I’m considering the purchase of my first rebate plane – also know as rabbett or shoulder planes. I would enjoy some discussion on what size I should get. L-N makes a small one with 3/8″ wide blade and a larger one wth a 1 1/4″ blade. Clifton makes several with blades from 1/2″ to 3/4″ in width. I would be using it for smallish to medium joinery, tenons, tenon shoulders, etc.
Any recommendations on whcih size will be most useful in the long run? Any opinions on the respective merits of L-N versus Clifton?
Sam
Replies
I bought a Stanley #92 rabbet plane last December. As it is my very first hand plane, I'm no authority. But I have found using it to be enjoyable. I believe it is 3/4" wide. In my area (Seattle), it seems to be tough to find a good selection of hand planes locally. The L-N was not available at my local Rockler. In fact, my local Rockler only carries the hand planes they do sell around the Christmas holiday.
I have the 92 also, for the money it works great...but I too am saving up for a LN 072 (1-1/4" blade) . Everyone I have read who has it loves its quality and It has much more MASS than the stanley.
Sam,
FWIW, I'm perfectly happy with my SweetHeart era Stanley #92 for the work I do. If the situation calls for a larger plane, I reach for my #78.....
Dano
Save you monet and but one of the Stanley's -
I use the model 93 which has the 1" wide blade. I've set the mouth as thin as I can have it and then lay the blade where one side extends
1/32" outside the body to help clear the bottom of a tenon and does not hamper results while trimming the shoulder with the other side.
The Stanley 92 is also an excellant bosy for this use and others. I don't have a problem with other planes you mentioned, but you could have the Stanley 92/93 and also buy a model 60 adjustable mouth plane with the blade bedded at 12 degrees. With this combo there is no condition or end grain that could not be handled. Two for the price of one.
My 2 cents.
Good luck,
Robert
Beware of a new Stanley #92. I bought one last year as a gift for a good pal and it turned out to be really bad. The front and rear soles were out of plane with each other and neither sole was perpendicular with a side. The iron did not seat square with anything and came with a visable concavity. I returned the plane to Woodcraft, they have a great return policy. Recently while in England, I purchased a Clifton 3110 for him as a replacement. (Two birthday presents instead of one.) This is a superb tool, accurately machined in every way, a joy to hold, and look at.
By the way, I have a Stanley 92 that I use myself, but this plane is at least 15 years old. Mine is true in every way and is visibly better than the one I returned. Perhaps the advance of time has not been favorable to the Stanley folk.
My ex-mentor had the same problem with a 92....that was probably 15 or several more years ago; he put a lot of time into correcting it. I just don't think they are very consistently good tools.
I have one L-N (the very narrow bronze one where you buy the casting and finish it yourslf, that they used to sell as a kit), and a Clifton with a 5/8 blade (can't recall the number). That is a very nice plane. I need a bigger one, and it's a rotten shame so many good planes have been mothballed.cabinetmaker/college instructor. Cape Breton, N.S
I'm up to 5 Lie-Nielsen planes. Each one is truly a joy. I can't imagine anyone being dissatisfied with anything from L-N. I've read a review of their shoulder plane and the verdict was as one would imagine. Large and very smooth in use. Funny, I don't have a fancy shoulder plane; just a Stanley 93. I use it sometimes and use the L-N skew block plane with knicker sometimes. I almost purchased an H.N.T Gordon (Australian) shoulder plane in ebony the other day, at the Japan Woodworker in Alameda, CA, but looked at the rest of my tab and came to my senses! I think their irons can be turned around for more of a scraping action on more difficult timber. It must be a valuable option with some Australian timbers. Probably will go for a purchase sometime within the year. The Japan Woodworker has just put their catalog online, if you want to see good photos (the whole catalog is a thing to behold). Both the shoulder and rebate planes are pictured. I'd also bet Larry Williams has some very nice examples; see http://www.planemaker.com/ for beautiful traditional wooden planes.
Cheers,
Greg
Are you looking for a rabbet plane or a shoulder plane? Shoulder planes are generally low angle for working end grain and rabbet planes will be common pitch or steeper for working with the grain. If you're lucky and get a good one a Stanley #93 isn't a bad plane but still not in the same league as the Lie-Nielsen or the Clifton. All three of them are shoulder planes. There aren't any new production rabbet planes I've seen that are all that great. Stanley's old #278 is a great plane for on-site carpentry but they're also collectable and go for over $250 when complete and in good shape. An old wooden moving fillister is about the most versatile rabbeting plane but make sure it's straight, has tight boxing and can work properly before you buy it. I'd suggest you blow off any idea of a Stanley #78 or the Record version of it.
