The worst part about making an old plane
…work is flattening the sole. I got an old Stanley #5 and a #7 as well as a Sarget copy of a Stanley #9 1/4. (I think it is copy copy of a #9 1/4.) The #5 and Sargent came from a yard sale and the #7 came from eBay. The Sargent is just about done. I even put a new bevel on the blade. Seems to work well, although adjusting it is a PITA.
The #5 is getting there but will need a bit more work on the sole to make it perfect. But the #7 is going to kill me. Flattening this one is going to take a while. Getting it perfectly flat may become an ongoing project.
I’ve been using 220 wet/dry sandpaper on a piece of marble to flatten the soles. I tried some “for metal” sandpaper, but it doesn’t seem to work as well as the 220 wet/dry. I don’t suppose anyone has any idea on how to make this go a little faster without screwing up the bottom? (I also got a #10 at a yard sale. It broke my heart to see that someone had used a grinding wheel to try and clean up the sole.)
Both the #5 and #7 are getting new blades so I think they should be good user planes when they are done.
Has anyone taken a new Lie-Neilsen, Clifton or Veratis plane and marked the bottom with magic marker; then run it over a flat surface with sandpaper on it to see how flat it really is? I’m not sure I’m that brave.
Replies
I don't know about the others but Lie-Nielsen planes are flat out of the box.
As Patrick Leach notes on his site when discussing the 7:
"There are a lot of folks out there who believe that these longer planes - the #6, #7, and #8 - have to be perfectly flat in order for them to work. Good luck finding one that's perfectly flat, as they don't exist, all of which is proof enough that the old timers, who depended upon these tools for their livelihood, could make effective use of them in a non-perfect state. Thing is, you can, too. "
"I don't know about the others but Lie-Nielsen planes are flat out of the box."I know that L-N says they are, but have you tried it?"...the old timers, who depended upon these tools for their livelihood, could make effective use of them in a non-perfect state. Thing is, you can, too."I agree! I'm going to use these planes as they are. But being a bit on the anal side, I'd like them to be better. :) So I'll sand them when I have a few minutes to spare. Eventually they will be at least closer to perfectly flat.At some point I have to buy a L-N plane to see what a new, properly fettled plane is supposed to work like. Although my old ones seem to work OK once I fix 'em up.
<i>"I know that L-N says they are, but have you tried it?"</i>Yes, I have a few Lie-Nielsen planes and my business partner has more. They all arrived flat. I visited LN last spring but didn't pay much attention to the flattening process. I can't tell you much about the process they use.Give them a try, they stand behind their tools and you aren't risking anything.BTW, I sometimes like to humor myself into thinking we compete with them in a small way. I do own part of another company that makes planes.
Yes, I have a few Lie-Nielsen planes and my business partner has more. They all arrived flat. I visited LN last spring but didn't pay much attention to the flattening process. I can't tell you much about the process they use.
OK, good. I'm getting the impression that L-N tools are what you get when you are ready to get serious. Especially with planes.
Give them a try, they stand behind their tools and you aren't risking anything.
At some point I'll replace all my old used planes with shiny new L-N planes. I'm new to woodworking and I'm finding the amount of "stuff" I need to buy to get going a bit daunting. Other than an old Makita router and small tablesaw that I've had in the basement for years I haven't even started on power tools. For now I'll work with my old, but still serviceable planes.
BTW, I sometimes like to humor myself into thinking we compete with them in a small way. I do own part of another company that makes planes.
For someone who is part owner of a company that makes planes you are working hard to sell L-N. :D
Hi Baldmountain,
Your old Stanley's are not inferior to LN's. LN's are nice planes, but they are mechanically the same as a Bedrock. There are a billion ways to shave wood. Find a copy of "Patented Transitional and Metallic Planes in America" and check out the different ideas past inventors have had.
Wood planes are a whole other aspect. Here is a link to Mr. Williams plane company. Some day I'm going to make enough money to buy something from him. I hear they are second to none. http://www.planemaker.com
Infills are another catagory. They look like a cross between wood and metallic planes, and they work very well, if you get a good one.
When Leonard Bailey drew up the Bailey/ Bedrock design, he came up with a money maker. There where millions of identical Bailey planes made, and they worked. I personally think there are better designs out there, but the economics of plane making made the Bailey the king.
