see-thru fluffies.
Jeff
Jeff,
You are a masochist-bloke and, for your birthday, I might send you one o' them ladies dressed in studs and carrying an implement..... :-)
Whilst I sympathise with Mufti concerning the useless WW shows (which are just markets, yet they want you to pay to go in!) I do find the wood-prep planing to be strange. Of course, once upon a time it was necessary, as the electric had not reached the village and the steam engines often blew up. But what you describe, Jeff, is some kinda self-abuse!
A couple of months ago I used two of Philip's excellent planes to take thick shavings (not as thick as a scrub, mind) in order to remove cup, bow, twist and rough surface from two 6 foot 2X4 oak planks. This was just to see what wood prep via planes involved.
I was at it a long, long time and very tired at the end. I probably wasted a bit too much wood by over-planing here and there, in getting it straight and square. What took hours and hours with planes (which worked very well in removing the wood, incidentally) could have been achieved in twenty minutes with the planer/thicknesser, including the set-up time. Moreover, the results would have been more dimensionally precise than with the planes.
Of course, those same planes smoothed a beautiful final surface to a standard the planer/thicknesser could not achieve, via those translucent shavings that Mufti curls his lip at.
So - I don't get it. Unless you are purist or masochistic, why prepare large timber baulks with planes? My planes are either specialist (shoulder etc.) or various smoothers. I feel no need for them scrub thangs - I can go to the gym for that. Also, I put on the ear-muftis when the planer/thicknesser is at full roar, so the nerves are not jangled.
Lataxe, staring with a puzzled look at old-fangle thangs.
There is something theraputic in using a series of hand planes to achieve an attractive surface from stuff which at first sight holds little promise. One can be selective and thoughtful in the choice of grain in a way a planer /thicknesser does not permit, and I for one shudder at the prospect of toiling in a gym to no constuctive purpose like a gerbil in a ball.
No good for earning a living of course, but little sawdust and lots of satisfaction.
mufti,
toiling in a gym to no constuctive purpose like a gerbil in a ball.
I swear I woke the whole neighborhood with that one, I was laughing so hard!
Regards,Bob @ Kidderville Acres
A Woodworkers mind should be the sharpest tool in the shop!
Lataxe
I am a huge fan of the power jointer and planer. Under most circumstances, I use them to flatten and thickness all my rough stock. However, with large, heavy slabs that exceed the capacity of those machines, my only other choice is a router with rails. I have no inclination to breathe in that much dust created by a wood shredder. My lungs aren't what they used to be. So, I really had no other choice than to go at the slab with planes. They did their job, and I got a pretty good workout, to boot.
I assure you, I glanced over at my jointer (I believe you fine lads call them surfacers)and checked on several occassions to see if its capacity had mysteriously grown, but with no such luck.
My only hope is that this beautiful slab of wood will remain flat, and be able to be worked into the useful table is was born to be.
Jeff
Jeff,
I shoulda noticed that 34" figure you mentioned. Still, I would've been heading for the TS to slice it up, lazy philistine that I am.
There is a 3 foot X 3 foot 12/4 piece of Swiss oak in my wood store - the mere end of a giant plank used up by one of my wood fairies, he of the first & second finish business. Although the endgrain has a few small checks and splits, the lump is intact. However, I have no idea what to do with it "as-is". Perhaps it will make some sort of rustic table top?
What kind of table are you going to make with your lump? Perhaps you can inspire me. :-)
Lataxe, a gym gerbil; but just off today for a 10 mile hike up Crinkle Crags in the sunshine.
Lataxe
Tis' a table from my small line of creations I sell to customers. I build them either from 1 large slab, or 2 bookmatched slabs. Sometimes live edge, sometimes finished. It all depends on what the customer wants.
This particular customer has hired me to deck out quite a few rooms in his home. It's a rather large home, with a mountain retreat theme. Everything is quite rustic. I made all the cabinets from knotty red alder, and the kitchen table is a rustic sort from 3 wide cherry boards, hand planed to show the hewn.
I try to choose boards with a lot of figure. Knots, crotch, and some bark inclusion are all the better. Straight grained, select or better boards need not apply for this job.
Rustic is the theme. I fill the rotted knots and bark inclusions with epoxy, so the tv clicker won't fall in. :)
Jeff
Re hours of hard work to true up a particularly difficult piece of wood...
I watched a video on FWW the other day while someone trued up a great hulk of wood that was way too large for any of his stationary tools.
He quickly removed twist and cup, and flattened the piece, using winding sticks, a piece of marking chalk, and a small portable power planner - the kind used by carpenters setting doors. About the size of a #4, noisy, of course, but very fast.
When the piece had been tamed - flat, thicknessed, and relatively smooth - he brought out his traditional hand planes and refined the surface.
Looked like a great mix of modern and traditional woodcraft. It's something I'll try when I make that great lump of walnut my wife made me salvage into something for her.
Mike D
small portable power planner ..I have a Ryobi.. Yes, one of those $99 or so things that 'works for me'.Great for all sorts of stuff.. Hogs down 'lumps and bumps' and then you can do your 'thing' with your 'fine' tools and save ALOT of time!
Me too. Use it on old doors, etc.
I hadn't thought of using it as a scrub plane until I saw the video. But it certainly makes sense - gets the big bumps and twists off in record time, and ready for the fine work.
Mike D
Actually, Jeff, it is possible to joint material that just under twice the width of your jointer. I do it all the time with my 6" jointer, routinely flattening stock that is 10-11" wide. Of course, you will be limited by the size of your planer (I believe those chaps call them "thicknessers").
I don't mean to disagree, but flattening an 11" wide board on a 6" jointer is not going to leave an accurately flattened board, with both sides registered to the same flat plane. The board will ride on it's half side of highs, and for each side that will be different. Each side will be flat, but both sides will not be in the same "plane" of flatness.
It will, however, make the board better than it was.
Jeff
Jeff,
6 inch jointers and 12 inch planers, as you lads call them - another inexplicable aspect of American woodworking machinery tradition that I often wonder at, along with the preponderance of all those TS Unisaw clones lacking riving knives, sliding crosscut carriages, blade brakes and so forth. There is something in this tradition that seems stuck.
Perhaps the clue is in the nomenclature - "jointer" rather than planer for the table-top variety, for example. This seems to indicate that the machine is meant only for edges not faces, begging the question, what flattens the face?
Now I know that one may build a great wooden carriage to hold the plank in a single plain whilst the 12 inch planer both thicknesses and flattens the plank. But who wants to have to build one of these ginormous "jigs"? Not I, with a small shed already too full. Yet without this (owner-made) jig the planks that are merely jointed will be planed into perfectly even-thickness twisted bananas!
This wonderment is not directed at you, of course - you just happened to be a handy "reply" point. Still, you are an American WW professional and may be able to shed light on this strange cultural blindspot.....?
Thoroughly Modern Lataxe
Sire lataxe
I believe the 6" variety of the aptly named jointer is designed solely for the hobbyist individual who purchases his/her wood S4S, and feels no need for flattening. The shortcomings of that tool show up as soon as the same individual tries to work with rough stock.
The problems really show up when the aforementioned S4S stock isn't milled correctly, and is, indeed, "a perfectly thicknessed twisted banana".
So much to learn for beginners, and so little time. That's why you see so many of them "beginner tools" for sale on ebay. Frustration sets in, because woodworking really isn't as easy as Norm makes it look on tv. Americans want everything, and they want it fast. When they can't build a chest of drawers in the same half hour as Norm does, the tools get listed on the internet.
Jeff perhaps shedding some light, but hardly enough
You are more than welcome to disagree. Actually, I do it rather frequently, (disagreeing, too) and I produce stock that is flat one face before planing. When I first read about this, I was incredulous, thinking there was no way the board would end up properly flattened. I tried it. After jointing, I placed a straight edge running end to end, angled from opposite corners, trying both directions. With a small flashlight, I could see light, barely, appearing between the straightedge and the board, consistently in both directions. However, the light was only apparent due to the normally undulating machinery marks left by every jointer -- the straightedge was lying flat on the stock along its entire length without rocking, again, equally in both directions. To me, that says the board is flat. I suppose it is possible to get the board flatter than that, but why?
Call me chicken, but that sounds a bit dicey; you have to remove the pork chop guard I take it?
There is a persuasive argument out there in the professional furniture maker's land of 'Estimating' that goes something like this:
Even if you don't own the equipment to work efficiently you, in effect, bear the cost of owning it.
Looking at the task of squaring up boards it's argued that the efficient way of doing the job is with machines therefore, following the argument, you have to own the machines and use them if you're doing substantial squaring and straightening of wood. If you choose to do this squaring up procedure by hand, it will take you a great deal of time longer.
Built in to the charge for machining and planing boards is the cost and depreciation of the machines as well as the maintenance. You might therefore charge, let's say £60 per hour, or so much per unit of wood, eg, price per ft³, m³, or bd ft.
Using hand planes eliminates the need for buying, maintaining, depreciating and using machines, but now you have to charge for your time to make the same profit. And your time to do the job might have to be multiplied by factors such as 10 or 20, or who knows what to process the same amount of wood. Then how much can you charge for this hand processing per hour?
I don't completely buy the argument, and it has no real relevance for many hobby woodworkers, and may not be applicable to some professional woodworkers. It is though an interesting point of view, and it's relevant to what I do. Put it this way; I'm not going to break out the hand planes to square up boards for paying customers. It's far too inefficient for the way I price and do my work. Slainte.Richard Jones Furniture
Chicken.
you have to remove the pork chop guard I take it?
Yep! The truth is there is very little in woodworking that isn't "dicey". We woodworkers create jigs, elaborate setups, etc. to stack the odds in our favor, but there will always be inherent risks in woodworking. Not that I'm recommending that one take unnecessary risks -- I'm not!
With regard to the particular method I have in mind, the only time the cutterhead is exposed is at the very beginning -- with your hands nowhere near the cutterhead, and at the very end (and, hopefully, they are well protected through the use of push sticks/blocks). In any WW operation, it is imperative that one knows where his/her hands are in relation to the cutter -- this is no different. Is there a risk involved? Sure, but it's a manageable one unless the person is drunk, tired or stupid. Frankly, I think a greater risk is presented running a tablesaw without a splitter/guard/riving knife, yet, I'm sure we all know people, experienced and capable, that do so.
With what I've said notwithstanding, you'll notice that I made no attempt to describe the method for jointing stock wider than the bed/cutterhead of the jointer. And the reason for that is simple: there are too many novices that visit this forum (arguably, myself included) and I feel that this is a technique left to someone more experienced with machinery and their inherent dangers.
pzaxtl,
I do that too. But I don't talk about it, for it requires that I remove the cutter guard, and that is strictly verboten in these parts. See the above messages referencing the difference betw amateur and pro techniques as it applies to the drive for productivity/ avoidance of risk.
Ray
how about a photo of that monster??
dan
I'll post a photo of the table when its done.
Jeff
I spent about two hours today hacking away at a 12/4 slab of cherry 34" wide. It's air dried, and has been in my woodshed for about 7 or 8 years.
You really know how to hurt a guy........
;) Lee
Hey, Lee
I'm just hoping the slab is salvageable. It was cut too close to the pitch, and had twisted quite a bit. It has some checks, knots, and swirly crotch grain where a large limb was coming out. All the character is perfect for this particular customer, so I hope it'll stop moving for me now. As it was, it was good for a teeter tawter, and that was about it.
Jeff
Jeff,
That thick stuff loves to move. I had a cherry log cut up several years ago and had the sawyer cut me a slab of 12/4 straight through the center. When it arrived a few months later (after drying) it had developed about a 2-3 foot check on each end. I joined the checks with a circular saw and ripped the board into 2 narrower pieces for leg stock. (Which is why I wanted the 12/4 in the first place, and it made it a little easier to move those 11' long pieces)
So I've been thinking..... do you think that in the future it would be wise to do that when milling the wood - to release any built in tension? If the board were cut through the center, and then ripped in half straight through the pith, would that help keep the resulting pieces flat and stable?
Just wonderin'
Lee
Lee
Large slabs are desireable, and trendy. The problem is, to get those wide slabs, you have t have large diameter logs. The best wood for stability is the wood closest to the bark. The radius of the rings are the largest, and it moves the least. The problem with that, is there aren't any wide slabs out there, except in huge logs, 40"+, and 99% of the bandmills aren't capable of even handling a log that size, not to mention the weight.
Because of this, most of the wide slabs we see are cut near the center of the log, where it is at its widest. The problem is obvious. It's close to the pith, and sometimes, with an inexperienced sawyer, or in the case of the guy I was using for years, who just "plane" don't give a dang, the pitch is included in the slab. Any slab that near of inclusive of the pith is gonna explode while drying, almost without exception.
However, like you mentioned, when those large 12/4 slabs are milled, they should be cut into thirds. 2 sections of riftsawn wood, which is perfect for leg stock, and the pith, which is firewood, stickers, boxed for a beam, or any other utilitarian use you can think of that doesn't include furniture making.
That's exactly why I want to get a swingmill. A swingmill, with a slabbing attachment is the perfect saw for sawing up those huge logs that no bandmill can handle. Reason being, you don't have to move the log.
Don't worry, by the end of the year, I'm gonna have lots of that stuff available!! :>)
Jeff
"they without exception were showing what a thin shaving could be achieved."
"This is some sort of sickness."
