# Paul Sellers says cap iron position doesn’t matter



## paulrbarnard (22 Apr 2021)

Perhaps this should go in the new controversial forum


----------



## JohnPW (22 Apr 2021)

It only matters if planing "difficult" grain. I doubt he was planing against the grain in that video.


----------



## scooby (22 Apr 2021)

Oh popcorn time..or is that only reserved for sharpening threads?

Not that it matters, but I've always set mine about the same distance as he said (just over a mm). The cap irons on my planes aren't the tightest so setting super close just causes problems.


----------



## Adam W. (22 Apr 2021)

The Klangers say the moon is made of green cheese not blue.


----------



## Fitzroy (22 Apr 2021)

I only find it matters once the edge is so sharp is glows due to it cutting electrons off the passing air atoms. I achieve this by stropping on an off cut of deaths cloak.


----------



## Ttrees (22 Apr 2021)

That was more than a 1/32", and no mention that the leading edge needs to be honed at around 50 degrees if it is to work at that distance.

A lower profile edge of the cap iron is what most folks likely have, so it would need to be set closer to work.
That becomes a problem if one want's the tiniest of cambers on the other smoother plane that they should have...(which is set at half that distance)

The camber of the cutting iron must be so fine that it is difficult to see, until paired with the cap iron,
but evidently effective from the narrower shaving of a plane when the cutter is not advanced to correct depth, and when adjusted properly will achieve pretty much full with shavings, and give unbeatable results.

i.e ... on difficult timbers, the cutting iron will likely need to be honed straight across if the leading edge of the cap iron is not steep enough.
Camber is nice to have, so the cap iron will need to be further away from the edge, and I can't do that on the smoother without it being around 50 degrees.

Edit, the camber on the smoothing plane will be so fine, that the cap iron can be set closer if need be.
And for those living under a bridge for near the last decade...
The mouth must NOT be set closely, or it chatter about and refuse to work.
Get a candle because the plane will have more down force compared to the lateral force experienced when planing before, without the influence of the cap iron.
Notice this when planing a straight edge that the plane will have less tendency to dive off the ends and create a bow.

And obviously the most important part about being able to plane any species of timber against the grain with flawless results, no scraper needed for planing flat work ever again, just plane as it were flawless uniform material without ever needing to reverse direction around a knot or reversing grain.


----------



## ivan (23 Apr 2021)

If you bother to search for it, there's an interesting macro video of an edge cutting timber, on line, made in a Japanese University, as teaching material for school students.This shows with-grain and against-grain cutting. There's a translated version, although only sub titles. There's also a paper by a Dutch? chap which looks at quality and cutter wear at various pitches and cap iron angles. To work, the cap iron must be set by "thou" not inches!
There's also info on downward and forward pressures needed to get a cut, which interstingly concludes that a steep pitch and close cap iron is an easier push than the equivalent bevel up, _when measured by the quality of the resulting cut_ (bevel up requires steeper angle to match the bevel down+close cap iron). Bear in mind, ultimate finish quality is not required from all planes in the kit.

Wooden planes (nor infill wood) do not "damp vibration". Vibration in planes is caused by thin irons. The pressure on the cutting tip tends to raise the body of the cutter from the frog, about 2 to 3 cm up the blade, by pivoting on ther heel of the bevel. The slight bend causes the cutter tip to dig in a fraction and then spring out. As posted here before I have measured this on a bog standard plane with a clock gauge. This plane has always cut with a brrzip sound. The stayset 2 piece cap iron prevents this, as will the 2 part Millers Falls lever cap. The original Baily patent is worth looking up, when you'll see that the the chipbreaker is formed so as to lie fully flat on the blade, with *both* sides of the curved part touching on the blade. Thus the thin blade is designed to be held down by the lever cap at 3 points, not 2. Pity the manufacturers have forgotten this! Over bending the chip breaker so the blade is held off the face of the frog is a definite recipe for vibration.