My point is, rather then spending massive quantities of sweat equity trying to "tune" a Bailey to some abstract notion of perfection, just get a idea of what that plane should realistically do, then make it happen. You can expect a Bailey to work well 90% of the time, if you learn to sharpen. Some situations however require different mechanical atributes then the Bailey design can provide. Don't expect your Bailey, with any amout of tuning, to be able to smooth a piece of pommele saple as well as an infill for example. The York pitch blade angle, and the wood in the plane just make them work better. Same with wood planes like Mr. Williams makes. Ask him to make you a plane to work quilted maple with, and you will get a plane that will blow the doors of any Bailey plane made. Economics dictate that Bailey's are common, but, they were made to appeal to the most people possible by compromising and combining the cutting characteristics required by most people. We as furniture builders live on the edge of that group, and sometimes we ask too much of Leonards design.
Have fun, and make sure you go over to Larry's site. Someday I'll make some money....
Steve
Edited 9/1/2005 10:47 am ET by dirtstirrer
BTW, I sometimes like to humor myself into thinking we compete with them in a small way. I do own part of another company that makes planes.
For someone who is part owner of a company that makes planes you are working hard to sell L-N. :D
Doh! I just realized that you are Larry Williams of Clark & Williams. (I think.) Now I feel like a dope.I'm becoming enamored with handplanes. Would it be OK if I ask you some more questions? Starting with: "Where can I learn more?" I think I'd like to try making some wood planes myself. Do you know of a good reference? If I do make some would you mind if I send you one for critique?
geoff
Edited 9/2/2005 11:13 am ET by baldmountain
Ask away, Geoff. I'm sure you'll find no end of people here who can help you and I'll try.
Ask away, Geoff.
Should I start with "Making & Mastering Wood Planes" by David Finck and/or "Making Traditional Wooden Planes" by John M. Whelan?
Some folks like to jump in and fumble around for a while; then get help. I like to read a bit and get started in the right direction.
thanks,geoff
I'm not a fan of laminated planes so I'd start with Whelan's book. My criticism of Whelan's book is that he goes to extreme lengths to avoid hand work preferring blind work on machines. It's impossible to see the operations the way Whelan suggests. The strong point of machine work is that it's good for multiple operations at the same set up but I doubt you're planning a production run. Even though I have some pretty elaborate machines and set ups, I just do it all by hand if I've only got a couple planes to make. It's faster to work by hand than go through all the machine set up unless there are a number planes needing the same particular task. I still do all the critical fitting work by hand.
"I'm not a fan of laminated planes..."
Larry,
May I ask why?
-Jazzdogg-
"Don't ask yourself what the world needs. Ask yourself what makes you come alive, and go do that, because what the world needs is people who have come alive." Gil Bailie
And can I ask what is a laminated plane-do you mean the infill type?Philip Marcou
Hi Philip,
I'm just trying to learn all I can about making hand planes as I'm making my first this semester: the first has the sides laminated to the front and back bits - it's a down & dirty affair to teach us the geometry and give is a quick & easy shooting plane. Then we're going to make spokeshaves, followed by the wood-bodied handplane of our choice (I'm inching toward a York pitch finishing plane with a 2-3/8"-wide blade).
Thanks,-Jazzdogg-
"Don't ask yourself what the world needs. Ask yourself what makes you come alive, and go do that, because what the world needs is people who have come alive." Gil Bailie
The type of "laminated plane" described in the Finck book is a wooden plane with sides glued to the center blocks, and a crosspin to anchor the wedge. This contrasts in design with the traditional wooden plane where the wedge is more evenly supported along the sides, and contrasts in construction with the traditional method of chopping a plane out of a single block of wood.While the Finck (Krenov?) scheme may lead to planes that don't meet the standards of Clark & Williams, the advantage of that book is the level of detail it provides, including teaching a beginner to use all the tools needed to make a plane. It has enough coverage of using a plane that a beginner can get good results with his own planes. It is very clear, detailed, and self-contained. It is limited, however, in describing only one style of plane. I am not familiar with the Whelan book, but the Perch and Lee book, available from Lee Valley, also covers many traditional plane styles. It does not provide anywhere near the same level of instruction or detail as the Finck book.
Thanks Alan and Jazz.