That is quite correct. What you should have been able to witness is a plane that can make translucent consistent shavings as easily as
the same plane could make very thick shavings- in a hard wood.
Too late now, Mufti, but next time you should go along with your own piece of timber....
They would not do that Philip, it would mean adjusting the frog to open the mouth, fiddling with the depth of cut, perhaps reshaping the cutting edge to a slight crown so a decent full shaving emerges and generally looking as though they know what they are doing.
"That is quite correct. What you should have been able to witness is a plane that can make translucent consistent shavings as easily as
the same plane could make very thick shavings- in a hard wood."I absolutely respect your planemaking skills but for the life of me I will never understand what appears to be the modern European obsession that practically every plane be able to function as a smoother. I appreciate the fact, as does my wallet, that every plane needn't be machined to NASA tolerances to do its particular job well.
Edited 2/18/2008 8:23 am ET by BossCrunk
Boss,
I have a fine modern European diesel motor car.
It has the qualities of one o' them Grand Tourers of yesteryear, in terms of ride and comfort, yet it also clags to the road like a leech and disnae care to skid about.
The noise from the engine, tires and so forth is hardly noticeable and one may listen without strain to Rachmaninov or even some proper music, as one whisks along all relaxed.
Although there is 150 BHP under the hood, allowing a rapid rate of acceleration and outright velocity, should one be so-inclined, a light foot on the "gas" pedal will yield 60 MPH, month-in, month-out.
The wonderous motor carriage also costs a minimum to service and has long service intervals. The galvanised chasis and other protection means it never rusts. Modern diesel engines will do 250,000 miles without problem.
****
Now, I could buy an old 1983 Ford diesel pickup for a lot less, along with a second-hand Corvette for a bit more. These might give me 40% of the modern car's advantages, between them, but then I would be coughing up for an inordinate quantity of fuel and coughing also from the fumes. Also, I would need earplugs and a thick cushion, not to mention a few friendly mechanics or many classes in motor-maintenance.
In short, why persist with several old-fashioned, good-for-one-thing-only, badly designed and clunky thangs when you can have one modern, efficient and well-designed one? The extra cost is small, especially when maintenance, comfort, usability and resale value are considered.
The argument applies to planes too.
Lataxe
Edited 2/18/2008 10:36 am ET by Lataxe
"...the argument applies to planes too."
Not really.
Lat, I am afraid those fine nuances are lost on dear Charles, and see yet another locked mind set looming.
Nonetheless, I see that the latest BMW has a turbo charged DIESEL V8 that is 50Kg lighter than the equivalent horse power petrol version.Philip Marcou
Philip,
Yes, and I refrained from mentioning the obvious example of an improved all-purpose machine - the computer. Probably the boss scratches out his messages with one of his 39 types of quill on one of his 73 typesof parchment before getting a boy to transfer the words of wisdom to the new fangled thang for us all to read.
Perhaps he even uses a different quill and piece of parchment for various lengths of word?
Lataxe, who has a shed too small for 78 different plane types,especially ones that don't work that well.
I do hope you do not mind me coming in. The comparison to me appears flawed in that a plane relies upon the cutting edge to achieve a reasonable result when applied to a material which to some extent is always unstable. Most middling planes if equipped with a superior blade will give those results, yet the material may yet not respond to the subsequent processes and so still end up as a cock-up. Planing is an interim stage.
Now I am a toolie and love beautiful planes but also enjoy improving the mediocre. It's a bit like Hi-Fi, by the time I can afford the best my hearing will have deteriorated to the point of no return.
Mufti musing.
I was, and am saying, that it is useful for a SMOOTHER to be able to take very thick shavings if necessary, and leave an acceptable finish.
Who said that "every plane had to be machined to NASA tolerances anyway"?Philip Marcou
Edited 2/18/2008 2:35 pm by philip
What is your definition of "very thick?"
Charles,
I don't have a definitive definition in terms of mm's or thous because whilst you might easily take shavings 30 thou thick in one timber it would be impossible to do the same in another timber type. I am not talking about scrub planing.
So for the purpose of this discussion in relation to a useful smoother I would want it to be able to take any shaving from the thinnest wisp to what you could manage with a #51/2 set very coarse, on a timber like Cherry, and I would expect a far better finish.
Ofcourse, you would need a suitable plane, and a person to demonstrate it.Send an air ticket or drop in at my shop any time.
To what do we owe this surge of interest?Philip Marcou
Philip,
Lying awake at night, worrying about the boss's jibes [ :-) ] the thought came to me: would it be possible to configure a scrub type blade for a Marcou S15 or 20A? I can imagine removing the adjustable mouth plate altogether and making a scrub-shape blade to fit in there. But scrubs are narrow so as to take less-wide but thick scallops. Could a wider blade for an S15A be easily curved to scrub-dimensions.....?
Your planes are heavy-duty and would surely take the forces of scrubbing; in fact their weight and rigidity might provide the ideal platform for a scrub blade. Perhaps the inherent adaptabiity of a heavy, superbly-engineered slightly-longer smoothing plane might extend to true srubbing also, eh?
After all, why confine the idea of an integrated multi-purpose machine to motor cars or computers?
Lataxe
Lud,
I am not the one to answer that because I don't do scrub planing- it is too slow too much unnecessary work and no fun..Unless you want to make a sow's ear from a silk purse? And bequeathe it to dear Charles?
I think it better to stay in the 21st century, make good use of our surfacers and thicknessers, join up panels as taught by the best apprentice system (British) and keep the hand planing to an enjoyable minimum. It is quicker too.
Philip Marcou
"I would want it to be able to take any shaving from the thinnest wisp to what you could manage with a #51/2 set very coarse, on a timber like Cherry, and I would expect a far better finish."
Interesting, but I'd probably just reach under the bench and grab, well, a 5 1/2 and use it. I don't usually expect, or need, a 'better finish' when planing with a rank setting. I'm not sure what a fine (finer, finest?) finish does for me at this intermediate stage of stock preparation but if you tell me I need it then I'm sure I must.
I will say that I've long since gotten over the initial panic that ensues when one first scrubs a board or uses a jack set really rank for the first time. The result is not always pretty but so what?
To date, I haven't found an actual need for a smoother to go deep, but I don't doubt you for one moment if you say this is a selling point and a capability your customer base expects. Perhaps it is even an attribute by which one can observe the relative merits of one brand vs. another.
Honestly, I read these forums and have come to the conclusion that I'm either a genius or a complete, blooming idiot (I'm sure you'll vote for the latter). All the problems people seem to have that can only be solved with a boutique plane, or extremely intricate sharpening and honing routines, tips, and tricks, not to mention expensive arrays of stones and power sharpening equipment. Then there is plane fettling at the atomic level - it's the only way to avoid tearout, etc. I'm obviously missing something. I don't think much about planing. This is good because it must be pretty effin' agonizing to have trouble getting a small gaggle of boards ready for joinery. I guess I'm proof that ignorance is bliss. I have few planes so picking the right one to use isn't terribly difficult. When they quit cutting right I sharpen them. A squiggle from a wax stick I find helpful too. Expletives have been known to work well - "just one more pass you *uckin* son-of-a-*****" will usually get me to a smoke break. That demon nicotine. My planes have learned to listen. They are workers that will take a cussin' and still clock in tomorrow - not pretty prima donas that need to be petted, polished, and put to bed proper.
In the grand scheme of hand tool woodworking these days I have a miserable kit of tools. Excluding the workbench, I could pack my entire operation in less than a half hour and skee-daddle. And come to think of it, the workbench isn't worth moving. And if the whole she-bang fell off the truck on the way out of town a few hundred bucks and an afternoon on EBay would put it right.
BossCrunk,
Feeling a little sorry for himself to-day.
Edited 2/19/2008 2:47 pm ET by BossCrunk
>BossCrunk,Feeling a little sorry for himself to-day.<Those are words I never thought I'd see. Well you've got that set of hollows and rounds you were talking about. You couldn't easily replace those if they fell off the truck. I've been working on building up a set of Greenfield H & Rs, all from approx the same era, and it ain't the easiest thing in the world. (Yeah go ahead, bring it, you demented ebay snipers, I'm almost done now, and just need a few more sizes). Cheer up.
Edited 2/19/2008 5:19 pm by EdHarrison
I keep 'em under my bed...not really.... I use 'em hard... hell I put a colored Sharpie dot on the ends of a couple of them so I could quickly grab a few sizes I use a lot.
They're good planes. They do what they're supposed to do. In a perfect world, I would actually like to have gathered up a set of really old ones though. Not sure why, maybe Larry's planes are a little too crisp, little too tablesaw-ish. But I have no complaints whatsoever about their performance.
And it would be hard to replace them. I bought them when Larry charged about half what he charges now and at a time when he didn't have a huge backlog of orders.
I'm eternally grateful that I had the forethought not to blow my budget on bleedin' bench planes. There is a lot more to handtool woodworking than jointer/jack/smoother.
Edited 2/20/2008 9:52 am ET by BossCrunk
"To date, I haven't found an actual need for a smoother to go deep,"
But you would want it to be able to cut more than a wispy without choking, surely.
What are these boutique planes you talk of?
If you have time to feel sorry for yourself then you are not working hard enough- increase your customer base, or develop an interest in tools and tool making. Either way it will be good for you and business.(;)Philip Marcou
"To date, I haven't found an actual need for a smoother to go deep,"But you would want it to be able to cut more than a wispy without choking, surely.
Philip, I don't guess my smoother chokes all that often. Occassionally I suppose, I don't keep a logbook on such things. I just knock the chip out and keep going. I usually back off the iron a little if it happens again. No big deal. I don't see any reason to force the issue, maybe I have to make an extra pass or two at a lighter setting. It's not an event that sends me scrambling to a tool catalog or into some fit of micrometer-wielding angst.
When I plane, I'm concentrating on what the board looks like. If it's shaping up nicely I'm less concerned about using shavings as a diagnostic tool. Plane shavings don't usually become part of the finished product in the work that I do. So far, the voices in my head have talked me out of buying a micrometer to measure shavings. At least those voices are good for something.
Edited 2/20/2008 9:44 am ET by BossCrunk
Charles, try not to be so thick. I was not referring to your smoother-I am sure it has a practical mouth.Who on earth is "keeping a log book, forcing an issue , scrambling to tool catalogues in fits of micrometer wielding angst"- apart from someone in your head? Certainly nobody on this forum.
Further talk with you will be counter productive-so quit whilst the going is good.Philip Marcou
General comments, more or less.
I live on thick(er) shavings until I'm ready to make a couple of passes to bring a board right to finished thickness. I'm planing to a line on real wood that will be put into a project, not working up practice boards to photograph and post a gloat (meant generally, not specifically at you). I guess other than for jointing edges for a glue-up I'm always working to a line. I'm not cleaning up ripple marks from a power planer. I'm simultaneously flattening, taking out cup and wind, and bringing the thing to finished thickness. Hopefully this happens more or less simultaneously - I don't need to get to finished thickness and then discover there is still twist, cup, etc. left in the piece. And I don't want to introduce a defect that wasn't present when I got started.
My concern is trueness for joinery first, absolute surface perfection second. I don't need a perfect surface finish on a board that's off-dimension. Sometimes I hit dimension before I get the perfect finish I'd like to have. It happens and for lots of different reasons that are not an indictment of the woodworker. Anybody who says it doesn't happen to them is either lying, or lying about how much stock they've actually four-squared to go into a real project. Again, meant generally, not aimed at you.
Pro golfers sometimes "fall in love with the line" and forget to stroke a putt hard enough to get it to the hole. It can happen in planing and it can happen to experienced woodworkers. You get a little lazy with the winding sticks and check a little late and here comes the "OH $HIT, I don't have enough thickness left to make this right."
I try to work reasonably fast. I'm not giving a demo to a room full of people. The goal is to get out furniture parts ready for assembly, not refine my skills as a machinist and tuner of tools to the Nth degree (again, meant as a general explanation of how I work, not a comment on how I think you work).
There are no problems in my shop that are the fault of the tools. Everything I own is more than adequate for the job asked of it.
Edited 2/20/2008 5:12 pm ET by BossCrunk
Boss, another great brutally honest post. It all rings precisely true with my experiences in the shop with hand planes. I know some of these guys seem to get their shorts in a knot over your posts, so I thought I'd tell you that I like your posts and attitude a good deal.
BTW, It's kind of funny when you read someone say something like
I am not the one to answer that because I don't do scrub planing- it is too slow too much unnecessary work and no fun..Unless you want to make a sow's ear from a silk purse?
You just have to believe he's never actually used one (I suppose he says as much with "I don't do..." but then goes on to opine on it anyway!). If he had, he'd know that it is quick, often necessary (depending, I suppose, upon the large stationary tools you may have), and rather fun and rewarding. I'm tempted at times to come up with a way to use a panel or some such that leaves the scrubbed texture; I also like the nice little chip/shavings it makes.
Edited 2/20/2008 4:06 pm ET by Samson
Thanks,,,, appreciate it.
Edited 2/20/2008 5:32 pm ET by BossCrunk
Samson,
In any plank with cup, bow and so forth there's an ideal straight, flat and square plank. One way to extract it is with a scrub plane et al. A much faster and probably more accurate way is to use a planer/thicknesser with its fine flat tables & fence, not to mention that rapidly whirring set of blades driven by a motor.
