# What makes new hand planes bad?



## Craigus (30 Dec 2014)

I've been doing lots of reading on this recently but surprisingly, I couldn't find an answer to this. It seems that the only *new* plane worth buying is a Veritas or similar that costs a couple of hundred quid. The general recommendation is to get an old Record or Stanley plane, my Dad kindly gave me his old Stanley No.4 that I've taken apart, de-rusted and cleaned up.

However, I was in Axminster tools today and looking at their own brand planes for around £25. Compared to the old Stanley I now have though, I couldn't tell the difference.

So what exactly is the reason that the old ones are better than these new ones?


----------



## Racers (30 Dec 2014)

Ask the accountants, its there never ending strive to reduce costs that has ruined the quality and machining of plane parts.
Planes used to cost a lot of money now they are cheap, something has to give.

Pete


----------



## matt_southward (30 Dec 2014)

I was in Axminster yesterday doing exactly the same thing (tempted by the cheap price) and if you can't tell the difference between an old Stanley/Record (though I suppose it depends on the exact age), then you need to take a closer look. The casting looks and feels okish (didn't check with a square/level though), but the finish is terrible on just about everything. The y-lever terminates in an open ended soft wire arrangement that looks unbelievably poor, the screws look like they'd disintegrate or worse and just snap off, the irons and cap-irons are similarly crude. They are deffo cheap for a reason - the ultra budget ones at least. I would have liked to have seen their more expensive Rider bench planes, but they didn't have any to look at as their block planes are not quite as bad and can be made usable more easily. The difference between those and Veritas/LN for quality (and price of course!) is worlds apart.


----------



## Cheshirechappie (30 Dec 2014)

Craigus":17dp5hh8 said:


> However, ..... in Axminster tools today and looking at their own brand planes for around £25. Compared to the old Stanley I now have though, I couldn't tell the difference.
> 
> So what exactly is the reason that the old ones are better than these new ones?



That's part of the problem - the differences are not easily visible. They tend to become apparent only when you use the tool.

There's a great deal written about planes, probably more than about any other woodworking tool. A lot of what's written is (at least in part) personal prejudice on the part of the writer. Some people have their personal likes and dislikes, and (sometimes subconsciously) tend to plug them.

It's a bit of a myth that all older planes were superb. Some were not. However, the better ones (Stanley, Record, Marples and one or two rarer ones) did gain a good reputation amongst tradesmen and craftsmen, so they do tend to be more prevalent on the secondhand market than the outright duds. That said, just being secondhand doesn't guarantee excellence; some planes are very heavily worn, and some were mistreated. There are also some dodgy characters about selling planes made up from bags of bits; these may work fine, or they might not.

Some time in the latter part of the last century, the previously good makers started to trim their manufacturing costs by cutting corners a bit, and the quality of planes started to decline, and with the rise of power tools, the market started to shrink too. By the 1990s, things were pretty dire on the quality front, and the trend to off-shoring of manufacture to the far east also brought about another drop in quality in the previously trusted brands. About this time, a couple of niche makers saw an opportunity to make small numbers of high quality planes for the discerning amateur and the more demanding professional - Lie-Nielsen, Veritas and Clifton are the best known for bench and joinery planes, but there are a number of very high quality infill plane makers out there.

There are now a range of new planes available, some of very high quality (already mentioned), some very decent (Quangsheng, Wood River and Stanley Sweetheart for example) where the low manufacturing costs of the far east and other 'developing' countries are combined with good quality control, some of variable quality (sadly modern Stanley and Record must fall in this bracket), and some that are decidedly indifferent, though very cheap - the latter may make a reasonable plane if you're prepared to do a fair bit of fettling, and perhaps shell out for a good quality replacement blade and cap-iron.

What makes the difference? Attention to detail, really, and selection of materials of construction. One really important aspect that you can't easily see with a casual inspection is flatness of the sole; the better makers take some pains (and go to some expense) to make sure their castings are stable and well-finished. The cheaper ones just go for a shiny finish, and if it happens to be flat, that's a bonus. Then there's the fit of the various parts, quality of material and heat-treatment of blades, and general finish. Those add up to either a plane that is easy to adjust and use, giving a good finish to the wood, and capable of taking shavings from gossamer-thin to trouser-belt thick as the user requires, with an iron that takes a razor-sharp edge and holds it for a good while - or one that falls short.