Thicker blades are more rigid. Double the thickness is 8 times more resistant to bending. The bevel will be twice as long, so the overall effect is reduced to 4 times. Wooden planes and infills do not use thin blades - possibly even 3 x thicker (9 times stiffer overall) so not likely to chatter. Nothing to do with the wood!

Thick blades take no longer to sharpen than thin, if you use the 2 bevel "grinding angle + sharpening angle" approach, especially if you are hollow grinding on a wheel, like a Tormek. DC's Ruler Trick will also concentrate the flat side sharpeing directly in the area of wear (see paper below)

So there you have it - bevel up planes are harder to push and need more downward pressure than bevel up, for the same planing quality.
The chipbreaker (or whatever you call the blade's intimate companion) will not break chips unless properly set, which means no more than 12 thou (0.3mm) and more like 4 thou (0.1mm) from the edge, for tricky timber. Just like grandad showed me around 1950! 

Bear in mind, finesse is not needed on every plane. Where it is, use a flat, not bent cap iron, sharpened to the appropriate angle, and curved to match the blade of your smoother. If the cap iron is completely flat, you can gently roll a tiny hook (scraper style) at the correct angle to ensure no shavinges get trapped-thanks again grandad!

Video: 
Paper: Mechanics of Chipbreakers


----------



## Bm101 (23 Apr 2021)

Fitzroy said:


> I only find it matters once the edge is so sharp is glows due to it cutting electrons off the passing air atoms. I achieve this by stropping on an off cut of deaths cloak.


Someone's a Terry Pratchett fan.


----------



## Ttrees (23 Apr 2021)

ivan said:


> . To work, the cap iron must be set by "thou" not inches!
> 
> The chipbreaker (or whatever you call the blade's intimate companion) will not break chips unless properly set, which means no more than 12 thou (0.3mm) and more like 4 thou (0.1mm) from the edge, for tricky timber. Just like grandad showed me around 1950!
> 
> Bear in mind, finesse is not needed on every plane. Where it is, use a flat, not bent cap iron, sharpened to the appropriate angle, and curved to match the blade of your smoother. If the cap iron is completely flat, you can gently roll a tiny hook (scraper style) at the correct angle to ensure no shavinges get trapped-thanks again grandad!



That's a bizarre statement to read, that you can't use the imperial
measurement to set the cap iron.
You must try honing the cap edge, around 50 degrees instead of rolling the edge,
and see those shavings coming straight out of the plane, all nice and burnished and the plane leaving a lovely glossy finish as you've noticed already.
The only difference being the cap can be set further away.
Some like Warren Mickley suggest honing it much steeper than 50, I think I recall him suggesting around 80 degrees, presumably for more camber.
The influence of the cap iron isn't just for smoothers.
My no.5 1/2 will hog off material when set at 1/32", or maybe when set just under/ and iron honed to match it, for a denser batch.
Rarely do I need to reach for the smoother, which is normally about half that distance away from the edge, but can be adjusted closer without re-profiling the cutting iron, as the camber is so fine.

I've got away without damaging the cap iron at times, where the iron got damaged before.
Makes sense to me to hone at 50 degrees, even if one didn't want camber.

Tom


----------



## Jacob (23 Apr 2021)

ivan said:


> .... a Dutch? chap which looks at quality and cutter wear at various pitches and cap iron angles. To work, the cap iron must be set by "thou" not inches!


He's wrong though isn't he 


> There's also info on downward and forward pressures needed to get a cut, which interstingly concludes that a steep pitch and close cap iron is an easier push than the equivalent bevel up, _when measured by the quality of the resulting cut_


Yes and no. If the cap iron is too close it may be really difficult to get a cut on easy wood though it may scrape well on something difficult. But yes a cap iron will tend to help in many circumstances as it works as a chip breaker and helps roll the shavings


> Vibration in planes is caused by thin irons.