Now, I can understand the Jeff-need of scrubbing a plank that's bigger than the planer/thicknesser maximum capacity. Thankfully, such wide planks are rare. I can grasp a purist's preference to scrub rather than put up with a motor's noise and such - but that purist must either charge a lot for their pieces or their time must be free (that is, they are doing it for love not money, like thee and me).
Is anyone going to pretend that scrubbing is efficient; or that a scrubbed plank is distinguishable in the final piece from a machined one, should the smoother, scraper, spokeshave or other finishing tool be used to give the final surface? Perhaps; but I won't believe them, as I know how fast and accurate is a proper machine and how slow the handplane at removing large quantities of wood in a precise fashion.
Of course, romantics will bluster about "setup time" or "tearout"; also about how they can scrub a flat plank in ten minutes because they have done so many times (it musta already been flat, mate) but they are dreaming.
Of course, if you want a scalloped surface, there is possibly no better way than that rough scrubber plane; although Festool do make rather a nice scalloping drum/blade for their electric planer......... Then there is the adz (not too fast, especially when you consider the many, many practice swings required before you get it right).
Lataxe, sans rose-coloured glasses.
Easy on the Adz, Wife wanted a hewn mantle and I got busy wacking away. I found out that I was doing too well, with a little practice you can do better than someone with a scrup pland. I had to work at making the beam looked hacked enough for Her.Work Safe, Count to 10 when your done for the day !!
Bruce S.
Thankfully, such wide planks are rare.
I have a 6" jointer and a 12" planer. Planks with faces larger than 6 inches are ubiquitous, and those with faces larger than 12" are hardly rare.
Whilst rose coloring is optional, you may indeed need some glasses to see beyond your own shop's capabilities.
Samson, Boss & Lataxe,
I think it depends on what the customer wants more than what any of you folks think as Bruce discovered. As many have said before most customers could give a poodles patoot how you did it. On the other hand if the customer wants a piece made the traditional way then that's how it should be done.
If Samson & Boss want to plane to their hearts content I say go for it. If Lataxe wants to use his machinery to get there what's the issue?
You Boss have said many times before to many different folks in essence, Git 'er Done, now matter how you do it.
You're all right!
Regards,Bob @ Kidderville Acres
A Woodworkers mind should be the sharpest tool in the shop!
Bob, were you a middle child?
No need of a peacemaker here as far as I'm concerned. And I think Boss and Lataxe would agree that disagreements can be entertaining and enlightening. Our skins are thick enough to withstand even vigorous disagreements - EVEN THOSE REGARDING SUCH SERIOUS SOLEMN ISSUES AS PLANING.
;-)
Nope, I have just an older brother.
Oh I guess I was just stirring the porridge you might say.
Tis great joy to take a well fettled plane and make some passes o'er a board or three. No need for ear protection. Ain't but a little dust, if at all. And ya see that fresh pile heapin up around your ankles, the smell of the wood.
You can even enjoy some musac whilst you work too.
Regards,Bob @ Kidderville Acres
A Woodworkers mind should be the sharpest tool in the shop!
Bob
Let those fine lads drop the gloves and get it over with. It also makes for a more interesting thread.
My money is on Lataxe for all verbal sparring accounts. He is the wit-meister, after all.
And, to be clear, if I had a 36" jointer, I never, ever, in a million years would have flattened any slabs by hand. However, since I haven't seen one of those bad-boy aircraft carriers cruising through my pond, I'm stuck using the tools I have at present.
And, one final thought from me. No customer ever gave a rats a$$ whether the wood was flattened and thicknessed by hand or by machine. Many of mine, however, do care that their new table is flat. Get er' done, I say.
Jeff
Ah come on Jeff, you may not have an aircraft carrier but we know you do have something approaching battleship dimensions and make good use of it . A 24 incher will do at a push (;).
I see msgs to me have been deleted and would hope they were not malignant, but all the same regret missing out on a skirmish or two.
I was hoping to be able to show that all methods have their place (within reason) and also to show how panels can be joined without a sweat -physical or worries about coming out under size.Philip Marcou
Edited 2/21/2008 2:27 pm by philip
Philip
I've definately got my eyes out for a 16" or 24" Northfield. There's one out there with my name on it. It just doesn't know it yet!!
Your point about knowing and understanding many different ways to approach a job are well taken. Today's shop work included making some framed raised panels to be applied in an office on a job I'm doing. One section has some really goofy angles. 10 years ago, I would have had to build a couple of jigs to run the long boards (5" wide frames, about 5 feet long) through the TS, or on the miter saw. Instead, I just cut with a handsaw and block planed to the line. Much faster, and no dust.
This topic is Plane Talk, right??
Jeff <g>
After further reflection and re-reading, a few thoughts:
Original Question:
Why are so many sellers preoccupied with boasting about how thin a shaving their plane can produce?
My Answer (and recap):
Thin shavings are seen by many as a short hand for quality, and with good reason. In order to reliably produce thin shavings, a plane needs to have certain attributes in materials, design, and workmanship. And thin shavings are often desirable for smoothing work, especially in figured woods, as the thinner the shaving, the less likely tear-out.
Furthermore, many (perhaps most) folks see little need for hand planes except as smoothers. In other words, the market for smoothers is larger than any other plane market so you would anticipate sellers aiming at this segment.
Boss agrees with the OP that planes do lots other than smoothing. Lataxe, who seems rather knee jerk in responding negatively to Charles, poo poos using bench planes for much other than smoothing as it seems to him unnecessary, masochistic, and worse yet, sentimental.
A further response to your latest assertions:
- "A much faster and probably more accurate way ..." Have you ever used an actual dedicated scrub plane, i.e, a Stanley 40 or the LN or LV equivalent, as opposed to setting one of Philip's planes to take a "thick" shaving? If you had, you might have seen that it is not particularly slow. In short, you are using the wrong tool for the job and then damning the right tool as somehow equivalent. As for accuracy, a skilled hand, using the proper tools, can 4 square a board extremely accurately.
- see above on the myopic "rare" assertion
- "as I know ... how slow the handplane at removing large quantities of wood in a precise fashion." As set forth above, I don't think you really do "know." I'm not going to argue that the hand method is faster or produces a board that is "better." But handplaning stock, for the hobbiest, is a legitimate, reasonably efficient, and, indeed, often rather pleasurable and satisfying effort, especially if one has neither the room no the resources to have large machines capable of doing the crucial stock preparation for you.
Edited 2/21/2008 11:14 am ET by Samson
Edited 2/21/2008 1:18 pm ET by Samson
Samson,
Planes - a serious topic indeed! :-)
There can be no argument that a scrub plane is a useful tool and still legitimate for some modern woodwork. The following three uses are not in dispute, perhaps:
* scrubbing to flatten very wide boards too big for the planer-thicknesser (P/T);
* scrubbing because you enjoy it rather than machine work (or you can't have a machine);
* scrubbing to get a scalloped surface.
My eyebrow is raised only at the idea that making rough boards fair with a scrub is somehow at least as efficient (fast, accurate) as the P/T. (We are talking proper P/Ts here, of at least 10 inch width capacity - not them toy ones you have in the USA).
The scrub plane is only just a specialist plane - it's a narrow smoother with a scalloped blade and a wide mouth. It may be less tiring than pushing a smoother set for a thick shaving but is it really so different that it would significantly speed up or make more precise the result?
I used a small smoothing plane with a 1.7 inch blade having a heavy camber - not quite scrub but not so very different. It took a long time to take out the cup and bow from those oak planks and I can't see that either the perfect scrub plane or a well-practiced plane-wielder would do better than to half that time.
In a race, the P/T would win over the scrubber by a huge margin, with just one everyday bowed/cupped/wound 8/4 plank of 6ft length and 4 - 10 inches wide. When there are the typical project's worth of planks to deal with then the P/T means days, not hours, are likely to be saved.
And the finished plank will (presumably) look the same......?
Also, how many hours of scrub practice (not to mention marking-out practice) are needed before one is reasonably proficient? Of course, there will be no shortage of opportunity to practice, should one need to deal with that project's worth of timber via a scrub. :-) It can't do the food bill any good though - ye must be starvin' after all that work!
****
I've lost count of the number of professionals I read who grin at the idea of retaining the working practices of yesteryear just because they are old. Most furniture makers who are doing it for a living cannot add-in to their prices the cost of days of scrubbing. Some may do it as part of their "sell", which is fair enough (as is the need for a scrub to get a scalloped surface, if that's part of the design).
But I like the Art Carpenter style of "honest" woodwork. The initial preparation is done by machine because it is efficient. The art and the associated use of handtools to achieve it comes at the end, when the parts are made and constructed to achieve a "human" look and function. I save my romanticism for the furniture, not the planks, perhaps because I have not yet detected their souls.
Lataxe, a Philip-stine
PS When are you going to start pit-sawing yer trees to get the planks for scrubbing? Mr Wenzloff is making a saw for the job.......
My eyebrow is raised only at the idea that making rough boards fair with a scrub is somehow at least as efficient (fast, accurate) as the P/T.
Fast, I'd grant. Accurate, I'd not. In other words, it may be slower, but is as accurate.
The scrub plane is only just a specialist plane - it's a narrow smoother with a scalloped blade and a wide mouth. It may be less tiring than pushing a smoother set for a thick shaving but is it really so different that it would significantly speed up or make more precise the result?
I do not beleive that it was considered a "specialist" plane (in the sense of for occassional or specialized use). Rather, it was a workhorse that likely saw use on more planks than not in the days before machines.
And yes, scrubs speed up the initial flattening process considerably. "Precision" is not much of an issue until later stages when you've switch to try, jack, and smoother planes. The scrub is designed to quickly address twist, cup, warp, etc., not to zero in on a scribed line.
I used a small smoothing plane with a 1.7 inch blade having a heavy camber - not quite scrub but not so very different. It took a long time to take out the cup and bow from those oak planks and I can't see that either the perfect scrub plane or a well-practiced plane-wielder would do better than to half that time.
I dunno whatt the plane you were using was like precisely, your technique, nor how long you considered "long." All i can say is that my 40 is a hungry little devil that is not slow in getting rid of 1/4" cups and the like.
In a race, the P/T would win over the scrubber by a huge margin, with just one everyday bowed/cupped/wound 8/4 plank of 6ft length and 4 - 10 inches wide. When there are the typical project's worth of planks to deal with then the P/T means days, not hours, are likely to be saved.
Again, faster I will grant you.
And the finished plank will (presumably) look the same......?
Finished with your smoother, or finished as it came out of the thicknesser machine? If the latter, then no, the hand planed board will look better.
Also, how many hours of scrub practice (not to mention marking-out practice) are needed before one is reasonably proficient?
Not very much really. If you are working on a flat bench, you use that (and winding sticks) as a reference to take out any wobble or cup on one side. Once you get one side flat, it serves as reference for all the next steps, which no doubt are obvious to you. Practice just makes you faster.
And now the strawmen:
I've lost count of the number of professionals I read who grin at the idea of retaining the working practices of yesteryear just because they are old.
Who was advocating any "just because they are old" line?
Most furniture makers who are doing it for a living cannot add-in to their prices the cost of days of scrubbing.
If I were in business, I'd have to buy the big machines no doubt.
I save my romanticism for the furniture, not the planks, perhaps because I have not yet detected their souls.
While I may be a romantic, for the most part, I use the planes for this work out of necessity, as I've said.
PS When are you going to start pit-sawing yer trees to get the planks for scrubbing? Mr Wenzloff is making a saw for the job.......
Why must you insist I'm a Luddite. I'm no such thing. Perhaps you have me confused with the Cherubic one.
I'm not trying to convert you or anyone to my way of using handplanes as necessary to prep stock. I simply want others (especially newbies) to know that this option exists and is quite viable for the hobbiest.
Edited 2/21/2008 3:57 pm ET by Samson
Samson,
A very fair and informative reply. Perhaps I'll have a go at true scrubbing, although I know no one over here with a scrub plane so I may have to indulge in one o' them LV or LN ones. (Life is so hard :-) )
I hope you forgive the odd jibe or dig (pitsaw); this is only a bit of spice on the conversation, you understand. I know you are not a Luddite - not that our Ned was entirely wrong in his outlook: there is room for an argument bemoaning the motorcar, for example. And what about that evil television thang!
Lataxe
I don't mind the jibes a bit. It's a shame tone cannot be conveyed well on these inner-nets. I always imagine meeting at the corner pub after a day in our sheds and joshing back and forth - though rather in earnest after a pint or too - but with no hard feelings at all.
A 40 can be had for a very reasonable amount on eBay. Do look at LN's as well as LV's as both are quite nice. Even if it is a specialty plane in your arsenal (for that occassional 16 or 20" monster you salvaged, you'll be glad to have it.
Cheers!
Lataxe
If you have need of a #40, let me know. I've got a nice one, and I've even fashioned it with a new cherry tote, replacing the beat up beech tote that came with it. It sits on my shelf, unused. I find that particular tool to be a waste of the $65.00 I spent on it. I prefer to do the required hand scrubbing with a 606 or a jack plane with an equally cambered iron. Having the extra mass is a benefit, in my opinion.
Jethro, seeking a 36" surfacer for flattening slabs
Charles,
Excellent. I am glad you did not take my last sentence to heart.
