# Veritas® Small Plow Plane review



## CONGER (17 Nov 2007)

Hi... have been away for some time (hip replacement - excellent carpentry - mostly with hand tools)...

Where can I find a review for the Veritas® Small Plow (Plough) Plane? It has been on the market now for some months, so I am guessing(?) that one of the excellent reviewers here has done the honours.

-gerard-


----------



## Philly (17 Nov 2007)

Gerard
I have one - shall do a review very soon.
Cheers
Philly


----------



## dchenard (17 Nov 2007)

There's one here:

http://www.woodcentral.com/cgi-bin/hand ... ead=116635

DC-C


----------



## matthewwh (17 Nov 2007)

We will have them in next week, maybe you could review them for everyone else!


----------



## WellsWood (17 Nov 2007)

If you send me one to try out, and I get my review done before Philly, can I keep it? :lol:


----------



## matthewwh (17 Nov 2007)

Sure You can!

If the reviews so far are anything to go by it will be the best £135 you ever spent.


----------



## WellsWood (17 Nov 2007)

Hang on, er .... let me rephrase that.....


well you can't blame a guy for trying :lol:


----------



## jmk89 (17 Nov 2007)

Here's Derek Cohen's review (plus some comments from Jake Darvell):
http://www.woodworkforums.ubeaut.com.au ... hp?t=60857


----------



## Philly (26 Nov 2007)

Hi Folks
At last...........

Veritas Small Plough Plane
First of all I want to say this – I always look forward to new Veritas tools. They are usually very well made, well priced and work excellently. But I do find their appearance a little dull (my eye favours the more classic designs). When I first saw photo’s of this plane on the Internet my initial reaction was “oh no, what have they done?”.








But in the flesh, the plane is quite handsome, and slightly smaller than I was expecting. That’s not to say it is small – it was modelled after the Record #44 which is a fair sized plane. I got my other plough planes out just to give a comparison.








The first thing that struck me was how well engineered it was – the casting is cleanly machined and the various threaded parts and brass knobs are nicely finished. The tote is a comfortable size and shape – seems Veritas have been listening to feedback. The polished Bubinga tote, satin black finish and plenty of brass makes for a purposeful looking tool.
The plane comes supplied with a ¼ inch wide iron – for the money (£134) I would have expected a couple more. Needless to say, there are other sized irons available as extras. The iron comes lapped flat which means minimal preparation is needed to get the cutter ready for action. Adjustment and locking down of the iron, fence and depth stop is all done with finger pressure – no screwdrivers needed here. And this brings us to the “special touch” Veritas have given this plane – the fence locking mechanism. Instead of a thumbscrew tightening against the fence rod to lock it in place the plane features two collet style locks which work on a the same principle as a router collet. Another benefit of this is that the fence stays parallel to the skate of the plane when you move it, such is the precision fit of the components. Simple, yet impressive.




So how does the plane work? Very well. Set the fence, adjust the depth stop, set the iron and off you go. Depending onhow friendly the timber is you're working you may need to define the outer edges of the groove with a cutting gauge to ensure a clean cut – there are no nicker irons fitted to this plane. I found the plane to be well balanced and comfortable to use. The fence has holes drilled so you can attach a wooden face, giving a larger bearing surface to guide the plane. 
With the capacities of the fence and the plane itself you would use this plane for making grooves for drawer bottoms and cabinet backs, smaller work like box making. It makes a pleasant change from the nervous scream of a router!
So - well done to Veritas on a well made tool that has some neat new touches to bring it up to date. My only reservation is with the price and single cutter supplied – you can easily get hold of an antique example in excellent condition for a third of the price that will work just as well. 

Cheers
Philly


----------



## woodbloke (26 Nov 2007)

Philly - excellent review, many thanks. I tend to agree that for the price a few more cutters ought to have been included...I think the whole package with them all comes close to £200 iIrc. Hasn't put me off buying one eventually and I think it would be pleasant to make grooves for drawer bottoms and the like with one of these rather than a router.... nice _'by the by'_ plough-planefest gloat by the way :lol: - Rob


----------



## mr (26 Nov 2007)

Just cos she don't come round here no more is no reason for us not to go knock on ALfs door. 

Alfs review is here

Nice review Phil, but at £200 I'll be staying with my Record 405. 


Cheers Mike [/url]


----------



## Philly (27 Nov 2007)

Thanks Guys!
"By the by" gloat? Me? :lol: 
Cheers
Philly


----------



## bugbear (27 Nov 2007)

woodbloke":1dsbkwex said:


> Philly - excellent review, many thanks. I tend to agree that for the price a few more cutters ought to have been included...I think the whole package with them all comes close to £200 iIrc.



I suggest you look in a late 1980's catalogue to see what the last prices were for Record and Stanley ploughs.

"lots" basically.