No it isn't. It's caused by loose blades badly fitted, amongst other things. A thin blade firmly clamped down by a good fitting cap iron and lever cap will tend not to vibrate. Another detail is to set the frog dead in line with the mouth so that the back of the blade is being supported as much possible where it's most important - just behind the cutting edge.


> T........The original Baily patent is worth looking up, when you'll see that the the chipbreaker is formed so as to lie fully flat on the blade, with *both* sides of the curved part touching on the blade. Thus the thin blade is designed to be held down by the lever cap at 3 points, not 2. Pity the manufacturers have forgotten this!


It would need another lever on the cap to do this which is why the idea was dropped


> Over bending the chip breaker so the blade is held off the face of the frog is a definite recipe for vibration.


I agree - and nobody does that


> Thicker blades are more rigid. Double the thickness is 8 times more resistant to bending. The bevel will be twice as long, so the overall effect is reduced to 4 times. Wooden planes and infills do not use thin blades - possibly even 3 x thicker (9 times stiffer overall) so not likely to chatter. Nothing to do with the wood!


No it's to do with sharpening and ease of set. The Bailey design saved millions of hours of fiddling about. It made a thin blade + cap iron + lever cap perform as well as a fat one but much easier to use


> Thick blades take no longer to sharpen than thin,


Not true at all, how could this possibly be? 3 times as much metal takes 3 times longer to remove..
Do you really think that the abandonment of old woodies and thick blades was just a mistake which nobody noticed? Seems unlikely to me!


----------



## Phil Pascoe (23 Apr 2021)

Not true at all, how could this possibly be. 3 times as much metal takes 3 times longer to remove...

That's why most sensible people grind their irons and don't hone the whole of it.


----------



## Jacob (23 Apr 2021)

Phil Pascoe said:


> Not true at all, how could this possibly be. 3 times as much metal takes 3 times longer to remove...
> 
> That's why most sensible people grind their irons and don't hone the whole of it.


You have to grind with a thick old iron.
But you can get away with a light touch on thin blades, that's the whole idea. e.g. Paul Sellers style with three stones one after the other. If you are on site with just one stone that's no prob with a thin blade.
Actually you can freehand grind an old woody blade if you have to - it helps to bolt it to a lath so you have a handle and can put max effort and speed into it. With the right coarse stone 10 to 20 minutes perhaps.


----------



## Ttrees (23 Apr 2021)

That's often the fast part for me!
I find honing the iron to get that perfect camber is much more
of an issue.
What I thought was acceptable before would not be even enough nowadays.
I have tried numerous bloomin techniques and am always learning and changing.
I just couldn't replicate David's method's of getting the camber even.

I've since went on to using the cheap diamond hones and water
as my skin is porous, (couldn't get oil off my hands)
and find that not just leaning or tilting but locating your fingers where you want to remove material works a lot better than leaning.

David reckons directed pressure is a good term for it, but to me sounds like leaning using a honing guide,
That's a little bad habit one can pick up from one of those yolks,

I haven't found a more reliable way freehand of getting the camber even than this, so thumbs up to David Weaver again.
God knows how long that would have taken me to figure out, if it were to happen at all.

Tom
.


----------



## Adam W. (23 Apr 2021)

Phil Pascoe said:


> Not true at all, how could this possibly be. 3 times as much metal takes 3 times longer to remove...
> 
> That's why most sensible people grind their irons and don't hone the whole of it.


But you have 3 times the surface area contact with the stone, so one push will remove the same amount of material, surely.