We are on the same wave length provided we are talking about preparing stock mostly by hand work-which is what you are concentrating on here. If I had to do it this way my only comment would be that from what I read on this forum I would be using my #51/2 a lot more than what seems to be the norm . I don't have a scrub plane but I do have a #6 with wide mouth so that I can use a curved blade -again I suppose it is considered to be unorthodox. What I do is a combination of what I learned from apprentices and journeymen who had been trained by the British system, in a factory environment where mass produced furniture was made to a high standard with a lot of handwork involved, plus my own input.
For various reasons preparing stock by hand , for me, has been the exception rather than the rule. Some reasons which you will not like: 1)type of timber available to me and 2) the fact that I have seen first hand what can be achieved with machines that are suited to the job and properly set up. 3)I like good machinery and its maintenance.This does not mean that I am pre-occupied primarily with tuning , tinkering adjusting etc etc-but I expect a good machine to be accurate and not produce more work such as snipe, burn marks etc. To me the majority of what one sees in the magazines is not "good machinery"....although it can be made to produce good results and many folk do wonders with it when I would most likely take a hammer to it.
So, I am machine oriented , but believe a good wood machinist must be trained in hand methods first- as per the system as it was.So
I don't work to a line when preparing stock and I have a totally different outlook when joining up panels, tops and laminations. A smoother or a #51/2 comes to hand if there is too much to come off with a card scraper, and to lick over the machine scallops which are minimal.There is also the stroke sander. There is or should be minimal work to do after a panel or top glue up-certainly no significant thickness adjustment.
So there you go. Seeing things from a different stand point can have useful outcomes: you will be less likely to bark "go and buy a burnisher" when you realise that a) it may be preferable to save that money for another more exciting/useful woodworking purpose or b)it could be fun to explore other possibilities for a burnisher, that may be free and work better than the one from the glossy magazine.
Philip Marcou
Edited 2/21/2008 1:38 am by philip
Mufti,
The point of the person demonstrating the plane taking the very fluffy shavings was probably not so much that he was instilling that you would do the same when you use the plane, it was probably because the ability to do so was a testament to how well the plane was constructed. To be able to take such fine shavings full width of the iron there are several physical factors that have to be present. The sole has to be extremely flat and the iron has to be honed quite straight across, and all these parts have to fit quite precisely so that when assembled it works as a very solid unit. The relationship between the flatness of the sole and the straightness of the edge of the iron must be within the tolerances of the thickness of the finest shavings one would pull from a board with that plane. If the plane he was demonstrating was in fact a smoothing plane then the demonstration was relevant to the tool he was demonstrating, and if he was able to pull some very fluffy shavings well then the plane was very well built and tuned.
All these factors are key to how the plane would perform taking thicker shavings. As you increase the thickness of the shavings you also increase the stress on the performance of the plane and parts that don't mate well enough to hold the iron absolutely stiff will make planing at this shaving thickness a nightmare. So what I am saying is the same factors that give a plane the ability to take the fine shaving will also make it perform better when taking thicker shavings.
Ron
If you're too open minded your brains will fall out.
Edited 2/21/2008 11:07 pm ET by Ronaway
Edited 2/21/2008 11:07 pm ET by Ronaway
I'd like to join in this discussion - it's nice to be among friends - but I can't recall what the discussion is all about .... :)<!----><!----><!---->
I do know that Jeff is a man of my heart because I, too, prefer a large jack or fore plane set up to act as a scrub. The Stanley #40 is fine for pine, and the LV Scrub is a decent enough scrub for middling hard woods, but when you need to remove lots of Jarrah or Karri, then you want a man's plane, a #5 1/2! The extra heft, together with a Serious camber is what I use. Much of the time, however, the Serious camber is not really necessary and the Standard middling (8 1/2" radius) camber is just fine.<!----><!---->
Like Ron I think of the smoother as a smoother. In my plane reviews I have been known to focus on the creation of fine shavings (and this has had its critics), BUT it was not my intention (as Ron has well described) to use this demonstration for anything other than a measure of how well a plane has been made. Smoothers can and should be capable of thick shavings, but I'd rather use a jack plane to do jack work. Leave the smoother set up as it was born to be. This reduces identity confusion (I get enough of that in my patients at work). Nevertheless I agree that smoothing is a small part of the total handplane work.<!----><!---->
Somewhere back about 20 or so posts (probably more - I get confused easily), Charles noted that he planed to a line and that he sometimes overstepped the line (he does this in more ways than one!). I know to which he is referring and I agree with his sentiments here (did I just say that?!).
When working without machinery, the focus moves to the smaller areas around the joint rather than the boards larger expanse. Absolute flatness is not necessary at this stage since that area may be addressed later. Smoothness is different from flatness, and I guess that this is why vintage smoothers are about 7 1/2" long or less (to ignore the valleys and hills). This is also why there is a difference of opinion among woodworkers who use machinery to prepare stock (and this favour long "super smoothers") verses those who prepare stock by hand (and turn to short smoothers, like my 3 1/2' Mujingfang).
The point is (Hi Charles!) that professionals have a different focus than do hobbiests. Professionals need to get work out the door as quickly as is reasonable. Hobbiests just do it for fun and a little wasted time does not make any difference ... actually it may be why some are there in the first place. For the latter, the thickness of a shaving is not pertinent to the building of furniture. However it may be pertinent to the having of fun. Charles, I wonder how many times you go to your workshop just to relax and unwind?
In my own professional world I look at my meagre stock of child neuropsychological tests. I've been doing this work for 25 years and have reduced my choice of tests to a selected handful over the years. Most newbies have vastly more than I. I will look over what is new to the market, examine if it can do the job better than what I have at present, and almost inevitably decide that there is nothing there of significance (because it is not about the tests, per se) ... and so continue on my way. Sounds familiar, doesn't it Charles?
It never ceases to amaze me that there is a continued lack of appreciation that the professional work of woodworking is different from that of the hobbiest woodworker.
Regards from Perth
Derek
Derek,
"It never ceases to amaze me that there is a continued lack of appreciation that the professional work of woodworking is different from that of the hobbiest woodworker."
I don't believe this is a widespread phenomenon at all. Rather, it is concentrated in one individual. It is the underlying reasons for this condition which hold a (morbid) fascination for me. (;)
Philip Marcou
I actually see the hobbiest woodworker as having less time for experimentation but I know you reject this notion. I'm not here to deny anybody their puttering around time. The sad part about the professional furniture makers that I know, some from this forum, is that they are far from being booked solid year 'round. The notion of a guy making standalone furniture on a professional basis having to rush projects out the door (and tool up to the gills) because new orders keep pouring in is, in almost all cases, a pipe dream. There are a few exceptions, but not many. The cabinet and built-in guys stay pretty busy, but studio furniture makers are having to build on spec between commissions or hold down part-time jobs to make ends meet. Some gave up full-time furniture making and started schools. I've never met ONE studio furniture maker who set aside a bulging order book and said "screw this, I'm starting a school." Not one. Serious backlog is what these guys live for. So few have it that it is much more the exception than the rule.I think you are imagining a world that in almost all cases does not exist. The truth of the matter is that most guys WISH they could actually use all the productive capacity they have gathered around themselves. There are ample examples right under your nose. One wonders why all this hasn't dawned on you yet.
Edited 2/22/2008 11:31 am ET by BossCrunk
The notion of a guy making standalone furniture on a professional basis having to rush projects out the door (and tool up to the gills) because new orders keep pouring in is, in almost all cases, a pipe dream. .......
..... The truth of the matter is that most guys WISH they could actually use all the productive capacity they have gathered around themselves.
Charles
I imagine that there are yet more parallels with my private practice. For as long as I can recall I have been fully booked and overworked. This sounds wonderful but it is far from the ideal. Since I specialise in working with children, there are ebbs and flows - sometimes seasonal, as with school terms and vacations, and sometimes environmental, as with the weather, winter flu's, and so on. When the number of referrals slow to a trickle, neurotically I want to work even harder and longer hours - as if I'd better make the best of things. My wife reassures me that this is a pattern I constantly experience, but there is the stress of mortgages, private school fees, insurance, high taxes, etc, etc. Then the referrals pick up - as they always do when the school term gets underway - and I struggle to keep my head above water with the demand on my time.
The point here is that the work flow does not change. When times are lean, I work as hard (if not harder) than when times are busy. In my fantasy of the life of the professional woodworker I imagine that he/she does the same. In other words, there is still going to be the same emphasis on getting work out the door as fast as reasonably possible, and that this will place limitations on how one works.
Towards a summary Charles, I think I should pair together two of your statements, each from opposite ends of your post:
I actually see the hobbiest woodworker as having less time for experimentation but I know you reject this notion ........ I think you are imagining a world that in almost all cases does not exist.
I think that the truth is closer to there being no stereotypes, whether these are of the professional or the hobbiest woodworker. There are so many reasons why we do what we do, and how we do it. Who are we to say what one should or should not do in the privacy of one's workshop. If someone gets a thrill out of buying every Lie-Nielsen plane manufactured and then building shelves for these .. so good for them ... as long as it gives them pleasure. The source of conflict or disagreement in these repeated threads is the "Black-and-White" statements where things are either done this way or that ... either right or wrong ...
Regards from Perth
Derek
All I can tell you is that the time spent converting lumber, regardless of how it is done, is hardly part of the make or break equation for a professional studio furniture maker.
Derek, admittedly I have not been following all this too closely-fatigue has set in, but when this was said:
"The notion of a guy making standalone furniture on a professional basis having to rush projects out the door (and tool up to the gills) because new orders keep pouring in is, in almost all cases, a pipe dream. "
And you said:
"In other words, there is still going to be the same emphasis on getting work out the door as fast as reasonably possible, and that this will place limitations on how one works."
I think it should be emphasised that the professional is still bound to work as efficiently as possible since he is charging by the hour (when all is said and done) so the example of board preparation comes to mind: why should a client be paying for this to be all done by hand when it will cost far less by other means?Philip Marcou
Do you really think that's how a studio furnituremaker bills?More like this: Total personal bills for X number of weeks plus raw materials cost = price to Mrs. Jones for Jacobean dressing table. Please, lady please let me book this job.Hourly billing is the first thing that goes out the window when the commissions get a little slow (if you ever really collected your street rate in the first place which is doubtful). If you're busy, hell, everybody in the shop has an hourly rate - even the cat who catches the mice. Doesn't happen that much. The last thing a guy does before he accepts his first set of students is send out a proposal to his last, qualified prospect at his full hourly rate.Get a clue.
Edited 2/22/2008 4:06 pm ET by UrbaneLegend
Charles
My particle flux articulator is sensing a host of multiple personalities here. Perhaps you should set a spell on Derek's couch. I'm sure he'll make an exception in your case. We're all children at heart.
Even if a one man pro shop dedicated to stand alone furniture isn't sitting with a yearlong backlog of commissions ready-to-build, it wouldn't change the pace at which that individual would choose to work. Especially if billables are bit slow, I'd imagine you'd want to get paid as quickly as possible, and keep the cash flow going. Yes???
BTW, I've seen Philips work. In fact, everyone has. I believe, undoubtedly, that he has more than a clue.
All those in-between cabinet jobs do allow for the funds to seek gainful employment building furniture, but unfortunately, our customers seem more willing to spend $15K on a wall filled with built-ins than a custom built dining room table. Right now, my income from cabinet work has a 3 to 1 advantage over stand alone furniture commissions. It's certainly not how I want it to be, but hey.........those 2 universities where my son and daughter attend still want their checks, so.............
HI HO HI HO IT'S OFF TO WORK I GO
Jeff
Urbane,
Charles, Taunton, Boss, at al,
For me, the work (however little or far backed up,) had better cover the bills. I'd just as soon starve all at once, than a little at a time.
Thinking of starting a school, are you? I am, too. Not that orders are slow in coming- business is actually picking up from a year or two ago. Just seems that the pay might be better, all things considered. Only consideration for me is that I might be a bit behind the curve.
Ray
Oh My God........ Ray, surely not, for the love of the Lawd....how could I have missed it.
The PosterFormerlyKnownAs, Tonton Macout, C. Stan, Boss Crump, and now Urbane L?
Somehow I doubt it , unless the meaning of the word URBANE has been misconstrued.
Just now I am going to call for a portrait of this chap.Philip Marcou
I think judging by what has been posted on other forums, that the real name of this miscreant is Ron. I have reason to believe he has recently published a book of unknown subject. Perhaps it is within the realm of possibility to finally unmask this villain. I further believe that said Ron has gone through a divorce, perhaps the loss of his better half has left for us only the worse half?
Hi Philip
It is quite possible that there are only two of us on this forum, that all the others are the multiple personalities of Charles. Mmm ... and I am not sure of myself either ... I could be one of Charles' unconscious souls ... how will I know? Perhaps I should ask Lataxe ....... do you think that Lataxe could be another Charles?!! <shock!!!> Oh Noooooooooooooooooooooooooooo!
Regards from Perth
Derek
Philip
Urbane usually only comes out to play after BC has been backed into a bit of a corner, so to speak. Of all the personalities that Charles carries around in his tool box, I must say I appreciate Boss Crunk the most. That's the guy I'm most likely to enjoy having a cold ale at the pub with. Who knows, the other 6 or 7 personalities may just show up, and then we'll have one helluva good time.
Bartender, 7 shots for my friend Charles!! Oh, and a glass of water, too.
Jeff
This sounds great. How about we do a trade in kind? You show me how to work wood as well as you do, and I'll teach you how to teach? If you throw in the occasional loan of the Indian, I'll promise to stop quoting Krenov :)
Pedro,
This could be the start of a wonderful friendship.