BugBear


----------



## bugbear (27 Nov 2007)

Philly":2cxov0mo said:


> But in the flesh, the plane is quite handsome, and slightly smaller than I was expecting. That’s not to say it is small – it was modelled after the Stanley #44 which is a fair sized plane. I got my other plough planes out just to give a comparison.



You know that's a _*Record*_ #044, right?

BugBear


----------



## CONGER (27 Nov 2007)

Thanks Philly, and Alf, and Derek.

Very interesting issues raised. 

I guess LV are thinking that the 1/4" blade is where most users of a 'small' plow (ugh!) will stop (pardon the pun)... though I am sure that many stockings will be complemented with the remaining blades.

'1 1/2 turns of slop in the adjustment' does sound un-characteristic for LV... perhaps Rob L will comment?

Concerning the 'resting place' for Alf's index finger... I thought this was desireable when using un-guided tools? OTOH, I am interested to see how my hand will fit the small(?) tote (is'nt that a ladies handbag in 'colonial' english?). It seemed as if Derek had problems gripping the tote, even though he described his hand as 'average in size'.

Derek did mount an auxilliary fence, but he did not comment why. Reading between the lines, it seems like this was an expression of dissatisfaction.

Reviewers welcomed the 'tool free' adjustment. Well done LV. Very neat of course would have been a compartment in the fence for the 'remaining' blades. How often do you find excellent w-working tools on offer... that are incomplete (missing extra blades).

I have rarely used a 'plow' plane. I have often needed a tool to cut stopped grooves. The best solution I have found so far is the excellent LV Router Plane. I have a 4mm (custom) cutter for this plane. I have used this plane very successfully to cut stopped grooves, even in very difficult woods. I see that LNT now have a Router Plane (fence included... not like LV)... now, how does one use the LNT router plane on the edge of a board (t&g)?... I guess one uses the LV plough plane... or in my case, the LV router plane for stopped grooves!

Good wood - work safe - gerard... who is able to walk again... without crutches - 40 days after (long overdue) hip replacement... coupled with heart failure (long story)... now can I push a plane?? Hmmm....


----------



## pam niedermayer (27 Nov 2007)

Conger, sorry to hear you've been so sick/disabled for so long. Hope you're getting better, more mobile, etc.

Pam


----------



## Philly (27 Nov 2007)

bugbear":1b2cwaju said:


> Philly":1b2cwaju said:
> 
> 
> > But in the flesh, the plane is quite handsome, and slightly smaller than I was expecting. That’s not to say it is small – it was modelled after the Stanley #44 which is a fair sized plane. I got my other plough planes out just to give a comparison.
> ...


Doh! Thanks Paul - that'll teach me to have a glass of wine whilst typing..... :roll:


----------



## woodbloke (27 Nov 2007)

Philly wrote-


> that'll teach me to have a three fingers of JD whilst typing.....


 :lol: - Rob


----------



## Derek Cohen (Perth Oz) (27 Nov 2007)

Hi Gerard

I think I should respond to a couple of perceived criticisms that I am alluded to have made, because these are incorrect. 

The first is the size of the grip. My only issue (which I did not articulate well enough) was that I could not make up my mind whether to use a 4 finger grip (it was _just_ possible to do this) or a 3 finger grip (easy-peasy). Note that the #044 is a tight fit with just 3 fingers.

Secondly, I used an auxiliary fence in all the planes because it provides better registration, and I wanted to extract the best from each. No other motive.

I later read Alf's review and, because someone commented about her finding that the blades tended to bind, I thought that I would take a second look. So I went back and checked my own. They worked flawlessly (I took photos to record the performance of the 1/4"), so I can only assume that Alf received a rogue set (or I received a good set). No one else has experienced any such difficulties. I reported this on the Ubeaut forum where, not unexpectedly, Jake decided to "find" evidence that the Veritas was rubbish - he has his motives. Let us leave it at that. 

Regards from Perth

Derek


----------



## Paul Kierstead (27 Nov 2007)

I am a regular user of a 044 and plowed a couple of grooves using the LV.

My experiences based on my limited usage:

- I really think the backlash is a non-issue. I have never found you much with the depth setting much on a plow/plough and it isn't absolutely critical to get it just so. If you are trying to get wispy shavings, that groove is gonna take a loooong time to plow.

- The fence adjustment on the LV really is fantastic. OTOH, it isn't awful on the Record.

- I think blade setting ala Derek is also a non-issue. The Record doesn't seem to care if the blade is not flush with the skate and works dandy even if it isn't. Slightly tapered blades are going to play havoc with that method anyway...

- The auxiliary fence is, I think, just good sense and doesn't indicate a flaw. LV could have made a larger fence integral, but it would hit vises, etc. more often. By letting you make your own, you can make the size(s) you want and take it off if it gets in the way.