Your father's old Stanley should be a pretty decent tool, and a good start on the general planing learning-curve. Once you can get a sharp edge on the iron, and set the plane up so that you can hog off material, or produce a super finished surface and very fine shavings, you'll be well on the way to knowing a bit about what makes a good plane. (The 'fine shavings' thing crops up a lot - it's not that you must produce fine shavings, just that in order to do so a plane sole must be flat, so it's a measure of a plane's fitness for duty.) That will give you a reference when expanding the plane arsenal.

And of course - any questions that arise, we'll do our best to answer! Good luck, and enjoy the learning!


----------



## matt_southward (30 Dec 2014)

That's a pretty good summation for a newcomer to hand planes - sometimes it's hard for people to remember starting out I guess. I would second the WoodRiver/Quangsheng option if buying new, they really are very good for the price and need minimal effort to be put to work - I've had very varied success with second hand stuff - but then again, I learned a lot from the failures too (in a painful, long-windedly frustrating sort of way!).


----------



## Craigus (30 Dec 2014)

Fantastic, thanks for the responses. You'd be surprised how long I spent looking for info like that!

I'll stick with the old Stanley for now then. Thanks again.


----------



## woodpig (30 Dec 2014)

Are these any good?

http://www.shobha-india.com/wood-workin ... ng-w1.html

I ask because I have one of their milling vices and it's pretty good.


----------



## Vann (30 Dec 2014)

Cheshirechappie sums it up quite well.

One point I would like to expand on is the issue of stablity of the castings. In the old days, as castings came out of the mould they were stored outside in all weathers for 6-12 months. This allowed the casting to move and stablise, so that when they were machined a year later, they were likely to stay that shape. Modern quality manufacturers heat treat their castings to achieve the same end.

Cheap planes don't go through that stage, so while they might be machined to reasonable standards, by the time you open the box they may have settled into a slightly different shape.

That's not to say all cheap modern planes are rubbish, but the chances of getting a good one are consisderably reduced.

Cheers, Vann.


----------



## condeesteso (31 Dec 2014)

That's a very good summary Cheshire, (in my view). From my own experience the old Stanleys and Records can be really good planes and an excellent starting point as they allow you a really affordable entry to learn how to check them over and tune them to work to their best. And no matter where you end up with handplanes (from a Lie Nielsen to a vintage infill) you will always need to understand how to tune to the max - witness David C recently (here) saying he didn't think any plane was ever as good as it could be 'out of the box' (that was in the Wood River pass-around I recall). Just as the best chisels don't sharpen themselves, planes are more complex and they won't tune themselves. But it's not hard and it isn't a black art. You just want to start with something well enough made to make it worth tuning - and the old Stanleys and Records were very well made. In real terms they were not cheap when new either. Those older Bailey pattern planes represent the old approach to production engineering, which is widely considered to not be viable now (not cost efficient or effective) - BUT Tom Lie Nielsen, the pioneer of the new generation premium plane, proved otherwise. The £300 Bailey-pattern is cost efficient and cost-effective (his market share proves that).
It's part of the bigger picture - competitive pressure drives price down and quality has to suffer. It is assumed the consumer cares first about price, so the quality options die out. Then we are left with a lesser choice. I see this everywhere, even in cabinet hardware these days.


----------



## Andy Kev. (31 Dec 2014)

matt_southward":36ot117x said:


> That's a pretty good summation for a newcomer to hand planes - *sometimes it's hard for people to remember starting out I guess.* I would second the WoodRiver/Quangsheng option if buying new, they really are very good for the price and need minimal effort to be put to work - I've had very varied success with second hand stuff - but then again, I learned a lot from the failures too (in a painful, long-windedly frustrating sort of way!).