Ray
Ray,
Thinking of starting a school, are you? I am, too.
Can I test drive it for ya!?
Regards,Bob @ Kidderville Acres
A Woodworkers mind should be the sharpest tool in the shop!
Bob,
I promise, you'll be the first to know.
Ray
philip,
"why should a client be paying for this to be all done by hand when it will cost far less by other means?"
In 30-couple years at this, I actually have had 1 (one) client ask that his project be built completely using period (18th century) techniques. (Turns out, he didn't like the appearance of the unrefined shellac I used for the finish!) Other customers who have brought me antique furniture for restoration have, without specifying, expected the new work to match the old, in surface quality as well as finish. This might mean removing planer-marks with a smoothing plane, but might also mean matching the radius of my fore-plane's iron with that of the plane used 180 years ago on the backboards I am patching out.
In addition, I have frequently hand planed the odd board that was too wide to fit thru my small planer. It was faster (cheaper, more efficient) to do that, than take it somewhere and have it planed, and I hate to rip those wide ones, just to glue them back together.
Ray
Ray,
let me be more specific: I don't expect clients to pay me for longer hours spent just because I have decided that (for whatever reason) I like to spend time using a scrub plane instead of machines.
Quality restoration work, reproducing tool marks, quirks, finishes etc pertaining to past periods is another fettle of kish altogether-and I don't believe is what has been under discussion here.If a client specifically asks for this either acquiesce or get someone else to do it, methinks.
I could not agree more with your last paragraph-that is why I like to have as big a capacity surfacer and thicknesser as is viable.
Philip Marcou
How do you go about flattening your wide glue-ups?I'm curious about what percentage of your operation repairs and restoration represent if that's not too personal a question.
Edited 2/23/2008 8:30 am ET by UrbaneLegend
Urb,
Wide glue-ups. Hit 'em on the diagonal with a try-plane (wood body) set scant (sorry I don't measure the thickness of the shavings), to level any mismatching across the glue lines, then go over the whole thing with a smoothing plane. I recently put a Hock blade in my smoother, after wearing out the old Ohio Tool Co blade I built the plane around (90% restoration!). Scrape, and sand.
Repairs vs new work varies from year to year. Most times, its about 70% new, to 30% repair/restoration. Occasionally I get a run of large jobs one way ot the other that skews the average. Interestingly, when the economy slows, new orders typically drop off, and restoration picks up (two different clientels--can that word be plural?); but in '01 after 9/11 and NASDAC tanked, everything dried up. Often see a slowdown, esp in new orders, in an election year, but that seems not to be occurring (yet).
Ray
Ray,
At the risk of an explosion from outer space, could I ask what timbers you mainly work for new work?
And, if you were pressed, would you consider using a portable power plane to hog off waste when you need to dimension and surface large slabs?Philip Marcou
philip,
My goodness, what sort of curmudgeon must you and Urbane think I am? He's worried about getting too personal, asking about repair work, now you are risking an exploding asteroid?
I'm extremely grateful that I have none of those ungodly timbers you and derek are always wrestling with. Black walnut, cherry, hard maple, oak, and mahogany, mostly, for primary woods. White pine, yellow pine and tulip poplar mostly for secondary. The odd bit of exotic stuff as inlay matrial: Ebony, purpleheart, lacewood, rosewood, that sort of thing. Various veneers as well.
No oftener than I need to surface boards by hand, and as flat and nice as they usually are, I don't know that I can justify the expense of a hand held power plane. If I were regularly surfacing those huge slabs a la Nakashima, I'd change my tune, probably. As is, I need the exercise, more than I get, nowadays.
Ray
Okay, thanks. I was not referring to an explosion coming from you....Philip Marcou
I was curious about how many board feet of lumber you think you could four-square in one day with an eight inch jointer, a pretty robust lunchbox planer, and an average tablesaw - say a Grizzly entry level cabinet saw.
Charles
I have no idea. I do not have a jointer. I do have but rarely use a lunchbox planer (called a thicknesser or thickness-planer in Australia), and my use of a tablesaw has slowed to a trickle in favour of a bandsaw.
I tend to work this way:
http://www.wkfinetools.com/contrib/dCohen/z_art/prepBoard/prepBoard1.asp
I would be happy to show you the product of the labours of the article/example, but I must do so privately as they have to do with the Wood Central tool competition. Send me your email address.
Regards from Perth
Derek
Derek, I could buy microscopes, a gas chromatography set up, complete lab bench and hood, test tubes, beakers, Bunsen burners, lab supplies, etc. and I still wouldn't be a microbiologist. Between bouts of polishing my microscopes, arranging the test tubes by size, and tuning the Bunsen burners I might occasionally look at a dead fly or a drop of blood or maybe some pond water. If I have fun that's cool, right? It is cool. I think. Do you think? Maybe I could buy a comfortable couch, rent a nice office, buy a bunch of notebooks and pencils and ask people about their dreams. Would that make me a Freudian analyst?
Edited 2/22/2008 2:06 pm ET by BossCrunk
Charles
Are there degrees of being a woodworker?
Do you consider that this title should be restricted? And if so, to whom?
Regards from Perth
Derek
I don't know, are there degrees of being a carpenter?Would you hire some joker who owned all the tools but had never built anything of consequence to do a 2,000 square foot addition to your house? Do you think this beginner should call himself a carpenter? Would you listen to him when he opined about building? What if he could tell you everything you could ever want to know about different manufacturers' circular saw blades - how they cut, how they held up in different materials, etc? Would you still hire him to build the addition? Would you ask him how to frame a roof? Would you seek him out as somebody to advise you about best practices in home construction?Of course "woodworking" is different, it's a catch-all. People don't die when a bedside table is poorly designed and constructed. Perfect, just perfect.....right?
Edited 2/22/2008 10:27 am ET by BossCrunk
Hi Charles
All this has nothing to do with woodworking, has it?
Regards from Perth
Derek
Derek, sometimes a cigar is just a cigar....
Either an analyst, or to be profitable, a blackmailer.
Edited 2/22/2008 2:32 pm ET by mufti
Mufti, be careful of the spelling of that word "analyst".(;)Philip Marcou
Its a bit like diarrhoea, when I am tired I just go with the flow. Sorry.
Perhaps that variation should be the word for solicitors (attorneys)?
I am laughing. But now confused: which word refers to solicitors? (;)Philip Marcou
The Stanley #40 is fine for pine,
With all due respect, Derek, this is nonsense. My 40 does fine in cherry, walnut, and hard maple, not to mention mahogany and others. Perhaps you ought to do one of your famous tests ...?
Perhaps you manly men can push a 2 3/8ths inch blade cambered with a radius similar to a scrub through Jarrah, but I kind of doubt it. Rather, your camber must necessarily be significantly shallower. As a result, you are taking wide shavings, but not deep ones. The scrub excels at taking depth quickly.
"It never ceases to amaze me that there is a continued lack of appreciation that the professional work of woodworking is different from that of the hobbiest woodworker."I couldn't agree more. In particular it seems as though there is a sense that every woodworker must set themselves up with a pro-level approach in a pro-level shop full of pro-level tools in order to build the occasional bit of copy-cat furniture. Almost every article in every magazine presupposes a TS, Jointer, Planer, and router table in a hobbyist's shop. When folks like Samson, or Charles, or many others state that there are other ways, that with under a grand in handtools you can make most anything in a small space, they are often derided as ludites.I've got to say that had it not been for the realization (thanks to a rasp of all things) that so much could be accomplished with so little I would have stayed out of the hobby. I don't have 1,000 square feet or 10,000 dollars to devote as a price of entry. I have often seen Charles get skewered for encouraging folks to stop obsessing about buying things or tinkering with old tools and just build with what they've got. For the vast majority of us who don't make a living at this, that's excellent advice. There are plenty of pros like Adam Cherubini, and Rob Millard, and Patrick Edwards, who do things the old fashioned way too.It's true that most pros use machines, it's also true that most furniture is laminated particle board junk. That junk is made by pros. I'd rather encourage the new guy (like myself) to focus on the journey rather than the destination. Hobbyists don't have to crank out pieces, and the world would be a nicer place to sit down in and eat at and grab a book from if pros spent less time cranking out disposable junk on machines. I think in the race to buy new toys that the point of woodworking: making beautiful things out of wood, gets lost. At risk of getting lynched I'll bring up Krenov again: he describes himself as an amateur and says the finest work will be done by amateurs. It's not just that there's a difference between hobbyists and pros, it's that more often than not the right approach is to be found amongst a small number of hobbyists.
Not me, I'm just learning the ropes.
---Pedro
"I have often seen Charles get skewered for encouraging folks to stop obsessing about buying things or tinkering with old tools and just build with what they've got."
Charles does not get skewered for encouraging folks to stop obsessing about buying things. Charles gets skewered for being a condescending bully, and acting as if his way is The One True Way.
-Steve
I'm not sure that in this thread (as an example) he's been any more condescending than have half a dozen others towards him. At least not Boss.
It seems to have become a habit, so I'll take the 100'th post in a long and winding thread yeat again, ha, ha.
I have to say this has been an interesting thread with useful and divergent points of view expressed.
I'm in the gang with a paucity of covetable planes. I just use the smallish collection of a mixed bag of planes, and sharpen them as and when needed.
I've never had much interest in wispy thin shavings, except when doing a bit of final cleaning up on some tricky grain. There's always the scraper and abrasives anyway to finish the job off if the grain is truly recalcitrant. Slainte.Richard Jones Furniture
Pedro,
You have made a fine and provocative post! I will squiggle about on your line for a bit and enjoy the bait, before swimming off into the cyber-depths, with your juicy morsel thoroughly digested.
First, you must not deny yourself the pleasure and efficiency of proper tools just because you are not a professional WW. After all, you could pawn the Marcou for a while and get enough for several excellent power tools or one proper plane/thicknesser. In time you will feel the call of the Marcou as it languishes in the pawnbroker's window and readjust your schedule of home economics in order to re-aquire it. Why waste money on cars, going to the cinema and exotic food - all sheer indulgence on your part and detrimental to the development of family character, moreover.
Many professionals produce stuff that may not be to our taste (blonde scandi-modern bores the arse off me) but this has nothing to do with the quality. Mr Ikea, moreover, is not a professional woodworker but a professional salesman.
But you have also failed to mention the many amateurs that produce absolute junky furniture - the build-it-in-a-weekend crowd; those who slavishly build from a magazine plan drawn up by Pluto or Micky; and many others who make dross for reasons unknown. They typically use cheap tools of a basic kind, often recommended by other woodworkers of a cheap and basic kind, some of whom write junky articles for WW magazines of a cheap and basic kind. Does this mean that such tools always cause bad furniture? No, no more than good tools do. It's what you do with them, you know.
However, using good tools does have a tendency to demand good skills and furniture from the user. It's a psychological thang. Do poor tools excuse bad work? I know people who who employ the tactic to explain away their weekend piney junk. "The tearout in that mis-shapen breadboard is due to the Stanley; as is the mis-shape, not to mention the spelks".
Much can be achieved with little, you claim. This is true although it does require rather a lot of time to both acquire the muscular/motor skills and to actually do the work, especially when it comes to matters like scrubbing or rip-sawing large ugly planks. As an amateur, I find my time limited (as Charles has pointed out more than once) so prefer to spend money (i.e. accrued value from time already spent drudging) on machines or handtools that remove the drudge-aspects of my hobby; and are easier rather than harder to use and maintain. As a consequence, I can concentrate on developing what little artistic talent I may have. In between the WW shed-events, I can do photography, fell-walking, cycling, dog-minding, gyming, allotment-improving, cosmology classes, etcetera, etcetera rather than scrubbing planks for another 8 hours.
Of course, some woodworkers like to develop a monk-like regime. No doubt they eat gruel and scarify themselves in a cellar after the days work. "I am an unworthy fool as I scrubbed only three not the alloted four planks today" (Whip, whip). Well, here I am unfair perhaps. Many like to adopt the old fashioned methodology and why shouldn't they? It's their time and in fact I quite admire those who produce wonderful furniture with basic tools. But must we all follow their ideology? I prefer my own, like any other citizen of a modern individualistic culture.
Finally, we must mention Charles and his skewering. Perhaps you didn't notice but skewers bounce off Charles and all his other personae. Moreover, he enjoys our thrusts and he parries mightily. He is probably the last person on Knots who needs defending. And, despite the slavering, biting scorn, distain, narrow-mindedness and all his other virtues, I for one love the old goblin. As Derek notes, conversations with Charles are not really about woodwork. I do sometimes wish he would offer up well-argued advice instead of the odd pearl-before-swine remarks, which we must all take on faith, like a group of gullible recruits to the temple. Samson could teach him a thing or two - he is vigorous but courteous in his arguments and includes the logic.
Lataxe, small shed but stuffed with lovely, proper tools of every kind.