- The price thing really is kind of unfair to LV. When you consider the technology, manufacturing costs (and not made with third-world labour) and size of market, I think the cost is very reasonable. Unfortunately for LV, the market is a bit flooded with used plows which are, in essence, being sold for pennies on the dollar due to a lot more supply then demand. I bought mine, with all the blades and parts in good condition, for ten or twenty pounds. So LV gets kind of screwed with this. But lots of people like the assurance of buying new.


----------



## Paul Kierstead (27 Nov 2007)

Derek Cohen (Perth said:


> I later read Alf's review and, because someone commented about her finding that the blades tended to bind, I thought that I would take a second look. So I went back and checked my own. They worked flawlessly (I took photos to record the performance of the 1/4"), so I can only assume that Alf received a rogue set (or I received a good set). No one else has experienced any such difficulties.



I also found that they were more likely to bind, so Alf is not entirely alone. I also had the same difficulty that Alf did holding it upright, finding the Record easier to control. I also have a high opinion of LV products in general and this product specifically. That doesn't mean all users (including me) will find it flawless.


----------



## Paul Chapman (27 Nov 2007)

Derek Cohen (Perth said:


> not unexpectedly, Jake decided to "find" evidence that the Veritas was rubbish - he has his motives. Let us leave it at that.



I think that's very unfair and unkind comment, Derek. Jake has done more than anyone else I know to analyse, demonstrate and share how to get the best out of plough, combination and multi planes. Pity that his efforts and generosity are not always appreciated........

Cheers :wink: 

Paul


----------



## Derek Cohen (Perth Oz) (27 Nov 2007)

Paul

Read the thread on Ubeaut, then comment. I dislike saying these things in public ,but when his critique is a thinly disguised attempt to push his own design (tapered irons), then I must speak up. Those who have followed past discussions here will recognise what I am referring to. 

Regards from Perth

Derek


----------



## Paul Chapman (27 Nov 2007)

Derek Cohen (Perth said:


> Paul
> 
> Read the thread on Ubeaut, then comment.



I read it when it was originally posted.

Cheers :wink: 

Paul


----------



## Philly (27 Nov 2007)

Pauls (BB and PK)
Price - it is a awkward one. To manufacture such a complicated casting is obviously pretty involved and therefore expensive. So no, on its own I would not criticize the price. And if antique plough planes cost £400 and upwards for the basic models then I would be shouting from the rooftops about the Veritas. 
But they are not - I bought my "RECORD" #44 in the box as new for £34. My #43 was even less and the #50 only a few pounds more. Makes for a difficult market place to enter on price terms.
Hope this explains my perspective - we sure are lucky in the UK when it comes to plough planes :wink: 
Cheers
Philly


----------



## Paul Kierstead (27 Nov 2007)

Philly":qgn58ayn said:


> ... we sure are lucky in the UK when it comes to plough planes :wink:



You are indeed. I bought mine from the UK and had it shipped to Canada (more then the cost of the plane) and it was still cheaper then buying one in NA (unless one gets awfully lucky). I hear the 043 calling to me now.....


----------



## bugbear (27 Nov 2007)

Philly":1b3f9vhe said:


> Pauls (BB and PK)
> Price - it is a awkward one. To manufacture such a complicated casting is obviously pretty involved and therefore expensive. So no, on its own I would not criticize the price. And if antique plough planes cost £400 and upwards for the basic models then I would be shouting from the rooftops about the Veritas.
> But they are not - I bought my "RECORD" #44 in the box as new for £34. My #43 was even less and the #50 only a few pounds more. Makes for a difficult market place to enter on price terms.
> Hope this explains my perspective - we sure are lucky in the UK when it comes to plough planes :wink:
> ...



Indeed. Both statements are true; here in the UK, second hand ploughs of good quality are very cheap (but don't forgot what the new prices of a #043,#044,#050,#405 were when they were last available).

The Lee Valley tool is very cheap, considering its quality of manufacture.

Of course, some second hand tools are rare and collectible, leading to filthy second hand prices; I suspect the Lee Valley skew rebate plane will be more universally welcomed... (*)

BugBear

Try getting a #289 cheap in the UK!


----------



## Pete W (27 Nov 2007)

bugbear":1czvf50c said:


> The Lee Valley tool is very cheap, considering its quality of manufacture.



And if you compare other Veritas planes to their old Stanley and Record equivalents, I'm not sure there's a huge difference in the difference (if you see what I mean :?).

If I had no ploughing solutions I'd probably go for one, but as the happy owner of Record 043 and 050 planes, I think I'll be investing my Lee Valley tool fund in something else (the LA Jack is currently top of my Christmas list ).

Pete


----------



## bugbear (28 Nov 2007)

I feel it of passing relevance that Lie Nielsen started off reproducing tools that were super precious in the s/h market; e.g. the #212 was one of their earlier products.