----------



## ivan (23 Apr 2021)

3x the work? *not if you grind on a wheel at 25 deg and sharpen at 30 (or more)
*thou, and inches are both imperial measure-or they were in my schooldays.
*a close set cap iron is not needed for most planing, only difficult stuff.
*most standard blades with chipbreaker / cap iron attached become bent as the screw joining them is tightened. The chipbreaker is over bent by the maker to ensure no shavings get caught under it. Writers often advise this should be done!
*the original bailey patent design mentioned above holds the iron down to the frog at 3 points under a _perfectly common_ lever cap. Google it and see for yourself.
*David Charlesworth sugests imagining the edge of the blade is numbered 1,2,3,4,5 across the width. 3 is the middle. You give the same number of strokes with pressure at each of 2, and 4, and then perhaps double that number at each of 1, and 5. Adjust by trial and error for more curvature if needed. For a smoother, a fine thin shaving should taper away to nothing at each side. If you use a honing guide, it must have either a narrow, or a barrel roller, to allow easy tilting. If you grind the edge straight, and camber only when sharpening on the finishing stone, you can just about see curvature in the shape of the highly polished strip at the edge of the bevel.
*you could probably knock up a deliberately hollowed diamond sharpener from one of those cheap ebay chinese diamond plates. At 1mm thick, I suspect you could glue a 3000 grit one to an old tile, with the edges raised up by a single sheet of thin paper. The bend in the plate would be very small, and with luck araldite or pu would hold. I believe a hollow diamond sharpening plate was actually available in the USA, but probably cost more than 3 quid...


----------



## ivan (23 Apr 2021)

Re sharpening the flat cap iron / chipbreaker mentioned above: For the smoother I usually sharpen the cap iron at about 50 deg and then gently roll on the hook at about 10-15 deg more. The shaving is thus turned by some 60 odd degrees. The paper mentioned in the earlier post shows how the cap iron also wears at close settings, so a well designed one for a smoother shouldn't be made of soft mild steel...


----------



## Jacob (23 Apr 2021)

ivan said:


> 3x the work? *not if you grind on a wheel at 25 deg and sharpen at 30 (or more)


3 times the work using the same methods, obviously. Though in fact you don't need to with thin blades - you can skip the grinder altogether if you do it a little and often - which also means sharper more often


> ...
> *a close set cap iron is not needed for most planing, only difficult stuff.


Agree. For most purposes it doesn't matter much as Sellers points out. 1/32" is a bit tight for soft stuff.


> *most standard blades with chipbreaker / cap iron attached become bent as the screw joining them is tightened. The chipbreaker is over bent by the maker to ensure no shavings get caught under it. Writers often advise this should be done!


The blade back needs to sit flat on the frog, yes it can be badly adjusted - you just need to bend the cap iron and/or the blade a touch


> *the original bailey patent design mentioned above holds the iron down to the frog at 3 points under a _perfectly common_ lever cap. Google it and see for yourself.


I think you'll find that that was one of many designs - found to be not worth the bother. In fact the common set up approaches having 3 contact points, the two sides of the "bump" and the point under the lever cam. The stayset design does it more explicitly


> ......For a smoother, a fine thin shaving should taper away to nothing at each side.


For most planes in fact. Couldn't quite follow all that other stuff - a camber is something which occurs more or less unaided with freehand sharpening whether you want one or not. But you do usually and it's very easy to increase it if you wanted to.
Modern sharpening looks more and more like alchemy with magic numbers and formulas all over the place! Big problem is the honing jig itself which creates more probs than it solves.


----------



## Jameshow (23 Apr 2021)

Do you think the heyday of handmade furniture and architectural woodworking was in the period of the wooden plane rather than the bailey pattern by which time efficiency and the finer details didn't matter so much with the advent of powered woodworking machinery. 

Just a thought 

Cheers James


----------



## Jacob (23 Apr 2021)

Jameshow said:


> Do you think the heyday of handmade furniture and architectural woodworking was in the period of the wooden plane rather than the bailey pattern by which time efficiency and the finer details didn't matter so much with the advent of powered woodworking machinery.
> 
> Just a thought
> 
> Cheers James


Bailey plane came in with industrialisation and a parallel huge increase in design complexity made possible by machines. Design got more fussy, not less. 1851 Great Exhibition provoked the arts n crafts reaction. Maybe plain and elegant Georgian reflected the sheer difficulty of doing stuff with these great clunky tools, all by hand?