Edited 2/24/2008 11:48 am ET by Lataxe
Sir Lataxe,
Pawn my Marcou? Surely, you go too far! A Marcou plane is not an optional piece of equipment or a luxury. It is an absolute necessity! Without it one cannot do woodworking of any kind. I made this argument to my wife, and many a shimmering wooden surface has born it out. Were it to be proven untrue she might ask whether it was not an unreasonable splurge... She might even say that our family would have been better off with heat and food this winter than with glorious gossamer shavings. Where would that leave me?But on to other, more sensible points you made. Charles like everyone else on this forum needs no defending. We're all big boys here. But his arguments sometimes deserve defending, and those in this thread are among them. I do not advocate suffering for suffering's sake. I only say that a beginner who is told that a scrub, a jack, a bowsaw, and a set of chisels will enable him to build most anything feels that a small amount of money can go a long way. I started with about this much. Then I added a smoother, a couple of better saws, a couple of better chisels, a couple of specialty planes, and so on as needs dictated. Now I look forward to a bandsaw to, as you say, remove the drudgery of resawing from my work. But the point is that I started with a handful of inexpensive tools and that was enough to get bitten by the bug and make things my wife loves. The spirit of Guidice's book, along with many of Charles' posts is diametrically opposed to the vast majority of the advice given out here and in most books. One does not "need" any stationary power tools to do anything! That doesn't mean one should never use them. By all means buy and use whatever you like. But none of these things are necessities. The number of necessities to do good work is actually quite small. A beginner should be told to buy (or be given):
1 LV or LN Scrub------------------$135-$145
1 LV or LN BU Jack----------------$210-$225
1 set of 8 Narex Chisels----------$65
1 Highland Woodworking bow saw----$44.99
Clamps, mallets, comb. square-----$118.50
1 Comb. water stone---------------$26.50
And for $599.99 you're in business. Sell these as a starter kit along with Guidice's book and you'd have a lot more beginners. Add Krenov's first book and you'd have a lot more beginners building fine furniture one bit at a time, and a lot less making ugly junk designed by Pluto or Micky from a magazine. Forget about speed or efficiency, and focus on quality. After you've made a few things see what you dislike and buy a machine to minimize that part, or see what you like and buy a specialized chisel or plane or saw to help you do more of that and better. One bit at a time, as you need it, as you build things, as a reward to yourself for making furniture that's as lovely as you can make it.In the end I think we agree quite a bit. I mentioned the junk most professionals make (the world wouldn't be full of junky furniture otherwise, and Mr. Ikea hires a great many professionals to build his wonders), you mentioned the junk most weekend warriors make. Both true, and for different reasons. In the professional's case, market pressures are often used as an excuse to cater to the lowest common denominator. "I have to use bad materials and shoddy joinery because I have to compete with the Home Depot." To which I would reply "You don't have to do either one, let Home Depot be Home Depot, grow an imagination, and be something better." The world doesn't need more custom made junk to go with the mass produced junk. As for the hobbyist, we're imitating all the wrong sorts of woodworker. Without time constraints (that table doesn't have to be done tomorrow), or financial constraints (this isn't how we pay our mortgage), there is simply no excuse for not employing first rate joinery and design. No excuse for building dime-a-dozen stuff from a plan.It seems there's always a few (many) voices who come out to say that every approach is wonderful, all is well if you're happy and all that happy nonsense. Let's all join hands and sing kumbaya. Seems awfully patronizing to me. Every approach is not equal, excellence is not relative, and while it doesn't matter one bit whether you achieve excellence it is critical that you try. It's the journey that matters, but you can't have the journey without knowing where you're headed. And Norm is most certainly not the destination.Okay, I'm ranting. I just wish somebody had said all this to me a year and a half ago. There was a thread back then in which Charles berated a newbie for fettling planes, and berated other posters for advising him to keep at it. He advised newbies to just get a few tools that work and get to work. It was the best advice I got, and I like the guy because of it. In the same thread he volunteered Philip and others to donate tools, which was a little silly. But the thrust of what he said was great. I'd rather get the right advice from an #### (and I don't think Charles is one), than the wrong advice (buy a TS first and build your shop around it) from the world's nicest guy.I'm off to the woodshop to continue resawing by hand until I've saved enough for a bandsaw. Monk-like scarification by necessity, not by choice.
Kindest regards,
---Pedro
Pedro,
I will even support your argument with my own exprience! The first two pieces I made used 1 cheap modern Record plane, 2 plastic-handled marples chisels, a coping saw and a generic hardpoint saw. Oh and some generic sandpaper that seemed to really be made with...sand. I made a small bookcase and a coffee table, from rough sapele boards, not planed-all-round softwood.
These tasks (for that's what they felt like in the end) took an age and gave me tennis elbow, not to mention a disgust with cheap handtools, which required constant fettling or sharpening and amazing amounts of time to accomplish anything.
After that I bought a Bosch POF600A router, 12 cheap bits and a ROS. I never looked back and the elbow got better after a mere 10 months. The subsequent pieces I could make were more complex and better-made (that is, precise joints, finer finish). Hopefully my current toolset allows not just efficient production (machines) but also a better overall quality (handtools).
If I had not spent a tiny bit more on that router I would probably have gone to do gliding (my other obsession of the time) instead. As it was, WW got a grip and I no longer spend all weekend awaiting favourable updraughts or wave-wind on a cold and oftimes muddy field.
My own experience would lead me to advise a WW newby: save up and do without to buy basic power tools, initially. When you've (quickly) made a well-wrought piece or two a la Norm, add good quality handtools (your starter list plus a couple more) to expand skills and capabilities. I suspect that, as Jeff mentions, most modern folk (including me, I admit it) are too impatient to spend all those hours of drudge per piece when learning. Power tools melt drudge work and allow one to get ddicted to the joys of production much faster than do handtools.
On the other hand, handtool experience via making something with really basic tools (froe, drawknife, axe) out of greenwood is a good education concerning the nature of wood itself. And that too can berapid, because the wood is easier to work and the artefacts less complex than a typicaal piece of hardwood furniture.
If one is determined enough to make do with only muscle, fair enough - power is in that sense a luxury. Me, I must be a lotus-eater. :-)
Lataxe the WW hedonist
Right you are. In fact before I had my little list I had a Porter Cable router and a set of Freud bits (and later a Leigh jig). So in point of fact I started with power tools too. But not stationary ones, I guess that was my point. Too expensive and too much space required. But it's true that the instant gratification of the router got me before the thrill of shaping with a rasp and planing with a LV BU jointer did. Then it was hand-cut dovetails and it's been all downhill since then. It's hard to trace the precise origin of the slippery slope.As for working only with muscle, I am certainly determined enough, but my muscles are not.
Best to you,
---Pedro
A voice crieth in the wilderness: "So where are we all, now, for I am lost....".
Could the Master of ceremonies sum up this thread in a precise and coherent fashion, whilst the going is good.Philip Marcou
You sir; are better qualified than most.....
If you can not make sense of this mess then I despair as to who can.....If I can not trust you then all to this point is lost.....Great dramatic effect don't you think??
Edited 2/25/2008 4:42 am by rsaunders
In all seriousness you are an authority....
Lead us unto the truth.....
Not now-I must go and sleep (;) It is eleven bells plus here at Land's End.
The whole thread has been most entertaining, even without dog fights (;)
I hope you have been reading it in conjunction with the thread about welding cracked planes.Philip Marcou
Who started this anyway? Being of limited intellect I do not have any idea who Charles is or any knowledge of alter egos. But so what, one personality is a bonus in a world of mediocrity.
Would anyone agree with my opinion that the starting point for the journey towards doing good work is decent timber, not exotic, but stuff which when worked gives a lift to ones feelings. This in turn makes me at any rate tune and sharpen my tools in recognition that I may be pleased with the results.
On the other hand stuff from DIY outlets very rarely inspires. Not to worry, lots of good stuff is tipped or broken up and is there for the asking. Already thicknessed and just needing stripping or cleaning up.
Most people's handplaning, as I think your original post pointed out or at least suggested, is limited to smoothing S4S stock either worked by the dealer or by machines in one's own shop. Taking a barely measurable shaving (a "whispy") is preferred in this scenario since the board has already been worked very, very close to finished dimensions with machines. ***There is nothing wrong with this***Bringing handplanes and other handtools to bear on the task of four-squaring lumber takes an approach beyond that required to simply smooth an already machined surface. Some people believe that working this way is the height of absurdity, a needless exercise in masochism, or fatally quaint. I don't. Having this skill more or less mastered will allow the woodworker who feels he or she has something to say with their hands to do so in a relatively small space, with a modest investment in tools, in a quiet way so as not to bother neighbors or run afoul of zoning ordinances, and work wood in a healthier and safer environment. I don't believe that using handtools extensively or even exclusively precludes practicing as a professional woodworker, regardless of what "the crowd" or one's favorite present-day woodworking hero or heroine is doing.I doubt one would want to go into business building large conference room tables or architectural millwork (unless highly specialized) with only hand tools. Similarly, if the only woodworking commissions one ever landed were for enormous buffets, kitchen dressers, and sideboards one might want to have machines in that scenario as well. But with a decent mix of projects, perhaps including chairs, having a manual operation really shouldn't be an impediment to success.
Edited 2/25/2008 12:49 pm ET by BossCrunk
Boss,
Wot a good post you have made. I for one am thoroughly persuaded by your reasoning. I am hoping for more in this vein (reasoned posts) although also that you don't give up the pokes, jeers and gouging as one must not become calm just to please the mob.
Lataxe, a WW swine.
Boss
I believe your analysis is spot on, and I have nothing further to add. Your description is precisely how I work, with the exception of when necessity requires hand tools to mill slabs that exceed the capacities of my power tools.
Jeff
Not quite what I intended. My point was that to randomly demonstrate hand planes as being intended for ultra fine work does a disservice to the craft and does not encourage an understanding of hand tool work. A comparison is the marketing many years ago of super surfacers which led some to think they had found the wonder tool, only to learn that it did nothing else. Planes ought to be shown to be the versatile tools they are.
I am perhaps naive in hoping that Joe Bloggs reads posts here, for I have little time for elitism but continue to learn and hope others do likewise.
Pedro,
You're projecting.
You're advocating an approach that works for you. That's fine, but don't make the mistake that so many do, that what works for you must of necessity work for everyone else.
As for the list of "necessities," we've all read stories of woodworkers in various parts of the world who create stunning works of furniture, sculpture, musical instruments, whatever--using only a homemade knife made from a salvaged piece of hacksaw blade, or a chisel ground from an old bolt, or....
-Steve
Of course I'm projecting. I'm not going to recommend that a beginner try something which would not work for me. At most I could recommend something that I've seen work for someone else, and then I'm just projecting their experience. Empathy and projection is how we relate to the world. Anything else is in the same category of fiction as unbiased reporting.And yes, you can take my point about simplicity of toolkit to an absurd extreme. But the point was to come up with a beginning toolkit that is not just simple, but capable and easy to get started with. Telling a beginner to buy a toenail clipper and go build Noah's arc is not what I was after. Though I hear Mel is doing just that with an Adze!
---Pedro
So why is your list The Right List? I would have no problem if you had said something like, "This is what I have found to be the minimum required to do good work." But you didn't. You said, "A beginner should be told to buy..."
-Steve
Hi Steve,
My list isn't "The Right List". It's what I wish someone had told me was the right list when I began. It's the right list for me. I also feel a beginner should be told to buy these items first, because it's what I wish I had been told without so much contradictory advice. I think this list is small, versatile, and coupled with the book will get you far in a small space with minimal outlay. From there it's easy to branch into machinery or more handtools without ever regretting any of the items on the list. The only one you may stop using is the scrub plane, but being a LN you can sell it on ebay for more than you paid for it.I'm sorry if I came across too strong, but I do find that many have a hard time thinking in terms of how best to introduce a beginner to the craft. For this you need to get their feet wet quickly, and success needs to follow fast. I think Lataxe's suggestion of a router should be on my list as well and bump it up to a grand. But a recognition that fettling old tools will discourage beginners, that most people don't have ten grand and a thousand square feet to spare is essential.Most importantly for everyone who is not a beginner, the ability to distinguish between a "need" and a compulsive purchase is important. Spending less time shopping for tools like my sister in a shoe store, might reveal that woodworking is about more than rampant acquisition. There's an artistry involved, a creative process that can be beautiful. And you don't "need" very much at all before the limiting factor is your own creativity and dexterity. Having Tage Frid and then Guidice tell me that you can do all your cutting with just one $50 bow saw was a shock for me. And they're dead right, you really can. Later you get more precise with specialized saws for this and that. But starting out? Same goes for a plane. Does a beginner need a 4, 5, and 7, or just a 5? Should a block plane be anybodies first plane? You can't do anything with just a block plane! With a Jack you can do everything. Should a $3,000 table saw be the cornerstone of your new shop? That's what most every book says. And yet many of the pros who do the work I admire most rarely if ever use one. A table saw is great for mass producing monotonous cabinetry. For one-off work a hand saw will do just fine, takes less space, makes no noise, and actually teaches you about how wood is put together.By now you must be thinking I'm one of Charles' personalities :)
---Pedro
ALL,
I don't think any list is right.
How on Earth could a beginner even think of anything resembling a list? He/she hasn't even started yet.
I think that a beginners list will be vastly influenced by how he/she makes his/her start in woodworking more than anything else.
Regards,Bob @ Kidderville Acres
A Woodworkers mind should be the sharpest tool in the shop!
Chicken and egg my friend. Can't make a list until you get started and know what you like, but how do you get started without a list? I say, come up with a very short list of very versatile tools that will fit into most any eventual shop configuration and work style. Then start working wood and see where it takes you.
Pedro,
You soph: "Can't make a list until you get started and know what you like, but how do you get started without a list"?