Larry,
I would agree that a #78 is no replacement for a shoulder plane. Perhaps I should have been more clear; in triming large tenons, I some times call on it for that use, not for shoulder work. My apologies to all for not making that clear.....
Dano"Form and Function are One" - Frank L. Wright
Dano,
No reason to apologize. I wasn't even thinking of your post when I posted my negative comments about #78 type of planes. I used one for a long time and the difference between a it and a good moving fillister blew me away. For what they are good old moving fillisters are way under valued and most guys end up with a #78 or the Record version at about the same or even greater price. There are some great old tools out there that too many wood workers don't get exposed to. I like to point 'em out when I get the chance.
Edited 6/9/2002 2:50:27 PM ET by Larry Williams
Larry , can you explain the differance Of a Fillister plane as compared to a 78 and shoulder plane?
Ed,
The #78 was intended as a substitute for moving fillisters. They're similar in function, I guess, but not performance. Rather than get commercial, I hunted down a link to a photo of an old moving fillister. It's not in very good shape and I wouldn't suggest this one but it's sold anyway.
http://www.orme.com/html/mathieson_skewed_fillister.html
I see it does the same thing , maybe its Just the OLd terminology
Is a skewed blade pretty much standard on a fillister?
I don't recall seeing a moving fillister that wasn't skewed. Stanley made the #289 which is a skewed plane similar to the #78 without the forward bed and it's better than the #78. The #289 is another of the collectable and more expensive old Stanley planes. Some moving fillisters had fences with arms but most are like the one pictured. You need to have a screw driver handy to adjust the fence, otherwise they're more comfortable and easier to set than the Stanley versions.
Thanks for the Info Larry
Larry
Thanks for the enlightening question. I was wondering if there was a difference between rabbet and shoulder planes. My primary needs right now are for fine tuning tenon shoulders so I think I'm on the right track with either the LN or Clifton shoulder planes.
I did a little poking around on the web and found that ECE and Ulmia both make a wood body version of the moving fillister plane you mentioned. Hmmm. . . another one to put on the list.
Thanks to all for the great discussion. I believe I'm going to to pop for the LN or Clifton after a little more comparison between them.
Cheers!
Sam
Sam,
Larry is probably too much of a gentleman to say it, so I will. He makes stunning wooden handplanes. Check out his website at http://www.planemaker.com/ Much good information is available too. My own plane budget went bust the other day on an iron miter plane, but I've added a moving filister from Larry to my own wish list.
Cheers,
Greg
Greg,
Thanks for enlightening me with the knowledge of who I was conversing with on this forum. I am in awe! I have seen the Clark and Williams website before but I didn't realize that was who was posting here.
Larry,
You really are a gentlemen. And you make some beautiful planes. Thanks for sharing your wealth of knowledge.
Cheers,
Sam
Sam,
Don't mention it. I did exactly the same thing!
Cheers yourself,
Greg
Sam–
As you’ve discovered, Larry Williams is a master when it comes to planes. His advice is solid, and comes from experience.
I would add that, in my own personal experience, I didn’t realize the value of a wide-bladed shoulder plane until I had already purchased a narrow plane. It took me years to get up the gumption (and bucks) to acquire my next rabbet plane. At that point, I made sure it had a wider blade. If trimming the face of tenons and other reasonably wide work is in your woodworking future (if you’re a furnituremaker, trust me: this type of work is definitely in your future) then a plane with a wider blade makes good sense, particularly for someone buying their first rabbet plane. Later on, you can acquire a narrow plane and put it to good use, but for now a wide plane will suffice for wide work as well as narrow work, such as trimming small end grain shoulders and other diminutive rabbet cuts.
One more thing to add: The heftier and thicker bodies of the wider metal shoulder planes make them more stable and easier to control for shooting edges, where the plane is laid on its side. A good example might be when shaping panel edges, such as when making raised panels for a frame. Plus the sheer mass of these big planes gives them the ability to power their way through the cut in difficult woods.
—Andy
This forum post is now archived. Commenting has been disabled