----------



## Adam W. (23 Apr 2021)

For London, I think the period after The Great Fire was a very spectacular time for architectural woodwork. They produced very elegant interiors.

But some regional architecture in 1500 was truly awe inspiring......Clunky wooden planes and all.








Uffculme rood screen.


----------



## AESamuel (23 Apr 2021)

I already commented on that video and got a reply from Paul himself - I was incredibly unimpressed with his almost authoritarian attitude. Absolutely bonkers!


----------



## Ttrees (23 Apr 2021)

ivan said:


> Re sharpening the flat cap iron / chipbreaker mentioned above: For the smoother I usually sharpen the cap iron at about 50 deg and then gently roll on the hook at about 10-15 deg more. The shaving is thus turned by some 60 odd degrees. The paper mentioned in the earlier post shows how the cap iron also wears at close settings, so a well designed one for a smoother shouldn't be made of soft mild steel...



Have you noticed wear happening yourself Ivan?
Can't say I've ever had that problem, and I hone the underside less perpendicular (with more undercut) than most folks I've seen, so should be a bit more fragile, but never experienced this that wasn't from some cement.
I do metalwork and get some metal embedded in the stock
but notice no issue with the cap when 1/32" away from the edge, compared to the damage the iron will get.
Thought if it were a problem I would increase the angle of the edge, but doesn't seem to be an issue.

Since were actually having a discussion of cap irons for once and the matched geometry of things regarding cambers or eased edges...
Another issue I think worth mentioning is fitting the underside of the cap iron.
I haven't heard anyone mention that if there's a belly in the cap iron
i.e, the edges aren't in contact with the cutting iron, 
and honing it like some folk do is not fixing things, then a good way to mate it to the flat iron (Sellers actually has a useful video on that, where he taps an iron flat)
Is to either use the corner of a hone, or easier again to get a short strip of abrasive not as wide as the cap iron and focus on the middle, easier to get it flat if it's in contact on each edge first.

Tom


----------



## Derek Cohen (Perth Oz) (24 Apr 2021)

AESamuel said:


> I already commented on that video and got a reply from Paul himself - I was incredibly unimpressed with his almost authoritarian attitude. Absolutely bonkers!



Yes. He is not interested in what others have to say. He preaches to his choir, and that is all that is important to him. This "test" simply demonstrates how little he understands about this area of plane tuning. He has done similar "tests" with bevel up planes, with inappropriate set up and inevitable failure ..... when something does not fit in with his own philosophy, he will find a way to discredit it. This characteristic of his is a great pity since he is in a position to influence many newbies. He is interested in that, to be sure, but with the closed mind of an autocrat.

Regards from Perth

Derek


----------



## planesleuth (24 Apr 2021)

Derek Cohen (Perth Oz) said:


> Yes. He is not interested in what others have to say. He preaches to his choir, and that is all that is important to him. This "test" simply demonstrates how little he understands about this area of plane tuning. He has done similar "tests" with bevel up planes, with inappropriate set up and inevitable failure ..... when something does not fit in with his own philosophy, he will find a way to discredit it. This characteristic of his is a great pity since he is in a position to influence many newbies. He is interested in that, to be sure, but with the closed mind of an autocrat.
> 
> Regards from Perth
> 
> Derek



Well said ! Completely agree. Also applies to certain contributors in this thread and on this site. They need to be censored especially the ones that over post.... incredibly arrogant, boring and most of the time just plain wrong, just like the old stick Sellars. Such a crime they are, and he is, influencing a whole generation.


