I bought two Stanley No. 5 hand planes on eBay. One looks like a new (plastic handle) made in USA model that is in pristine (maybe even never used condition). The other was sold as a pre WWII Bailey that will take a great deal of work to get in decent condition.
How much better is a bailey that would justify the extra work? What makes it better?
Replies
The new one will probably take as much work to get to work properly as the older one. On the older one, the castings are probably more accurate where the frog meets the body of the plane, so less filing/honing is likely to be needed; the frog itself probably mates more closely with the body with a design that may place the support for the blade closer to the cutting edge; the blade will probably hold a better edge, though neither as well as a high grade replacement from Hock, Lie-Nielson, or Lee Valley; the wooden handle will be more comfortable; you can't count on either to have a flat sole but the cast iron is likely to be more finely grained on the older plane, the chip breaker will probably need as much honing to fit on the new one as on the old one. And, it is more satisfying to me to fettle the results of age than the product of shoddy workmanship.
I agree with Steve. The main difference is the quality of the casting, but especially the amount of machining of the frog and adjacent components. This work is labor intensive and Stanley (and other firms) economized on it in the post-WWII era. Getting this part right is crucial to being able to adjust the cut for thin, even shavings. It's where Lie-Nielsen shines (LN also uses the Bedrock rather than the Bailey frog design).
Glaucon
If you don't think too good, then don't think too much...
This forum post is now archived. Commenting has been disabled