That's a fundamental question but there is an answer other than: "make a list". All my life I've drifted into things with no conscious intent most of the time. It was that way with woodworking; casual events led to the making of a bookcase then a coffee table, with a couple of tools lying about from house maintenance and a couple more bought out of a very vague idea that to do WW "you need a plane", etc..
Not an ideal way to go about things, you might say. It certainly continued in that way for a year or two, with tools acquired as an ambition to make this or that arose, along with still vague ideas about what tool might do various things best. I had a small bandsaw (versatile and fast sawing) and a router table (plus various bits) in no time. I made quite a lot with those few tools, even if most were by then power tools.
Once I began to read and (worse) acquire catalogues, tool mania began! Yet I still applied the rule, no tool unless you use it to make something. Even today, I have few tools that don't get used. (Ones that don't are router cutters bought in sets or for a one-off profile; some clamps for which I found better methods; a dowel-making jig).
Do I need all these tools? Not really - there is a lot of redundancy - I could do many WW tasks with at least 3 different tools.
But the drift method of tool acquistion does work, insofar as you get what you need to make a thing rather than what this-or-that ideological approach to WW says you should need or could get by with. I confess I prefer the drift to having a plan - plans are for anxious folk with budgets and no sense of adventure, as I think you may believe yourself.
***
I have a friend who is a plasterer/tiler (and smallbuilder). He has another tool-use method: "the tool you need for this job here now is the nearest one to hand". This often means he uses his jigsawas a hammer and spanner as a stirrer (amongst many other bizarre applications). Astoundingly, he lays perfect plaster, smooth tiles and doesn't ruin his tools in a week!
Lataxe
I'm all about drift, but in the beginning I wanted to know how to start. I didn't start as you did, I had lists and lists. I kept them all on LV's website which is wonderful, and I would check it every night (sometimes more than once) to see if I had the perfect selection of beginning tools. I scoured knots, read all of Derek's reviews, and read every magazine and tool review I could get my hands on before making a single purchase. So much contradictory advice I didn't know what to do. In the end I bought the jointer, and the bow saw, and the chisels, and the mallet, and Guidice's book, and got started. I fell in love, built a bunch of things here and there, and then I went nuts. All in all I've spent about two grand not counting the lovely Marcou which is priceless and therefore does not require pricing :) Not bad for a year's worth of addiction. I also buy tools for specific projects rather than for hypothetical future necessity. But I could have used some coherent advice in the beginning. And I would enjoy more conversations about design and proportions and so on, and fewer on which tool to buy next, or what does this cookie cutter piece of furniture from a plan look like when I build it, or how many acres of shop space do I need to make pens on a lathe. This goes for FWW too, even if they are far better than the competition.
"But a recognition that fettling old tools will discourage beginners..."
"Having Tage Frid and then Guidice tell me that you can do all your cutting with just one $50 bow saw..."
This is a good example of exactly what I'm talking about. If it were me, I'd much rather buy an old--but decent quality--plane (the same goes for chisels) and spend a day or two fixing it up, and take the money I saved and buy an inexpensive circular saw for rough cutting, and one or two low-end Japanese saws for fine work. I tried a bow saw once. Not my type.
"By now you must be thinking I'm one of Charles' personalities"
I already figured that out.
-Steve
Well now, I never claimed my list was perfect. But at least now we're on the same page. I wouldn't recommend an inexpensive circular saw, or an inexpensive anything since you usually get what you pay for. But a bit over a hundred bucks will buy you my Milwaukee which I use for carpentry, and you could make the same argument as Lataxe with the router. The only down side to this is that learning how to cross-cut and rip by hand is a lot more than just self flagellation. You really do build manual dexterity, and a useful understanding about how wood goes together and comes apart. For that reason I would prefer to start with the jack plane of hand saws and add the power saw later. But that's a personal preference. I said in the beginning that one would quickly add to the initial list as preferences are discovered. A circular saw might be the next purchase after a few projects and a learned distaste for hand sawing. Right around the time the scrub plane goes on ebay, and the new and enthusiastic woodworker kicks the car out of the garage and buys a planer and jointer. But $50 spent on a bow saw is a small sunk cost to discover whether the big machine shop or the small hand shop is right for you.
Best,
---Pedro
The number of necessities to do good work is actually quite small.
A beginner should be told to buy (or be given):1 LV or LN Scrub------------------$135-$1451 LV or LN BU Jack----------------$210-$2251 set of 8 Narex Chisels----------$651 Highland Woodworking bow saw----$44.99Clamps, mallets, comb. square-----$118.501 Comb. water stone---------------$26.50And for $599.99 you're in business.
This is always an interesting thought experiment. While I could make some stuff with this, I'd personally have quite a different list. If my present tools disappearred (in a natural disaster or at the hands of a jealous wife (;-), for example), what would I replace first?
- blue spruce marking knives
- tite-mark marking wheel
- Incra Guaranteed Square 7"
- 6 and 12" Starrett combo squares
- Starrett 24 inch straight edge
- vintage chisels (any of various makes are acceptable) 1/4, 3/8, 1/2, and 1" first (then add more sizes)
- Sweetheart of earlier vintage 5, 7, 4 1/2 bench planes
- LN rabbett block
- Stanley 40
- Stanley 78 and 248 for rabbetts and grooves
- 8 inch draw knife (vintage from various makers acceptable)
- Klein or Stanley tape measure 10 - 16' range
- LV large router plane
- LN dovetail saw
- LN tenon saw
- Old Disston rip (5-7 tpi range) and crosscut (10 tpi)
- Either a Nobex miter box or a Makita 10" SCMS
- Makita router 3612
- Gramercy rasps
- 151 or 52 spokeshaves - vintage
- corded 3/8th hand drill and/or 10" Yankee brace
- decent jig saw or Gramercy bowsaw
- lots of Bessey K-bodies and tradesman bar clamps
The list is endless, no doubt, but with no stationary tools, this list could take a small shop a long way.
Samson,
There are many items on that list o' yourn that I haven't got. As the envy-consumo meme has me in it's grip, I might have to buy them all .... and then use them to justify the indulgence.
On second thoughts, I'll make do with my own paltry few thangs.
Lataxe
Well yes, your list is much better than mine, but not for a beginner. You can hardly tell a newbie that they need both a 6" and a 12" starrett combination square to do woodworking, for example. One is fine for a newbie, one is all I have. No need for a miter box, just cut to a line, and shoot. No need for Disston as well as LN saws to begin with. I love my Blue Spruce knife, but a pencil worked just fine for my first few projects. No need for Bessey clamps to be your first (or last: Jet is cheaper and better I hear, mine are in the mail so I don't know yet).My point was a minimum set of tools with which you can do good work. The other benefit of my list is that by being short it avoids overwhelming the beginner with a vast array of tools to learn all at once. Coupled with the Guidice book it gives you a self-taught entry into woodworking. From there they can build up to your list one bit at a time, that's what I've done. I'm not saying my list is necessarily perfect. But it has the advantage of simplicity. If someone had handed me your list when I was starting out and said "you must have all of this to get started in woodworking," I would have walked away. Half a dozen old planes to find and fettle before I can build a bookshelf? I'd rather go back to the office and grade exams.
My list wasn't intended to be so much a beginner's list of the minimum, but more my own idiosyncratic list of most used, go-to, tools that I would replace first if I ever had to start from scratch again.
And really, what is the bug-aboo about fettling. If you spend $35 on a SW 5 on eBay (and I've bought several), it will at most need a bit of cleaning and a blade sharpening - 20 minutes TOPS - before it can be put to work. You can by a rusted piece of iron for $5 and rehabilitate it too to save $30 and because it is satisfying (or was your great uncle Roger's and has sentimental value), but it is NOT required.
Edited 2/25/2008 2:06 pm ET by Samson
You know, I think I may do that. I want to see what all the fuss is about with these old planes. If it is necessary to flatten the bed, do you recommend lapping on glass or can you use a large diamond stone? Assuming I don't own any specialized power tools for this task. How often is the old blade good enough, and how often do you order a replacement from LN?
Best,
---Pedro
If it is necessary to flatten the bed ...
For a jack that will be used as a jack, you'll have been stuck with an unusual lemon if it's sole is out so much that it requires significant flattening. Smoothers might benefit from some lapping (it can't hurt). I have several 5s, 4s, 3s, a couple 7's, and a 4 1/2, and they've all worked fine without any laborious lapping. The only one I significantly lapped at all was a 607 with some staining on the sole. I bought a roll of sandpaper and taped a strip to my jointer bed. I stopped after about 10 minutes when the stains were gone, tried the plane, and found it worked great. Never did any checking with straightedges and feeler gauges to see if it really should, by all flat sole worshipper standards, to have worked so well (sort of like how for so long engineers assurred us bees couldn't fly).
As for blades, I like LN's Stanley replacements, though they are not absolutely necessary. Indeed, that 607 I mentioned got a LN blade for about 15 minutes until I realized I liked that particular original Stanley better (and it's been in there ever since). My 40 has a Hock, which is very nice and thick.
Over all, Stanley bench planes made between around 1880 and 1940 are excellent planes and will do as well as you could want in 90% of planing tasks in American domestic hardwoods. When the grain gets wilder and more challenging - that last 10% of tasks - something like a LN (at 5 to 10 times the cost) might well do better. The beauty of the old ones is that they are inexpensive, ubiquitous, and setting them up (as opposed to taking a LN out of the box) gives you a very useful education - the distinction is not unlike that in Zen and the Art of Mortorcycle Maintenance between the lead who knew his bike and could fix it versus the guy who paid little attention to his BMW and always took it to a mechanic.
Edited 2/25/2008 2:31 pm ET by Samson
Very interesting...Would this same advice apply to plow planes? I would like one but don't feel like blowing two hundred big ones on a LV. A little cleaning, a little honing, and they work like new? If so which old plane would you recommend for the task?---Pedro, considering changing his spots and becoming a fettler
The spectrum of condition for old planes runs from rusted crap to never touched. What you want are clean "users." The new in box pristine stuff will be expensive as you'll be competting with the collectors. Cosmetic imperfections are irrelvant to you. Indeed, a plane that looks well used, but cared for, is a very good bet to be a plane that works well.
As for plows, I'm no expert as I don't have first hand experience with any other than my 248A (a 248 with extra cutters). It, or similar sized Records are good bets for light plowing (like for grooves to house panels or drawer bottoms. My 248A was in the $120 range IIRC - so it's not too big a savings over the LV. Now, a 78, on the other hand, a rabbet plane, can be had in very good condition for well under $100. That's just to say that not all specialty planes are more expensive.
If you really want to know, just pick up a couple of wooden planes for next to nothing and try them. Keep life simple, these things work very well and all the tuning is straightforward.
I've thought of this as well. I want molding planes, but should I go the Clark & Williams route, the Japan Woodworker route, or the cobbled together from here and there route? My primary concern is that I have no experience with how a good one should work (as opposed to with metal places), and so I wouldn't know if the plane was junk or just my technique. Samson's recommendation regarding metal planes appeals to both my lazy and cheap sides! But it's shortsighted if I end up frustrated and hating life with a poor tool. What has your experience been with old wooden planes (honest now)?
Pedro,
Oooooooh the wonders of a #45. If you're rallly up for a challenge a #55!
Regards,Bob @ Kidderville Acres
A Woodworkers mind should be the sharpest tool in the shop!
Did you get your new one? Do you like it?
But it's shortsighted if I end up frustrated and hating life with a poor tool.
Hey, don't take the chance on my account, Pedro. I don't want to see you hating life and $35 poorer if you can't get a Jack to take a decent shaving. You better save up for the LN, the LV BU ABCD, or what have you. Some folks know that they need their food chewed for 'em, and while some might deride that, I think it is just healthy realism. ;-)
I was referring to the wooden planes which I've heard can often be of dubious quality. But I am unapologetically in love with LN. There's something to be said for a beautiful functional wonder that works right out of the box. And since I won't be cultivating a fleet of planes with multiple copies of each type, it's not so expensive. In fact I'm more or less done buying. Just saving for a band saw to liberate me from my toils.
So you are done buying, eh? Do tell, what does the bottom of the slippery slope look like? And perhaps more interesting: What is the make up of this "complete set" of planes for you?
Well... the bottom of the slippery slope looks like a shameless confession of hypocrisy. No sooner had I posted the words than I knew they would some day come back to haunt me. Thank you for getting it over with.I've got:
Marcou S20A smoother
Marcou card scraper
LN scrub
LN 140 skew
LN beading tool
LN edge plane
LN card scraper set
LN dovetail saw
LN carcass saw (crosscut)
Putsch bow saw
LV BU jointer w/ extra blades
LV large router w/ fence
LV BU spokeshave
Narex chisel set
Blue Spruce 1/8" paring chisel
Blue Spruce skew chisels
Blue Spruce marking knife
Assorted files
12" Starrett combination square
LV marking gauge
Glen Drake burnisher
Comb water stone
Mallets, hammers, screw drivers, etcetera
Router, circular saw, jig saw, cordless drill
Cheapo Grizzly workbench (I'm building the Schwartz Roubo soon...)The hypocrite still wants:
Band saw
Molding planes
Carving knife
Plow plane (holding out for a LN)
Left handed 140 skew
I would say you have done a remarkably good job of discernment as you scrabbled your way down the slope! Keep up your research as you catch your breath on the ledge, it's a long way down!