I have seen that method in one of Krenov's books. Seems to me to be a good way of making a plane quite easily and quickly.Philip Marcou
I'm sorry for the delay responding. I've spent some time reducing my original reply into something shorter and more readable.Aside from my preference for traditional craftsmanship and the highly evolved and refined look of traditional planes, there are practical reasons to prefer traditional planes over the laminated variety. These reasons center around the properties of wood itself.We need to look at the effects of changing ambient humidity has on wood. Woodworkers are well exposed to this when it comes to 4/4 lumber but much less so when it comes to rectangular timber. In timbers distortion shows up on the faces of the material. It is the result of a surface shell expanding or contracting around a core with a different moisture content. Looking at a cross-section view (a rectangular end grain view) the sides will either be concave or convex. Concave if the core is drier and convex if the shell is drier. This distortion on a plane sole can inhibit proper function.We have a choice of either working with this property or fighting it. Conventional wisdom seems to be to search out some finish that slows water vapor penetration. We know we can only slow it and not stop it. The other choice is to select wood and grain orientation that's efficient at moving moisture through to or from the core. Beech does this very well and quickly. A beech plane will acclimate to changing humidity in hours rather than months.When discussing wooden planes, wear invariably comes up. The term wear is somewhat misleading. Yes material is removed from the sole of the plane, but that removal usually isn't the result of wear or rubbing on another wooden surface during use. The vast majority of material removed from a sole is a result of tuning or dealing with surface distortion as a result of humidity changes. This material removal from the sole is what "wears out" a plane.A plane that has little differential between the core and the surface because of rapid transmission of water between the two will require much less tuning than one that slowly changes moisture content differences between the two.The most efficient conduits for moisture through the wood are the cells of the wood. In a laminated plane, those cells are severed and a layer of impermeable adhesive is added between them. This radically slows moisture movement and increases instability and tuning.Then we come to the frequent use of different woods for the laminated sides and the body. Two woods with different expansion and contraction characteristics compounds the instability and tuning problems. Inevitably, some decide to use a harder and more "wear resistant" wood for the sole. This is done in the hope of limiting the frequency of tuning but the results are actually the opposite because it too will inhibit moisture movement. This unintended consequence is the result of the above mentioned interrupted cell structure and added vapor barrier.Ultimately removing material from the sole of a plane will open the mouth. Experience tells me, I experience this opening more as a result of wear to the face of the iron than from "wear" to a properly maintained plane sole. While heat has little effect on a wooden plane sole, it is a catalyst to wear when it comes to metals. You can see this in any old Bailey plane that's had a lot of use. The leading edge of the mouth will be severely rounded as a result of heat induced wear. Even the front of the cap iron may be worn to a near horse shoe shape. This wear also happens to the face of the plane iron and the iron must be flattened during sharpening to achieve a sharp edge. Tuning of my beech smooth plane soles is so minor and limited that reducing the thickness of the plane irons during sharpening has more effect on mouth opening than tuning the soles.
Edited 9/7/2005 12:21 pm ET by lwilliams
Hi Larry,
Thanks for your cogent and thoughtful reply. It'll be interesting to discuss your comments in my planemaking class this Friday!
-Jazzdogg-
"Don't ask yourself what the world needs. Ask yourself what makes you come alive, and go do that, because what the world needs is people who have come alive." Gil Bailie
Thanks for the information and careful analysis. I'd wondered why beech was so commonly used, given that it has one of the largest tangential shrinkages (at least american beech does.) Do you know where I might find more on moisture migration? I've seen data on the extent, but not the rate of moisture equilibration in wood, except as general statements that lighter woods tend to be more porous, or comparing types of finish on a single species. Those studies seem to show that many finishes don't impede moisture transport very much, and I wonder how much glues differ. The wood handbook http://www.fpl.fs.fed.us/documnts/fplgtr/fplgtr113/fplgtr113.htm says in section 12-6 that moisture travels 10-15 times faster along the grain than sideways (presumably they describe some "average" wood). As laminated planes tend to have endgrain exposed, possibly the disadvantages you note would be most pronounced in jointer planes.The same reference says that moisture travels "somewhat" faster radially than tangentially. With growth rings roughly parallel to the sole of the plane, the glue joints are well designed in that they interfere only with the slowest mode of water migration. Also, the shallow height of the Krenov style plane may also help to compensate for the glue lines, since the distance water must travel can be pretty short. While wood planes of many types have soles of different wood than their bodies, apparently with good results, that construction had made me wonder about wood movement. I'd think the wood in sole and body should be matched in expansion. Your point about transport of water seems particularly important here, as it would tend to exacerbate the problem. So the easy way to rejuvenate an old plane, putting in a small insert at the front of the mouth, may actually have advantages over the more elaborate approach of adding an entire new sole.It does seem though, that the compromises inherent in laminated planes were made with wood properties in mind. I wonder if drilling a few holes crosswise through the body of a laminated wood plane might help to even out the behavior of a poorly behaving one by creating pathways for water entry and exit. This should speed equilibration, though it would not affect distortion of a rift sawn plane due to unequal radial and tangential change.By the way, I certainly don't mean to challenge you or question your making of exquisite traditional style planes. This started as a response to your points, and seems to have drifted off into speculations. Thank you.