BugBear


----------



## Rob Lee (28 Nov 2007)

Hi All - 

Will toss in a few comments here... short though, 'cause it's crazy season...

This plane shows some of the foundation work for similar styles of planes (multi-cutter, fenced) going forward. It startetd out to handle the same functions that the Record 043 did - though it ended up looking more like a version of the 044. Nonetheless - we intended to have a small "grooving" plane that would be welll suited for carcase/panel work.

Blades - yes, we're familiar with tapering the blade sides - but it's a bear to do from a production standpoint, where everything is usually set-up to make things square. Then too - we would be making a "fettling choice" for users - as not everyone would want this done. We stayed with square (and lower cost!) I'd certainly relieve the lower corners on the blades for the last 3/4" or so if I had one .... won't hurt at all, and shouldn't affect honing guide use, or blade registration in the plane body. 

Adjuster feed play - nature of the beast in this type of adjustment mechanism. There just isn't the cost/benefit to have an adjustment measured in .001" in this type of plane. The narrow blades also limit the styles of adjuster that can be used...

What we're the most happy with in this plane (and the aspect no one has mentioned!) is the quality and stability of the thin casting.... the sole on that thing is less than 1/8" thick, milled both sides, and straight. we weren't 100% sure it could even be done (at least repeatedly)!

Cost - well, the costs are what they are - not much we can do there. More milling, multiple castings, and multiple blades make for a more expensive plane. Blades are a really high proportion of the cost - which is why we supply it with only 1 - that way you can see how much the extra blades cost (and we're *almost* giving them away). The cost of a small blade is not much different than the cost of a large blade - the handleing and processes are about the same - only the material cost is significantly different, and that's such a small component of overall cost. At the retail level - cost/size relationships often have more to do with volume, than with cost of production...

Now - when we come out with the skew rebate planes - you can infer that the costing will be similar to what you see with the plough. There will be a small marketing "tweak" though - the price for the pair (R+L) will be very aggressive - as we have twice the investment in tooling, and would like people to buy both at the same time. We'll see how that all works out next year....

Cheers - 

Rob
(who thought this was gonna be short!)


----------



## Paul Chapman (28 Nov 2007)

Rob Lee":3o4sxzaz said:


> Now - when we come out with the skew rebate planes -



Will look forward to that  

Cheers :wink: 

Paul


----------



## Lord Nibbo (28 Nov 2007)

Paul Chapman":2fjz4y6x said:


> Rob Lee":2fjz4y6x said:
> 
> 
> > Now - when we come out with the skew rebate planes -
> ...



\/ ccasion5:


----------



## matthewwh (28 Nov 2007)

Another thumbs up for the small plough from me  

The first thing that struck me was the fact that it is both a plough plane and a beautiful object - all at the same time! When I look at the other plough planes made in the last 70 years they make me think of the word 'contraption' - functional for sure, but very rarely graceful. 

As mentioned previously, the engineering is absolutely spot on and despite my well aired feelings about ductile as a material for bench planes, this is a perfect application for it. 

Suffice to say that one of them didn't make it as far as the stock room! :twisted: 

Hats off to Rob and the guys for a job well done.


----------



## bugbear (29 Nov 2007)

Rob Lee":1rs3a8ym said:


> Blades - yes, we're familiar with tapering the blade sides - but it's a bear to do from a production standpoint, where everything is usually set-up to make things square. Then too - we would be making a "fettling choice" for users - as not everyone would want this done. We stayed with square (and lower cost!) I'd certainly relieve the lower corners on the blades for the last 3/4" or so if I had one .... won't hurt at all, and shouldn't affect honing guide use, or blade registration in the plane body.



Putting a quick taper on the side of the blade should be easy, at least if you have a bench grinder.

It not as if much precision is required.

BugBear


----------



## woodbloke (29 Nov 2007)

bugbear":2j4mvw5k said:


> Rob Lee":2j4mvw5k said:
> 
> 
> > Blades - yes, we're familiar with tapering the blade sides - but it's a bear to do from a production standpoint, where everything is usually set-up to make things square. Then too - we would be making a "fettling choice" for users - as not everyone would want this done. We stayed with square (and lower cost!) I'd certainly relieve the lower corners on the blades for the last 3/4" or so if I had one .... won't hurt at all, and shouldn't affect honing guide use, or blade registration in the plane body.
> ...



You could also do the same thing with a coarse DMT stone, might not be quite as fraught as holding a small bit of metal against a high speed grinder...'specially if your finger(s) happen to make contact with the wheel :shock: - Rob


----------



## bugbear (29 Nov 2007)

woodbloke":184w8apy said:


> You could also do the same thing with a coarse DMT stone, might not be quite as fraught as holding a small bit of metal against a high speed grinder...'specially if your finger(s) happen to make contact with the wheel :shock: - Rob



Mole grips?

BugBear


----------

