Replies

1. 
   mwenz | Mar 11, 2007 06:40pm | #1

   Hi Joe,

   Is the tearout in the endgrain of the pins/tails, or on the long grain? Sounds like it is the endgrain of the joints.

   If so, planing into the endgrain towards the long grain pieces with a really sharp, lightly set plane is the ticket.

   fwiw, if I use a low angle plane, I typically use a low angle smoother, at least on DTs. But I also often use a jack-sized plane. Sharp and light cuts.

   On through tenons which will be planed flush, same deal. On through tenons which will stand proud, all trimming done before assembly.

   Don't know if this helped or not.

   Take care, Mike

1. 
   Joe Sullivan | Mar 11, 2007 07:28pm | #2

   Mike:Have trouble with both, but was mostly planing from the long to the endgrain. Had not thought about doing it the other way 'round. Just stumbling along trying to progress on my reversion from the machine age...Joe

1. 
   mwenz | Mar 11, 2007 07:41pm | #3

   Hah--I hear you.

   I went from using primarily hand tools and then about 1993 transitioned into powertools and opened a business. After I closed the business late in 2004 or so, I have been transitioning back into using primarily hand tools.

   My mind gets all befuddled at times because of the different thinking about how to solve a particular problem. For instance, an issue came up yesterday about a simple trivet. Rail and stile construction, mortise and tenon joinery. Tile in the center which rests on a rabbeted edge. So you know, ya build the thing, take a router and a rabbeting bit that is set for width/depth, run it around the inside and square the corners. Easy if not noisy and dusty.

   Question is, how do you do it with hand tools and avoid making a stopped rabbet on the stiles? Or does one go through the hassle of making the stopped rabbets on such a short length [tile is 8"], or does one do the through rabbets and then one cut overlapping ends on the rails to cover the rabbets on the stiles?

   I've done it before a certain way, but I had to think about it--and still got a width issue messed up in my head until I started to cut wood and had a forehead-slapping moment.

   Take care--good luck.

   Mike

2. 
   Samson | Mar 12, 2007 01:35am | #4

   I find it much more forgiving to do the initial slicing of proud dovetails or through tenons with a paring chisel.  The backof the chisel can register on the surface you are trimming down to and by making a slicing arc movement parallel to that plane, you can make quick work of the leveling without risking any tearout of end grain.  If you want a really pretty surface come back after the chsiel trimming with a smooth plane set to take a very thin cut and make sure to run it at such an angle so as to avoid any break out of the ends (e.g. toward the middle on a drawer side). 

1. 
   Joe Sullivan | Mar 12, 2007 05:44am | #5

   So I am learning.  Seems some prefer smoothing planes, and yo make a very good point about using a chisel.  WHat are block planes especially good for, then?

1. 
   mwenz | Mar 12, 2007 08:55am | #6

   Hi Joe,

   With a block plane, there is a problem with the inertia vs. force required for trimming DTs in all but better behaved woods. Walnut, Poplar, Cherry and the like I will often use a block plane for trimming pins/tails in smaller work. But in harder woods, nope.

   I do often use a block plane for other tasks simply because of being able to use it one-handed.

   Take care, Mike

1. 
   Joe Sullivan | Mar 12, 2007 04:27pm | #9

   Mike:

   You are so right about the effort with a block plane.  What you say makes perfect sense.

3. 
   philip | Mar 12, 2007 10:07am | #7

   Joe, I think the best tool for that is a heavy one. I prefer to use either a 51/2 or a 41/2 for cleaning up dovetails.Set fine and sharp you can't go wrong- obviously for through d/t's you plane into them so there can be no break out-like with drawer sides you'd plane from back to front.Same applies to blind ones. You can even plane them at a skew or across, going straight when almost flush. When you get blase about them you can plane them through, but as you some to the end you pull the plane sideways to avoid the break out.
   If you have left some plane marks these are easily eliminated with card scrapers.....
   It is satisfying to plane them flush when you know they are "well"-why use an ittybitty item like a small block plane for that job- especially if it is a hard wood.

   Philip Marcou

   
1. 
   Joe Sullivan | Mar 12, 2007 04:41pm | #10

   Philip:

   I was trying a skew approach with the block plane, but as Mike suggested above, it is a lot of work and not that effective.  I was also doing it in soft wood for inexpensive practice -- trying to build skills with Rogowski's quick dovetail drills as well as working on real stuff.  I am learning that soft wood is counterintuitively harder to work with hand tools that harder woods because of the sponginess and give.