----------



## Adam W. (24 Apr 2021)

Ttrees said:


> Have you noticed wear happening yourself Ivan?
> Can't say I've ever had that problem, and I hone the underside less perpendicular (with more undercut) than most folks I've seen, so should be a bit more fragile, but never experienced this that wasn't from some cement.
> I do metalwork and get some metal embedded in the stock
> but notice no issue with the cap when 1/32" away from the edge, compared to the damage the iron will get.
> ...



I put the edge of my cap iron over a newly dressed Tormec stone and I also ground the back of the cutting iron flat. It's worth checking for flatness on the two irons before you begin, otherwise you'll never get them to match.

'Twas on my old wooden jack plane which cost a fiver, but I use daily and the base never gums up when I'm planing the resinous scots pine we have here. It's a great plane and warm on the hands when it's cold.


----------



## Jameshow (24 Apr 2021)

I hope I'm not thread jacking too much but a quick question record or Bailey no 5 1/2 seen a couple at a decent price. 

Cheers James


----------



## Adam W. (24 Apr 2021)

Record with rosewood handles and a nickel plated lever cap iron thingy. You know, the shiny bit with Record on it.


----------



## Jameshow (24 Apr 2021)

Thanks.


----------



## Adam W. (24 Apr 2021)

Just my opinion mind. You probably won't notice any difference when you come to use either


----------



## Jacob (24 Apr 2021)

Derek Cohen (Perth Oz) said:


> Yes. He is not interested in what others have to say. He preaches to his choir, and that is all that is important to him. This "test" simply demonstrates how little he understands about this area of plane tuning. He has done similar "tests" with bevel up planes, with inappropriate set up and inevitable failure ..... when something does not fit in with his own philosophy, he will find a way to discredit it. This characteristic of his is a great pity since he is in a position to influence many newbies. He is interested in that, to be sure, but with the closed mind of an autocrat.
> 
> Regards from Perth
> 
> Derek


A bit severe!
The questions Paul has to answer come from novices - obviously, or he wouldn't get asked them. So he gives simple practical answers. People go away and find that things work. For instance his 3 stone simple freehand sharpening is spot on and dead easy. Nobody needs much more than that. In fact less will do; one oil stone if you do it a little and often enough.
In the meantime they've escaped having to work their way through the maze of hysterical half baked opinion and sheer alchemical madness which surrounds the subject, as we see in this thread!
They can always stick their nose in later, but best advised not to bother in my opinion!





Keep sharpening simple - Paul Sellers' Blog







paulsellers.com




PS it wasn't Sellers who influenced me to move away from the sharpening hysteria - I rediscovered trad sharpening on my own by chance and never looked back! I've still got a couple of honing jigs in a drawer somewhere but can honestly say I haven't used them for many years. They are useless and they make sharpening more difficult.
PPS and 1/32 to 1/8inch is fine for cap iron clearance. 1/32" a bit fine for easy stuff. Less than 1/32 and you might as well go straight to a scraper, because that's what you effectively have.


----------



## Garden Shed Projects (24 Apr 2021)

Jameshow said:


> I hope I'm not thread jacking too much but a quick question record or Bailey no 5 1/2 seen a couple at a decent price.
> 
> Cheers James


Hi record Is a manufacturer like Stanley or Lie Nielsen. Bailey on the other hand isn’t a manufacturer but a design of plane made by most plane manufacturers.

If you are looking for a decent plane for reasonable money you can’t go far wrong with a Bailey plane by either Record or Stanley.


----------



## Adam W. (24 Apr 2021)

Except you can buy a plane with the name Bailey cast on it, which is probably what he means.


----------



## Ttrees (24 Apr 2021)

Jacob said:


> PPS and 1/32 to 1/8inch is fine for cap iron clearance. 1/32" a bit fine for easy stuff. Less than 1/32 and you might as well go straight to a scraper, because that's what you effectively have.


Not that I be planing pine often , but plenty of the stuff I see has knots.
That's a good excuse for me, to use it when needed.