Alan,I certainly don't have a monopoly on knowledge and have an awful lot yet to learn. Discussions like this are why I'm here and provide one of the easiest ways for me to learn new things. Forums like this are an invaluable resource for us and we learn a lot here.I don't know of a historic precedent for holes being used to help speed moisture exchange in wood but I don't see why it wouldn't work. It could possibly also provide a place for relief of internal stresses caused by expansion and contraction. I think it's a technique used in metal and ceramics when thermal expansion and contraction cause stress and I don't see why it wouldn't work with wood.Regarding your post and moisture movement there is more too beech. Beech has a heavy ray structure and rays are primarily made of wood cells that are oriented at right angles to the rest of the wood cells. Maple, cherry and some other woods have similar ray structure. In beech there are so many rays that 40% of a flat sawn surface is actually made up of the ends of rays. This means that 40% of a flat sawn surface is essentially end grain and exchanges moisture just like end grain. This makes it good for planes but also makes thick beech very hard to dry without degrade from surface checking. That's why thick beech is so difficult to find.
Edited 9/9/2005 11:49 pm ET by lwilliams
I have recently formed a company that is going to make the ultimate planes. In order to ensure complete dimensional stability, we require all owners to build a temperature controled room in which to store and use our planes. Each plane is made from a special titanium that is porous on a microscopic level. We then have a air line to each plane that presurizes them and this then lets each plane float on a bed of compressed air 10 microns thick. Our planes will be the finest on the market and only the most perfectionist of tool owners will be able to afford them.
The question I have is one of marketing. Since a well set up Stanley that you can buy for $5 at a junk sale will remove the exact same shaving that our $2,500 plane will, can anyone come up with some good ideas on how to convice people to buy ours?
The question I have is one of marketing. Since a well set up Stanley that you can buy for $5 at a junk sale will remove the exact same shaving that our $2,500 plane will, can anyone come up with some good ideas on how to convice people to buy ours?
LOL! Yes! Charge $2500! Seriously. People will buy it for no other reason than it is the most technologically advanced and most expensive plane available.
This is the kind of thing I was trying to get across in my tool elitist post. The fact that people WILL buy a tool that expensive even though a tuned up $5 yard sale tool with do the same job.geoff
Hi Michael,
You're joking right? If not, Bridge City is still in business, so I guess anything is possible.
Steve
Larry, that is a most useful post-I have stored it for reference purposes.
Do you know of any book or publication that contains tables or comparisons of the actual rate of response of different timbers to moisture changes, measured on a time scale or other means of comparison?Philip Marcou
Philip,There is a book, 'Transport Processes in Wood' by John F. Siau.It's quite esoteric and the cover description is:"Written for use both as a textbook and a research guide, this book covers transport processes (fluids, heat, moisture) in wood as functions of wood structure and composition. Of particular interest is the author's discussion of the application of the concept of water potential to the sorption isotherm of wood and to a proposed theory of nonisothermal moisture movement in the steady and unsteady states."It's not a thick book, nor is it a quick read. If you plan to sit down and get much from it, I suggest you pack a lunch or two.
Thanks Larry-I get the picture!Philip Marcou
I'm sorry for the delay responding. I've spent some time reducing my original reply into something shorter and more readable.LOL.. LOL... The post was 10 times longer en' anybody!Sounds GOOD though!
I just do it all by hand if I've only got a couple planes to make. It's faster to work by hand than go through all the machine set up unless there are a number planes needing the same particular task. I still do all the critical fitting work by hand.
You're right. No production runs. I'll be doing all the work by hand.
Can I ask about irons? I replaced the irons in my old Stanleys. I assume that the old blades are fine to use while I'm learning. Once I use those up what blades should I use? Is it reasonable to just build a plane around a Hock replacement blde? (Veritas or maybe a Lie-Lielsen?)geoff
I'm not familiar with what all Hock is offering these days. I prefer a single tapered iron for wooden planes. I can't tell you where to get them. We struggle to keep up with out own demand when it comes to our irons and the tapering process.
I have both books and used them to make my first plane. The plane is a success and has me jumping to make more.
Geoff.
I certainly don't have the background (nor inclination) to disagree with Mr. Williams about styles of wooden plane construction ... but, if you want to give wooden planemaking a try, here is a link to fairly detailed instructions on making the 'Krenov' style plane that the ww students make at College of the Redwoods (If you've seen David Marks use/make his wooden planes on the show, they are this type).