It's also worth remembering that for the beginner the fettling of a plane to bring it into order might seem a daunting exercise. Without prior knowledge or experience, how do you go about it and how do you know (with a fair degree of confidence) that you have reached the end state? I certainly didn't have a clue and I would still be reluctant to attempt it unless I picked up a second hand plane which I could effectively bin if I wrecked it. It was that sort of reasoning and studying of reviews that led me to bite the bullet and get a Veritas low angle jack plane. Damned expensive but obviously a tip top bit of kit and relatively easy for a beginner to master its mechanics (as opposed to a bevel down plane).


----------



## DiscoStu (31 Dec 2014)

Andy I think that's very true. There is a lot of talk of getting and sharpening etc. but is there a basic guide to sorting out and using a plane? I mean a really good step by step guide?

I've got an old Stanley plane that I've had for 20 years and I'd like to strip it, clean it, sharpen it and get it to be in the best possible state so that I can then learn to use it but I don't have a clue what I am doing with it. I received a No.3 plane in my secret Santa and I can tell that it is sharp and I'm pretty sure it's been fettled to get it in excellent shape, but I don't know. 

Is there a plane bible that tells us all the basics? Also is there a basic recommendation for sharpening? That in itself seems to have thousands of different options.


----------



## matt_southward (31 Dec 2014)

Andy Kev.":39hl552m said:


> It's also worth remembering that for the beginner the fettling of a plane to bring it into order might seem a daunting exercise. Without prior knowledge or experience, how do you go about it and how do you know (with a fair degree of confidence) that you have reached the end state? I certainly didn't have a clue and I would still be reluctant to attempt it unless I picked up a second hand plane which I could effectively bin if I wrecked it. It was that sort of reasoning and studying of reviews that led me to bite the bullet and get a Veritas low angle jack plane. Damned expensive but obviously a tip top bit of kit and relatively easy for a beginner to master its mechanics (as opposed to a bevel down plane).



I agree. It's what I did too (though I bought a Clifton and maybe would have been better off doing what you did) after buying a couple of duffers from eBay and not having the time to keep trying. It's incredibly frustrating at the beginning when you are looking for decent tools on a limited budget - *but you aren't quite sure what's decent!*


----------



## matt_southward (31 Dec 2014)

DiscoStu":1a052hqb said:


> Andy I think that's very true. There is a lot of talk of getting and sharpening etc. but is there a basic guide to sorting out and using a plane? I mean a really good step by step guide?
> 
> Is there a plane bible that tells us all the basics? .



I think the book by Garrett Hack - not sure on spelling - called 'Hand Planes' or something equally obvious is supposed to be pretty good. I don't have a copy yet though.


----------



## Mr T (31 Dec 2014)

It really angers me that some budget planes sold by the likes of Axminster and the big DIY sheds would never cut properly even with hours of fettling. Novices buy these tools thinking they might like to try woodwork but give up soon after because they can't get the plane to work. Some on the forum will say they were stupid to buy such a plane in the first place, but you have to put yourself in the place of someone who may know nothing about tools and how to assess their quality. 

Chris


----------



## PortersWood (31 Dec 2014)

I am just starting out and have been given several of the Axminster rider planes for Christmas and am generally pleased. They are all square and flat so only require a bit of work to the iron before getting started. I'm not much keen on the screw caps and will replace with lever caps when I can. 

As a beginner and hobby wood worker I have a limited budget and these are a good start and have reasonable reviews certainly when compared with the new Stanley and record equivalents. 

LN or Veritas these are not but will keep me going until I can replace with more expensive over time


----------



## condeesteso (31 Dec 2014)

Well done PortersWood for being prepared to do a bit of 'tuning'. Most of the tools we all use need commissioning and on-going sharpening. It's a part of what we do. I suspect your planes will serve you well in part because you are willing to prepare them for use.
By the way, if anyone wants a plane that's great out of the box, call Ollie Sparks. I got an old Spiers from him recently, put the irons in and set it... perfect =D> So I've ordered a new one from him now.


----------



## Carl P (31 Dec 2014)

Hi,

I've read the book by Garret Hack - it's absolutely fantastic, it deals with pretty much everything anyone might want to know, is very readable and has a lot of very nice photo's that will induce severe plane envy, I wish I'd read it when I first started trying to use a plane - would have saved a lot of time and frustation!