It's knowledge that should be learned regardless if one uses it or not.
It's not difficult to do, the only skill is getting a nice tiny camber, and that's it.
If you don't need it, you can slide it away.

Have you ever tried dimensioning with a no.80?
I've done that a few times before I learned how to use the cap iron.
I used to write WFH on those examples that seemingly couldn't be planed... 
Now I actively seek out those denser examples instead of avoiding them.
A scraper for this is absolute torture, and I never will scrape again if I don't need to.
I was getting reactions to the tropical timbers I was working before this,
but now that my shavings are unbroken and I'm not slamming into reversing grain causing tearout, planing is easy, and no need to sweat it with the scraper plane to get down to the bottom of the pits.

A smoother with cap set at 1/64" or a breath less from the edge (honed @50), will leave any scraper for dust, no comparison..
Effort and time, cleaner workshop and a superior chatoyancy than the scraper gives. 
What's not to like?


Tom


----------



## Jameshow (24 Apr 2021)

Adam W. said:


> Except you can buy a plane with the name Bailey cast on it, which is probably what he means.


Yes too early in the morning! 

Cheers James


----------



## Jacob (24 Apr 2021)

Ttrees said:


> Not that I be planing pine often , but plenty of the stuff I see has knots.
> That's a good excuse for me, to use it when needed.
> 
> It's knowledge that should be learned regardless if one uses it or not.
> ...


Tiny camber comes of its own accord if you do normal freehand sharpening. No skill required at all!


> Have you ever tried dimensioning with a no.80?


No. A bit of finishing yes


> I've done that a few times before I learned how to use the cap iron.
> I used to write WFH on those examples that seemingly couldn't be planed...
> Now I actively seek out those denser examples instead of avoiding them.
> A scraper for this is absolute torture, and I never will scrape again if I don't need to.
> ...


OK but it's not for beginners, or earners - getting a perfect finish from a plane alone, in difficult material, is a challenging target for plane enthusiasts, and good luck to them! I've fiddled about doing the same thing and yes it can be done.
"Chatoyancy"  There's a new word for me, had to look it up! But this is enthusiasts' territory.
I might have a go at getting high chatoyancy and no tear out, with some knotty pine or pallet wood.
Come to think - getting a better finish from an 80 scraper might be worth investigating too, they are so easy to use


----------



## ivan (24 Apr 2021)

I agree with Trees. We have a veritas "No 80" which is a bit bigger than the real thing, and also the larger (112 is it?) scraper plane. Very handy, but the 51/2 which can be tuned up, is _far_ better for dimensioning something like curly maple.
I have not _noticed_ the wear on the cap iron when it's set very close. However the Dutch? guy's paper suggests it's there and can be seen along with the blade wear, which is mostly on the bevel side, opposite the cap iron. I made my flat cap iron by grinding off the little ridge of a LN chipbreaker. I don't know what these are made of, but seem harder than the usual mild steel. They are ground flat (except for the little ridge at the sharp end). Being blade like, it's really easy to camber the cap iron to match the blade, the tiny +15 deg hook setting the final angle and keeping out trapped shavings. I do sharpen both when performance falls off. Click on the link and have a read. 



Mechanics of Chipbreakers



This sort of tuning caper is not necessary unless the stuff you are working is proving tricky with the cap iron set away from the edge. Anything over about 0.3mm will make little difference to the planing results. Grandad told me to get it as close as you can whilst still cutting if you're still getting tearout. This was about 1950, and he was well over 70, a life long 3rd generation joiner and cabinet maker. Alas I am still an amateur, but I do like to understand what's going on at the sharp edge, as it were.

If you grind on a wheel so the result is hollow due to the wheel curvature, you might try copying Jacob and sharpen by hand. Only front and back of the bevel will touch the stone which makes getting and keeping the angle easier. However I lack the degree of practice needed to do this on autopilot, so for me a guide is quicker and gives repeatable results.