These are the same instructions given to CofR students, and you can make yourself quite a nice plane in a fairly short time. Some of Ron Hock's irons are specifically designed for use in this type of plane (indeed, Ron was starving as a knifemaker until Krenov and the local CofR folks asked him if he could make plane irons, and he said 'Sure!' [before actually figuring out how he might accomplish that task ...] )
I know some local wwers whose planes of this type have lasted more than 10 years without patching or mouth-opening, so movement and sole flattening is not always a problem. Of course, some areas get a much wider range of annual humidity than here.
http://www.crfinefurniture.com/1pages/sitelinks/howplane.html
Enjoy!
Clay
Clay,Thanks for the pointer. That's just the kind of information I'm looking for. I also got a copy of "Making Traditional Wood Planes" so I'm in good shape as far as information goes. I just need to find some time and suitable wood...
geoff
A CofR student of my acquaintance, in part as a reaction to the reverence with which the Krenov planes were regarded, made quite a nice one from Baltic Birch ply. Looks pretty sharp as it turns out, with the lengthwise striping. Quite stable too, of course.Pretty much the same instructions (a little less detail than these, IIRC) are available on Hock's site, along with the irons of course.Clay
Try 180 grit and a six pack of your favorite adult beverage. A file can also work wonders to get rid of the worst spots. Contrary to popular lore, the sole dosen't have to be dead flat to do an OK job. Just so there are not 6" long spots of no contact, and the area around the mouth is good, you'll be fine. Try to use the plane first, if it works fine, it dosen't need "fixed". Of all the old planes I've gotten going again, only a few have actually needed the soles flattened. Using and fettling a plane is not rocket science, contrary to a bunch of "experts" opinions. I think some people try to make things more complicated just to sound important. My $.02.
Dirt, I couldn't agree more. I am pleased to march with you on that. I think this pre-occupation with flattening plane bottoms to the nth degree is unnecessary and definitely verging on tearing the ring out of it (anal).
Some body wanted a suggestion on how to speed up this task, assuming it is necessary: tape a length of mettalite cloth belt to a flat surface like the bed of a jointer and give the arms some exercise. I have a stroke sander and my jointer is 8ft long so it was easy....I was more interested in making that sole smooth and shiney.I have yet to come across a plane posterior so warped that it had the slightest effect on the efficiency of the plane.Philip Marcou
LOL, and looks like my opinion is shared by good company. In my experience, planes are usually functional when you get them, learn to sharpen and you are usually good to go. No need to be "one" with the plane for cripes sake. Course there are a few bad apples, and don't buy abused junk, but other then that, make shavings, not filings. Have a good day, and good idea with the metalite cloth.
Steve
> I have yet to come across a plane posterior so warped that it had the slightest effect on the efficiency of the plane <
Philip - I had one once! A British-made (new) Stanley 22 inch jointer. It bowed down the length when tensioned-up! I used it for 5 years because I thought I couldn't afford better!
I no longer joint by hand (with the occasional exception), and I now have an HNT Gordon jointer which is a dream to use, even though it needs to be adjusted with a mallet!
I really enjoy firing up my new MiniMax under and over, and running bits of wood over all that beautiful cast iron!
Malcolmhttp://www.macpherson.co.nz
Malcolm,
...a plane posterior..." I was on one of my high horses, haw haw.
Seriously , how bent was that #7? Was it convex or concave?
And, for 5 years you were making edges straight with a bent plane???You see, I was correct when I implied that people are going overboard with the flatness of their plane bottoms <g>
I have an ancient Bedrock #7, complete with nail inflicted groove donated by an unknown previous owner-too deep to come out when I cleaned up the sole.I always use it to shoot all boards that I have machined-I am surprised you don't?
Can you post a picture of your Minimax-I am not familiar with that line-only SCM Invincible and the SCM mini30.
Was in Whitianga today-may be putting some items in a gallery there.
P.S: did you choose the Australian wood over a Lie Nielson or Veritas?
Philip MarcouEdited 9/3/2005 4:54 am ET by philip
Edited 9/3/2005 6:04 am ET by philip
> how bent was that #7? Was it convex or concave <
It was OK with the iron backed off and no tension. Drop the blade, wind in the knob, and it would go down at the front and down at the back - is that concave? Visibly noticeable when sighting down the sole. I learned to live with it!