Cheerio,

Carl


----------



## Craigus (31 Dec 2014)

Thanks for all the input guys, not knowing, or not having much experience with planes makes this all quite frustrating. I have considered getting the Credit Card out and getting a nice posh one a couple of times, but resisting at the moment.

Maybe I could have a bit of advise on setting up my old plane. I've spent a long time sharpening the iron using the same method I use for the my chisels which works well, but I couldn't get the iron hugely sharp.

I've tried it on a few bits of timber now, and it is snagging and jumping quite a lot, I did get it working nicely for a few strokes and got a nice smooth edge on a short board, but that didn't last and it's back to jumping and catching. Do you think I need a new iron and cap iron? If so, any recommendations? Or is it more likely to be that it needs further fettling? 

The iron isn't the flattest, and is a bit bent at the back, I'll try and get some pictures...


----------



## Cheshirechappie (31 Dec 2014)

Not quite sure what you mean by 'the iron isn't the flattest, it's a bit bent at the back' - sounds a bit undesireable though. Piccies would be a help, if poss.

One thing that cures a lot of planing problems is sharpness. It's not always an easy skill to master, but our very own Graham Haydon does an excellent video on the basic technique, which I'll try to post a link to.

Another thing that might help is a copy of Robert Wearing's book, 'The Essential Woodworker' (published by Lost Art Press and available from Classic Hand Tools). It's the best book I know on the basic techniques of using a plane, 'squaring up' timber, and the basics of cabinetmaking.

Edit to add - here's the link to Graham's sharpening demo - http://gshaydon.co.uk/blog/sharpening-chisel - this is for a chisel, but for plane blades it's basically the same idea. By the way, Graham's blog archive is well worth a good read through.

Another edit to add - here's the Classic Hand Tools link - http://www.classichandtools.com/acatalo ... Press.html - you'll have to scroll down to almost the bottom of the page. Don't get distracted half way down - there's some super books here!


----------



## JohnCee (31 Dec 2014)

the best value for money planes currently available must surely be the reconditioned stanleys and records that Ray Iles sells.


----------



## bugbear (1 Jan 2015)

Craigus":3q1e12cs said:


> I've tried it on a few bits of timber now, and it is snagging and jumping quite a lot, I did get it working nicely for a few strokes and got a nice smooth edge on a short board, but that didn't last and it's back to jumping and catching.



My guess, given your stated beginner status, is that you've got way too much blade out, trying to take too thick a shaving. Try aiming for a super thin shaving. One doesn't always want a super thin shaving, but as an experiment, it may serve you well.

BugBear


----------



## IHc1vtr+ (1 Jan 2015)

I have a couple of new faithfull one's and i am quite happy with them. Came with a 5yr guarantee as well.


----------



## L2wis (2 Jan 2015)

I've just now created a post regarding a troublesome brand new Irwin Record #04 plane I was given for christmas (Amazon link), so far I've had to do a few jobs... Consisting of reshaping the blade adjusters as one of them comes out of place when moving the iron back and forth minor issue I guess although I've noticed the problem has come back so I've got to revisit it. The chip breaker was very poorly finished so I've had a shot of smarting it and reshaping the business end where it meets the iron, this needs more time on it, polished the machine marks out of the metal just after the front edge, the edges of it are all dinged up out the box which made me think it had a protective plastic sheet on it (but it hasn't). The worse problem though of all is easily the flatness of the sole, I've not had that many planes come through my hand but the sole on this seems massively out and still isn't flat.

If it had not been a gift it would certainly had been sent back. I'll be pleased if I ever get the sole flat.


----------



## Tom K (2 Jan 2015)

You have your Dads old plane but how old is your Dad? If he's not pushing 80 his "old" plane might be modern junk like a lot of the "vintage" stuff I see on e bay that's younger than my kids!


----------



## Craigus (2 Jan 2015)

Thanks guys

I had a fettle with it today and got some lovely shavings. I think I had the blade too far out. I've also ordered a new iron and cap iron from workshop heaven as the current iron isn't in a great way. Hopefully it will be lovely when I've got all the new bits in.

The plane turns out to be my Grandfathers who passed it onto my Dad when he retired, so it must be pre-war.