   Looks like I need to move up to a 4 1/2 or so.

4. 
   RMillard | Mar 12, 2007 02:13pm | #8

   Joe,

   I pick drawer stock with "tame grain" for purposes of stability and ease of planing. I like a heavy plane with some mass, so I use a LN 4 1/2 with the high angle frog. The high pitch lets it leave a perfect surface without regard to the grain direction, which allows me to plane in from the ends, avoiding tearing out the endgrain. The only place I have trouble, is planing the back of the drawer. I hook the drawer over a board that has been clamped to the bench with its end over-hanging the edge of the bench. This works well for the sides, because the dovetails have great strength in this direction, but the first time I tried this on the back, I broke the drawer apart. I now plane the drawer back smooth before assembly and just use a chisel to pare the pins flush, sometimes (I don't even worry about the back, but I can get away with that on period reproductions, since very little care was given to the backs of drawers on the originals).

   I can't remember ever having to plane a through tenon on a primary surface, but the same set up would work well.

   Rob Millard

   http://www.americanfederalperiod.com

1. 
   Joe Sullivan | Mar 12, 2007 04:47pm | #11

   Rob:

   Thanks for weighing in.  You and the other guys on the thread who really know what you are doing all agree that a 4 1/2 or so is the way to go.  Seems that I was wrong not only about the block plane, but also the angle.  I had the idea that a low-angle blade would slice better, and on my practice dovetails, I was leaving quite a bit proud of the surface.  So, a couple of questions are begged:

   1)  Would I be better off to flush saw the ends first before planing:

   2)  What is a low-angle block plane best at?

   I had the idea that a low-angle was intended for endgrain and tail trimming.  Clearly there are better tools.

1. 
   RMillard | Mar 14, 2007 12:56pm | #12

   Joe,

   I would cut the dovetails so they were very close to flush, right from the start, to avoid having to saw them flush later, or having to plane away a significant amount of material.

   Low angle planes are great at trimming endgrain, but block planes are so small they really don't have the mass to be effective, with anything but the smallest cuts. I know many will disagree, but block planes really aren't all that useful; I have one, but I don't use it that much. I have a LN miter plane that will cleanly slice endgrain, and works surprising well on face grain. I have no experience with the low angle jack plane and ones similar to it, but they might work well for trimming dovetails.

   Clearly a $325 plane is not required to successfully clean up dovetail joints, and I should not have given that impression. Before I had such a plane, I did quite well with a pre war Bailey No. 6, for which I paid $32.50, exactly 1/10 of the LN. The keys, are a sharp blade ( I'm a advocate of a back bevel),  a way to securely hold the drawer while planing ( hooking the drawer over a board overhanging the bench is the best way I've seen) and using cooperative grained stock for the drawer.

   Rob Millard

   http://www.americanfederalperiod.com

1. 
   Joe Sullivan | Mar 14, 2007 03:35pm | #13

   Makes sense.  I inherited a pre-war Sargent 409 (the equivalent of a 4 or 4 1/2) that is missing one screw, and also a fully functional pre-war Stanley Bailey 6c.  Perhaps if I get those working and fettled, one of them will serve the purpose.

2. 
   Patto | Mar 14, 2007 11:35pm | #14

   Rob,

   There is a shool here where one of the instructors apparently does all of his planing work with an oldish Stanley #6. Bit heavy for me to lug aroung all day but makes those like me with a collection hanging on the wall look a bit extravagant.

   Dave

3. 
   philip | Mar 15, 2007 02:56am | #15

   Rob,
   "....but block planes really aren't all that useful;"
   I agree.I have a few,which look nice on their shelf. I suppose for really small work they could redeem themselves but I still would favour my #3 or #2 (if I had one). I have never dropped a knob and handle type plane, but the chances of dropping a blockie are a lot higher since they are not so grippable....
   I think some folk may be trying to plane drawer sides when they have not secured the work first-in which case no plane will deliver properly.Philip Marcou

1. 
   RMillard | Mar 15, 2007 04:04am | #16

   Philip,

    

   You're right, because I have dropped my block plane more than once, but I don't recall ever dropping a bench plane. I recently bought an old Stanley No.3 for letting little kids have a go at planing; I volunteer at a park doing woodworking demonstrations, and most kids have never seen a plane in use before, and they get a big kick out of using one. I was surprised at how handy it is.

   Rob Millard

   http://www.americanfederalperiod.com