> I always use it to shoot all boards that I have machined-I am surprised you don't <
I try not to - I aim to glue straight from my Freud glue-line rip blade, and mainly use my MiniMax for surfacing and thicknessing. I'll post a picture tomorrow.
> did you choose the Australian wood over a Lie Nielson or Veritas <
No, I bought it because I liked the look of it. I have a HNTG shoulder plane that I really like, and bought the jointer as a bit of an indulgence. It doesn't see a lot of use, although it is invaluable as a scraper with the iron reversed. Will clean up anything.
Edit: I've never seen either an L-N or a Veritas in the flesh!
http://www.macpherson.co.nz
Edited 9/3/2005 6:15 am ET by Malcolm
Philip,
I am jumping into this debate, and your name seems to be cropping up a lot, so.......
It seems to me that you can spend a considerable amount of money buying a new Lie Neilson, or even more money on buying one of the esoteric infill planes, or probably even more money buying pristine Spiers or Norris planes. Or you can go the secondhand Stanleys, Records, et al. I think the question you really need to answer is how good does it need to be? Our forbears produced some pretty fantastic work using their tools, and like wise you guys out there must also be producing some fantastic stuff, so how much better does it need to be? My only customer (my wife) actually celebrates the imperfections that I have in my work (although I really do try to eliminate them - it seems my techniques still need to improve.....), saying that if she wanted something that was imperfection free, she would go to a mass production factory, that would also include drawer sides of particle board, crappy joining of sides to tops and bottoms, et al. Don't get me wrong, I think each and everyone of us IS really trying hard to improve our skills to reach perfection - but just how close does it really need to be? And will that beautiful flat bottomed plane really eliminate all of your flatness problems in panels - and even do they need to be flatter?
Call me stupid (it's happened before), but don't stop calling me.
Ozzy
"My only customer (my wife) actually celebrates the imperfections that I have in my work (although I really do try to eliminate them - it seems my techniques still need to improve.....), . . . Don't get me wrong, I think each and everyone of us IS really trying hard to improve our skills to reach perfection - but just how close does it really need to be?"
I think this is a really interesting question. So much of the joy and beauty that shines in a work of craftsmanship (or dare I say "art") is conveyed in being able to see the mind and hand of the craftsman in the work. Much of this character, for lask of a better word, comes though in what some might call "imperfections" - tool marks and the slight impefections of hand rounded curves or handcut lines.
To me it is akin to painting a picture. If you could capture reality "perfectly" you would have become a camera for all intents and purposes. That skill might be impressive, but the picture would have none of the spirit that comes from the varying degrees of abstraction produced when an idea or scene enters the painter's brain and comes out his or her hands.
Samson,
I think you have hit it right on the head. A kindred spirit! I actually don't think I will make a habit of getting in on these deep and meaningfull conversations, but bow to the knowledge of those who have it. Me, I'm just a woodworker.
Please don't get me wrong, I would love a chest full of beautiful planes, but I honestly do not believe that my skills are such that the quality of my work would instantly soar to new heights!
Take care, my friend, and stay in touch.
Ozzy
Bald, Ive flattened many old planes on an up turned and clamped belt sander using silicon carbide abrasive belts.
Before sanding, paint the whole bottom with blue magic marker, THEN hold the plane flat on the revolving belt (all the while moving it left and right) [So as to utilize the full width of the belt.]
Stop when it gets too hot to the touch. Examine the sole . Chances are there's an area still to be sanded' Blue again and repeat 'till all blue is erased.
You might want to really shine up the last step using a fine piece of wet or dry paper on a sheet of plate glass for the 'finale'
Steinmetz
Baldmountain,
I use the sandpaper rolls on the table saw for flattening the planes...makes it a bit easier... http://www.onlineindustrialsupply.com/sandpaperrolls.html
However, I did find it took a couple of times to get great performance. When I got the LN 4 1/2 it says the bottom was sanded to 320...nope, not gonna challange them ..lol.
Your main problem is that you are using way too fine sand paper, start at 60 or 80 grit, which will remove metal much faster. Go progressively to the finer grits only after the sole is made as flat as you need it on the coarse paper, the finer grades are only used to polish the sole, not to remove metal. Change the paper often as it gets dull or you will be wasting time.
John W.
I agree with John W., 220 is way too fine. I wouldn't bother with the #7, but if the #5 is too far out, start with 100. Look at the marks you get, and decide if you need to go coarser, even down to 40 if it's really bad.
In addition to what others have already said, I'll add: flattening the sole of a plane is but one aspect of fettling.