----------



## heimlaga (2 Jan 2015)

One of my friends bought a new Irwin Record block plane. To make it usable he had to scrape and file various parts quite a bit and he also had to harden and temper the blade. 
The only way to make a good plane out of it would have started with melting down the cast iron and recasting it...... but it became barely usable after the treatment.
Too low production costs means that processes have to be limplified and inferrior production methods used and less skilled workers emproyed and quality control abolished. Those together create a certain type of product, a useless*plane shaped object*.


----------



## Tony Zaffuto (2 Jan 2015)

Cost of production, and profit attainable through distribution line, including manufacturer and wholesale/retail sellers?

Maybe 8 or 10 years ago, I bought a #3 size smoother from a low cost, import tool store called Harbor Freight (here in the states), with the explicit reason to determine if the plane could be made to perform using machining techniques at the manufacturing plant I own. The cost of the plane was about $10.00 US. A guy on one of the US tool forums was selling blades for this particular plane for about $25.00 (O1 & 1/8" thick). I had one of my machinists grind the sole perfectly smooth and square the sides and mill the blade bedding area smooth. Anyhow, without doing anything to the wood, with my machinist's time, the new blade and cost of the plane, I ended up with a small smoother that could easily take full width shavings at .0015" in cherry (total cost around $75 to $85 US).

I didn't really use the plane and gave it away a few years ago. It must be noted that I had the plane long enough for the casting to season, and when I gave the plane away, it showed no evidence of the casting having moved.

I like my LN, LV, Clifton and vintage Stanley & Record planes, however, there is a place for these planes from the Pacific Rim as they can be made to perform. I've never handled any of the planes spoken of/sold in the UK, nor have I tried a Woodriver (US, sold by Woodcraft), but I believe there is a place for these and as the makers refine their techniques, the result may be positive for our craft.


----------



## rafezetter (3 Jan 2015)

Tony Zaffuto":1fnievst said:


> Cost of production, and profit attainable through distribution line, including manufacturer and wholesale/retail sellers?
> 
> Maybe 8 or 10 years ago, I bought a #3 size smoother from a low cost, import tool store called Harbor Freight (here in the states), with the explicit reason to determine if the plane could be made to perform using machining techniques at the manufacturing plant I own. The cost of the plane was about $10.00 US. A guy on one of the US tool forums was selling blades for this particular plane for about $25.00 (O1 & 1/8" thick). I had one of my machinists grind the sole perfectly smooth and square the sides and mill the blade bedding area smooth. Anyhow, without doing anything to the wood, with my machinist's time, the new blade and cost of the plane, I ended up with a small smoother that could easily take full width shavings at .0015" in cherry (total cost around $75 to $85 US).
> 
> ...



It must be noted though that you had to go to those lengths, using machinery costing in the 10's of thousands probably - plus pay your machinist for his time AND buy a new blade, so a bit more than the $80 odd you quoted.

An OLD ebay find plane - and it's simple enough to keep looking until you find a pre-war one, all Stanleys have markers to identify age, helped me to get my 1910 #7 - is surely better to give it a new lease of life than make a sow's ear purse out of a sow's ear? Ebay is awash with planes, and you can obviously tell which sellers are actually interested in what they are selling and will help with extra pics if needed.

The less of the cheap rubbish sold, the more incentive to go back to better manufacturing - or keep the better quality companies in business. Having said that my cheap faithful #4 made into a scrub works fine enough with a little tuning.


----------



## Tony Zaffuto (3 Jan 2015)

I kept track of my machinist's time, but I did not add a burden rate for the machinery. My figure included the blade purchased from Jim Reed, on Woodnet.

Harbor Freight planes are the cheapest of the cheap, but this one was made to perform. I do not make a habit of purchasing items I view as cheap, but did this as an exercise to see requirements to make the plane perform. The plane was a #3 size and did not have a frog, relying on two thumb screws to adjust the blade, so the thicker blade also aided in closing up the mouth. All in all, it was a very simple plane.

As I have never handled one of the other Bedrock clones, such as a Woodriver, etc., I can't estimate time needed, if any. But yes, my cost did include labor, but not the cost of machinery.


----------