No doubt. I feel very satisfied now, but then again I've made a great many purchases in the last year. We'll see how long it lasts before I become a materialistic fool like those I shake my finger at now.
An enviable list. I was really just asking about planes though. So with a the Marcou smoother, the LN scrub, and the LV BU jointer you've got all your stock prep, jointing, and smoothing operations pretty much covered? I'm not saying you need more, mind you.
I think so. What I really want is a band saw. I think that will open up tremendous possibilities in terms of being able to design pieces with board of different thicknesses and better grain matching. The rest is all gravy. I'd like molding planes to try profiles, but I really like the simple ones I can make with the spokeshave and beading tool. I'd like a carving knife so I can see if I like making my own handles and knobs a la Krenov. And I'd like a plow plane to make all those drawer bottoms and cabinet backs I'll be making with a router plane. But I can live without them happily for now. The band saw I'm anxious for. Still, it'll probably have to wait until Christmas. Which means I may get a toy here and there just to reward myself for being such a nice guy and confessing my hypocrisy so publicly:) Maybe I'll even check out a flea market and pick up an old plane like a 78 or a 62.
"I think that will open up tremendous possibilities in terms of being able to design pieces with board of different thicknesses and better grain matching."
You need at least a 3 HP table saw to do that.
"I'd like a carving knife..."
You'll poke your eye out.
-Steve
Indeed I was thinking about an old cast iron monster until I found out how expensive, and how monstrously large they are. Now I'm thinking MM16.Poke my eye out.. thanks. Probably true. While trying to work back to a resaw line the other day I sliced some very interesting ribbons off my left index finger. That bow saw will be the end of me.
A 62??? You either have high hopes or are joking. That's a plane where the LN version is likely to be cheaper. Let's watch this little guy and see where the bidding stops in a week:
http://cgi.ebay.com/Fine-Stanley-No-62-Low-Angle-Plane_W0QQitemZ300201950635QQihZ020QQcategoryZ13874QQssPageNameZWDVWQQrdZ1QQcmdZViewItem
Or I have no idea what I'm talking about. Seems that plane is worth more than I expected. I'm a bevel up guy, so maybe I'll end up with the LN someday, but I have a hard time justifying a jack with a smoother and jointer already on the shelf. Seems extravagant. I could try a miter plane, Marcou makes a lovely one... Bandsaw first.
Boy, you weren't kidding. That thing is up over $400 and there are still two days to go. So a question: you've got a host of planes, do you use them all just to spend some time with each or do you really find a 5 is different from a 5 1/2 or a 6 and need all three kinds? Is this a thing where you end up needing one of each size, or where you only ever need two or three but the sizes are there to accommodate your size?
---Pedro
I don't have a 6.
I kind of acquired a 3, 4, 4 1/2, 5, 5 1/2 and 7 over time because they were inexpensive (often the replacment blade was more than the plane) and just to try out different sizes because I figured I didn't know what I preferred (or was missing) until I tried it out. They all get a good bit of use, but the 3 and the 5 1/2 far less so for me. Someone who made small stuff might find the 3 invalauble. And lots of guys love the HEFT of a 5 1/2, but I'd usually rather use the 7 for that width and the 5 for that length. Many of these different sizes are useful to the extent they excel at different stuff (jointing, trying, smoothing, etc.) or can be set up with different blade angles etc. to handle different situations (a smoother with ahigh angle of attack or and extra cambered jack for foreplaning).
And sometimes, I just grab the one that is sharpest. ;-)
Samson,
I have a #3 but it's worth quite a bit of money so it is relegated to a display case, not to be used. I make a lot of small stuff, jewelry boxes, etc. I'm curious as to where a #3 might be used to advantage?
On most of my small pieces I reach for the block plane. I'm wondering where a #3 might be a better choice?
Regards,
Bob @ Kidderville Acres
A Woodworkers mind should be the sharpest tool in the shop!
Edited 2/29/2008 9:52 pm ET by KiddervilleAcres
Are you typing with disappearing ink, Bob? You have a ___________?????
Samson,
Goo t se ya till awake! Ink work etty ood EH!?
It's this damn keyboard and the fact that I didn't check to make sure I didn't have any typos. DUH is me.
My usual system had a bad spell with its system board so I am in the middle of replacing it. Ever try replacing a system board in a laptop? If ya have big hands you're a gonna!
I went back and fixed the DUHs.
Regards,
Bob @ Kidderville Acres
A Woodworkers mind should be the sharpest tool in the shop!
I'm wondering where a #3 might be a better choice?
Bob
The simple answer is "on smaller work surfaces". A larger, especially longer, sole will remove more wood and reduce the board thickness because it wants to ride the hills. Also, a smaller plane is just easier to control on a small surface.
Regards from Perth
Derek
Yeah, Bob, what Derek said.
Thanks, Derek.
Like how small? Where do you transition from the ubiquitous 4 1/2 to a 3? Is the three something you break out for drawers under a foot in any given dimension, or for small jewelry boxes? I'm not trying to be difficult, and I know many things vary according to the specifics of the situation, but i'd like to be able to estimate how much use one would see in the types if work I have planned. Knowing when you break yours out would be very helpful. I wonder sometimes if people get all these planes but then end up using either a block or a 4 or larger for everything.
thanks,
---Pedro
I find the smaller smoothers invaluable for cleaning up the edges of boards to remove machine tool scallop or saw marks and also for flattening joints on face frames and door frames. The smaller plane is just easier to handle in those situations and therefore just more comfortable in use. It's one of those things where you can do without them, but once you have them you'll wonder why you didn't get one sooner.I also use my small smoothers extensively when making the fine adjustments to infills when I am making planes, which is every day at this point.RonIf you're too open minded your brains will fall out.
Like how small? Where do you transition from the ubiquitous 4 1/2 to a 3?
Hi Pedro
I don't think that you can put a "number" on the size of the board or the width of the edge that says "use a #3 now". Everything with handplanes is about feel. Whatever feels comfortable and controllable.
Before I had a #3-sized smoother I used a block plane with a high angle bevel. Now my go-to small smoother is an infill I built out of a cut-down #3 (it is actually 7 1/2" long) ..
View Image
Of course, since you like bevel up planes, why not add the accessory tote to the LV block plane?
View Image
Regards from Perth
Derek
Pedro,
A Roubo! You really have got a bad-bug meme there!
Make a proper, modern bench with a coupla Veritas twn screws - you will be glad and not have to sell the Roubo surrepticiously using a pseudonym, which we will all guess is you anyway.
Lataxe, examining your list closely for clues; and items for my own list.
I was actually planning on making the Roubo from Chris Schwartz' book with a Veritas twin screw vise in place of the leg vise. I'm back and forth on the Veritas versus buying two wooden screws and making my own. Either way I want the screws 24" apart. Do you have the Veritas vise? What do you think? Can you give us a mini-review? Making the vise by hand has the advantage of allowing me to become increasingly pompous and condescending towards rampant materialism, while continuing to nurse my LV grudge. On the other hand, I swallowed my pride with the LV router plane, and I'm glad I did: it's fantastic.
Why buy the screws when you can make your own? This is a perfect opportunity to jump off that ledge and slide further down that slippery slope. A Legacy mill would make those screw for you and open up a whole new field of possibilities. It also would provide a second use for that router.
Not exactly the quiet hand tool approach is it :)But seriously now, why not make my own screw (no jokes please)? How did they do it in the good old days (perverts)? How does one do this by hand (without going blind)? Any advice?
In the old days they used thread cutting dies which can still be had with a little looking.If you are not opposed to a little noise for a short time there is also this.
http://www.leevalley.com/wood/page.aspx?c=2&p=41791&cat=1,43000
Oh! That is very cool, thank you. I may just have to get one when it comes time to start building the bench. I could even make my own clamps. Problem is after a few uses I'd probably never use it again.
Pedro,
I have one and it's great, Veritas Twin Screw that is. Twin Screws are more fun too! So much versatility and if you follow the innstructions installing it you'll wonder how you got along without it.
If and when you see Lataxes' you'll get some really great ideas on how to exploit its usefullness. I'm working on a version of his dogless front apron approach. It involves two fixtures, a York bench hook (?) on the Twin Screw and a really interesting birds mouth wedge that is engaged into a row of dogholes on the top of the bench. It can be used for planing long timbers. Quite clever.
Plus he's partially to blame for my getting one over a year ago. Well, he ain't around so I gotta blame somebody!
Oh yeah, I'll be picking up the Hollows & Rounds for a test drive later this week. More snow coming tomorrow afternoon into Wed. Isn't that great!?@!&) &))$
Regards,
Bob @ Kidderville Acres
A Woodworkers mind should be the sharpest tool in the shop!
Edited 2/25/2008 8:16 pm ET by KiddervilleAcres
Edited 2/25/2008 8:18 pm ET by KiddervilleAcres
It just started snowing here. They say it'll snow all week. Iwant this winter to be over, it's starting to feel like I'm back in upstate NH. I envy you your molding planes. Please let us know how they turn out. Have you watched the new LN video on making profiles using just hollows and rounds? I've got a copy on order.
Pedro,
http://forums.taunton.com/fw-knots/messages?msg=33822.137
http://forums.taunton.com/fw-knots/messages?msg=37569.10
http://forums.taunton.com/fw-knots/messages?msg=32919.1
http://forums.taunton.com/fw-knots/messages?msg=31060.1
http://forums.taunton.com/fw-knots/messages?msg=33300.56
http://forums.taunton.com/fw-knots/messages?msg=33822.95
http://forums.taunton.com/fw-knots/messages?msg=34347.1
I hope these will do in lieu of me wittering on some more here.
Perhaps you would rehearse for us your thinking as to why a Rooobow bench is just the verry thang? I confess to nearly making one myself, instead of that you see in the above posts. Then I began to realise what a primitive beast it is and why evolution in design-space is not to be sneezed at.
Lataxe, enjoyer of dynamic rather than ossified traditions.
Edited 2/26/2008 5:42 am ET by Lataxe
Lataxe,
Thank you for all the excellent links. I am now certain to use the twin screw on the face, though I will probably have nothing (or a wagon vise) on the end to begin with. I will line the face with leather, but probably avoid the complexity of removable magnetic faces.As to why the Roubo, blame Chris Schwarz. I found his book to be hands down far-and-away the finest I've read on benchmaking. It's the only one I've seen that goes through a step by step analysis of what makes a bench work, and what sort of holding mechanisms are best employed for each type of hand tool operation you may want to perform on a bench. It seems like a twin screw up front, coupled with holdfasts and a bench dog will do the trick for me. If I end up needing a tail vise, I can add one later.My decision to adopt this style of bench is primarily based on its simplicity. It appears that a load of lumber and a weekend of work with a circular saw will yield all the bits and pieces, and another weekend with the scrub and jointer and the whole thing goes together. If I estimate two weekends, then a month of summertime ought to do it. This is based on the rule of pi, which is one of the wisest theorems I have picked up from a senior faculty mentor. Whenever you estimate how long a thing will take you, multiply that estimate by pi and you will have the true amount of time it takes. It's absolutely brilliant. It only works if you are efficient. If not, then you may have to multiply by 2pi. But you will seldom (if ever) accomplish something in less than pi times your original honest estimate. So, I will build my workbench in May (first month of summer break at the university).There where other things about the bench that I liked beyond the simplicity of construction:
1) I like the simplicity of appearance. Maybe it's my Calvinist grandmother coming through, but I like a bench that looks like it's built to be used rather than looked at. I don't want to cringe if a chisel slips and plunges into the top, or feel like I need to put down a protective surface before banging away with a mallet, or gluing an assembly.
2) I like the legs flush to the top, this is a major pain in the neck on my current bench when I try to clamp anything of any size to the face.
3) I like the absence of shelves or drawers or cabinets beneath the top. My current bench has drawers and it's a royal pain to clamp beneath the top across it's width. And the drawers are useless except as a nest for all the shavings that slip through the dog holes.
4) I like the mass of the whole thing. No aprons to give the illusion of thickness, just an honest thick top and honest thick legs.Of course, I've never built a real bench before, so I may change my tune later. I'm still not sure about whether to use the Veritas, or a pair of wooden screws and make my own vise.
Best,
---Pedro
Have you heard of Hofstadter's Law?
It always takes longer than you think it will take, even if you take into account Hofstadter's Law.
–Douglas R Hofstadter
-Steve
My experience with wooden planes has been very good, they sit right in the hands and the swish of wood on wood is different and in some way satisfying. The irons are chunky and "cast steel" and hold their edge.
Of course a poor plane of any material will not perform, but I can buy woodies for about £5 to £10, with really very good ones perhaps up to £20.
Molding planes, just try one you need and read up on their use. Its a learning curve rather than buying success. Have fun .
I will go along with the premise that a plane needs to be well adjusted Ron, but my old wooden planes and metal planes are capable of taking equally fine shavings. The planes sold by that French chap at shows, using knife and shaving blades will do it. My point was that most of us do not, or by common sense, should not live in a world of make-believe where such shavings are regarded as wonderful. A final fine pass is routine and many still then sand the surface, and rightly so.
I lubricate the soles because it makes life easier (he did not) and use hand planes to remove wood as conveniently as possible. Nothing more. Some otherwise very nice planes are a tad too heavy for my taste.
I do not subscribe to the esoteric being happy to use my big Festo to speed things up.
I sometimes wonder who reads our collective words of wisdom, the same people always participate.
This forum post is now archived. Commenting has been disabled