In many cases, the union between the frog and the plane body, the positioning of the frog relative to the throat, and the treatment of the throat itself, are at least as important as a flat sole and a properly sharpened blade.
I prefer to soften any of the sharp corners on the plane body with which my hands will be in constant contact - cuts way down on fatigue during use; ditto reshaping totes to be comfortable in my hands during hours-long planing sessions: since I don't intend to sell my planes, I'm not reluctant to modify them to fit my hands and my needs - I'm not worried about what the person who uses them after I'm dead thinks of my "modifications."
Good luck,
-Jazzdogg-
"Don't ask yourself what the world needs. Ask yourself what makes you come alive, and go do that, because what the world needs is people who have come alive." Gil Bailie
You need some planes that you can put to work immediately or with a minimal amount of fettling.
Consider picking up what you need from ECE - flattening is easy as they are wood planes.
Of course L-N is always a great choice.
"You need some planes that you can put to work immediately or with a minimal amount of fettling.Consider picking up what you need from ECE - flattening is easy as they are wood planes."Yup! Got an ECE scrub plane on the way because I need it NOW! But the other ones can be used as they are and I will continue to refine them as time goes by. They work, but could be better."Of course L-N is always a great choice."Of course. Although my next L-N tool is probably going to be the dovetail saw.To everyone, I appreciate all the help. I feel like I'm coming up to speed on all this woodworking stuff pretty quickly because of all the help I'm getting here. Thanks!I picked up some coarser sandpaper (120) today and see if that cuts any faster without wearing out too quickly.
you can also try drawfiling if you really have a lot of material to remove.
Use the marker trick to see where you're low, and go at the high spots with a mill file.
Saves a fair bit of time if you're not too overzealous...The older I get, the better I was....
I happen to be lucky enough to work at a place with a machine shop out back. I have used the oscilating lapping table on several planes to flatten the soles. I remove the handles and tension everything with the blade in place , then walk away for several hours. The soles come out dead flat with very little work on my part.
Use emory cloth for removing metal without clogging. If you can do this on a flat surface with oil on the emory cloth, it goes a lot faster.
You might try flooding the wet-or-dry with cutting oil, if you haven't yet. One article I read on restoration recomended a new heavier frog if you have the room in the mouth.
The cutting oil is a good idea. If nothing else it will keep the iron dust down. I'm probably giving myself lung cancer with all the sanding...I'm not going to buy new frogs. Between sand paper and a new blade for each plane it might be getting worth it to just buy new Veritas planes instead. Although I'm learning a lot about planes fettling them myself.
Have you considered the possibility that your marble is not flat? I've never seen a commercial flattening plate long enough to do a #7, and the last piece of marble I check wasn't even close to flat. I think that's the hardest part; getting a flat reference big enough to make it possible to get some motion going. I've heard of folks using float glass, but I've never tried it...
Charlie
a hog, conn a ship, design a building, write a sonnet, balance accounts,
build a wall, set a bone, comfort the dying, take orders, give orders,
cooperate, act alone, solve equations, analyze a new problem, pitch manure,
program a computer, cook a tasty meal, fight efficiently, die gallantly.
Specialization is for insects.
- Robert A. Heinlein
I'm with a lot of the others. Start with a coarser grit. The 180g sanding screen that drywallers use is also great for lapping. It removes metal quicker than 180g sandpaper and maybe even quicker than lower grit sandpaper. I'm not too sure but I think the sanding screen might be made in coarser grits than 180 but I haven't personally come across it. I was given some 180 screen and had never seen the stuff before. It worked really well on lapping the backs of a relative's nasty old chisels I was helping him make usable.
Waddaya mean it wont fit through the door?
Baldmountain, all the responses I've read here are a total waste of time. And when time is money I'd suggest taking the plane to a machine shop and have them grind it down.
I brought in five or six planes once and had a machinest grind them all flat for $15.00 -$20.00 a piece. They came back flat and my friend Starrett told me so. Of course if you like the reward of doing it yourself go ahead and sand away.
Baldmountain, all the responses I've read here are a total waste of time.
No! I've learned a TON about planes.
I've been reading a LOT about tools and planes. The books do a good job describing the tools but often leave out the fine details. Details you only get from experience or if someone shows you. Details that you learn by trying someing, finding that it doesn't work well, trying something else, and something else... until you hit upon something that works really well. These datails are the difference between success and frustration.
Even though there is a LOT of different information, it is all fine details that I'd have to discover on my own if I didn't ask.
And when time is money I'd suggest taking the plane to a machine shop and have them grind it down.
I brought in five or six planes once and had a machinest grind them all flat for $15.00 -$20.00 a piece.
Yeah, this is probably the smart thing to do, but as a newbie I'm not that smart. :) Also, between a new blade, and $15-$20 to have the sole flattened, and the cost of the plane itself, I'm starting to get close to what it would cost for a new Veratis plane. And for a block plane I'd be getting close the the price of a new a L-N plane. So I'm going to get my planes flat enough on my own. (Although I may spend $15 on sand paper. :) )
Also, I'm finding that the more I work on a plane, the more it fits me. It's like the plane is adapting to me while I adapt to it. I've gotten to a pretty good place with my #5 Stanley. Mainly because I've invested a bunch of hours in mucking with it. Of course I've ruined that with a new blade the is too fat to fit in the mouth and the lateral adjuster down't fit so I have to file the adjuster to fit and open the mouth.
But after working with a tool for a while it is like it starts to become a part of you. It's kind of a neat feeling.geoff
Start with 60-80 Norton blue sanding belts, you can finish with 220 but 150 in between. The others are right a jointer will never get perfectly flat. Good luck
I've never particularly understood why folks find it fun to finish the job a manufacturer started. A metal plane should be flat when purchased and stay that way. If it's not flat then a machine shop is your friend. A cast-iron plane is a manufactured product. Hand lapping any serious sole defects just doesn't make a lot of sense. A machinist is particulary well equipped to take care of this little problem. Just tell them to take very light passes. Flattening in one fell swoop might leave you with a mouth that's too wide. No reason to fret. Just give the machinist a heads up.
Learning to hand lap cast iron planes is way down on my list of skills needed in a woodshop.
Wood planes, due to the nature of the beast will always need a nip and tuck through the seasons. A slightly to even moderate out-of-flat condition is not a defect and is easily sanded or scraped to truth.
What is flat?
And how fare do you want to go? The time you spend to flatten one of those planes you could have build a plane like Krenovs. And for the $ you spend an a LN you could buy a lot of wood. I like to know how many professional jobs use LN
Hilmar
Hilmar, none of the points you raise are valid when a person chooses to enjoy different aspects of his hobby-such as re-working (notice the range of that word) used iron planes.
How many professionals use L.N? Who can say for sure, but I would guess the number is increasing at an increasing rate.Philip Marcou
This is probably a stupid question...but whatthe heck i've been called much worse than stupid;)
Would it be an option to send a plane to a machine shop and have it made absolutely flat with the equipment at their disposal?
send a plane to a machine shop and have it made absolutely flat with the equipment at their disposal?I for one have many metal working machines...As a test I did the flattening with sand paper on an Granet stone I have.. Not that much work on it... (NO I did not sand to perfect) Just what I thought was OK..I did a 'kiss' grind on the plane bottom and it was just about as good as the grinder did.. Well some place were lower/higher but none that a stick would notice!I bet that 5 HP motor Electric cost MORE than that sandpaper and my swore arm!EDIT! 15! Hp... Or something like it...
Edited 9/14/2005 1:30 pm ET by WillGeorge
Will,
....some place higher or lower but none that a stick would notice"....!!!1 That's it , man, that is the point-people are tearing the ring and everything else out of this business of striving for Dead Flat Plane Posteriors.It is a non productive labour of nonsense-even when engaged in for therapeutic purposes.
I can only understand it when one wants to resurrect the odd old Stanley -and then one just wants to see no light using a straight edge, and end up with a clean smooth and shiney plane. Notice I have avoided the use of the word 'anal' here.
May be you could make a few bucks by hiring out some of that metal working stuff-you know, to those people who are keen to kiss their plane bottoms.Just a thought.Philip Marcou
That's it , man, that is the point-people are tearing the ring and everything else out of this business of striving for Dead Flat Plane Posteriors.
The issue isn't making the plane dead flat, it is making is flat "enough". Where "enough" is subjective. I'll give you an example.
I got a Stanley #7 off eBay. It was in decent condition, just needed cleaning up. I tried sanding the sole on a flat piece of marble I have and find that the front and mouth are in pretty good shape, and that the left side of the tail end is OK too. But the right side seems to be high. Like the plane is twisted. (I don't think it is actually twisted, but the sole is definitly NOT flat.)
I've got it to the point where I'm reasonably happy, but not satisfied. With a new A2 blade it cuts decent and makes flat boards. The sole doesn't have to be PERFECTLY flat, but it does have to be flat "enough".geoff
This forum post is now archived. Commenting has been disabled