----------



## Jacob (24 Apr 2021)

ivan said:


> ........
> 
> If you grind on a wheel so the result is hollow due to the wheel curvature, you might try copying Jacob and sharpen by hand. Only front and back of the bevel will touch the stone which makes getting and keeping the angle easier. ....


You just hold it at 30º for honing and a bit less for grinding. Or easier; move between them for a convex bevel.
Takes about 10 minutes to get good at it
Might need a bit of practice visualising 30º - it's a third of a right-angle, or half the corner of an equilateral triangle. Practice by drawing it with paper and pencil and measure with a protractor.


----------



## Adam W. (24 Apr 2021)

Jacob said:


> snip/
> Might need a bit of practice visualising 30º - it's a third of a right-angle, or half the corner of an equilateral triangle. Practice by drawing it with paper and pencil and measure with a protractor.
> /snip


 

That's mansplaining at its finest.


----------



## Jacob (24 Apr 2021)

Adam W. said:


> That's mansplaining at its finest.


Really? Which bit didn't you get? Would a drawing help?
PS not intending to sound sarcastic honestly! But is this why people think they need honing guides?


----------



## scooby (24 Apr 2021)

oh, here we go..


----------



## Ttrees (24 Apr 2021)

As said I've tried a multitude of differing ways to get the camber the way I like it.
David's suggestion of "directed pressure" i.e putting your fingers where you want metal removed, rather than leaning, works for me the best yet.

I've seen some pine you were recently planing Jacob.
From the shavings, it does appear that you weren't using a mad camber or had aggressively honed the corners away of the cutting iron,
so you can at least see what a fine camber looks like.

You are always willing to talk about sharpening,
so I find it strange that you would not have noticed it being in anyway tricky to do, not the sharpening part, but the geometry needed to get the cap even when set.

Terrible photos I know, but an example of what my jack plane is set to
when working on slightly tougher stock, never more than 
that 1/32" away from the edge with my timber and cap iron @50.
It's not often I have to hone that iron with such a slight camber, 
and possibly easier to achieve compared to having a bit more camber, because it needs to be even if it's to work nice for me.
Sorry I have no other photos of cap irons to show.










I'm not saying your talking gibberish, as I've seen others appear to get nice cambers with nearly all methods.
I just wonder what I would think of the geometry if it were me in person, wanting to plane something that wasn't a narrow edge.

Tom


----------



## Adam W. (24 Apr 2021)

Jacob said:


> snip/
> Really? Which bit didn't you get? Would a drawing help?
> /snip



I was having trouble visualising 30º as 1/3 of 90º. I always thought it was 2/3 of 45º


----------



## Jacob (24 Apr 2021)

Ttrees said:


> As said I've tried a multitude of differing ways to get the camber the way I like it.
> David's suggestion of "directed pressure" i.e putting your fingers where you want metal removed, rather than leaning, works for me the best yet.


Well yes - you put more pressure where you want more metal removed (or more wood, cake, ice-cream, whatever  call it "directed pressure" if it helps!)


> I've seen some pine you were recently planing Jacob.
> From the shavings, it does appear that you weren't using a mad camber or had aggressively honed the corners away of the cutting iron,
> so you can at least see what a fine camber looks like.


Not sure what you are saying here. Yes I know what a fine camber looks like. I know what a coarse camber looks like. I never round corners of blade off


> You are always willing to talk about sharpening,
> so I find it strange that you would not have noticed it being in anyway tricky to do, not the sharpening part, but the geometry needed to get the cap even when set.


Oddly enough I was thinking about it only the other day. I tend to pick up the nearest plane when I'm fiddling about doing little jobs. This time it was a 5 1/2 which I hadn't used for a bit and it wouldn't cut on some quite soft pine. Flipped out the blade - saw it was very finely set (I'd forgotten been experimenting along those lines), slid the cap iron back to about 1/16" and it cut perfectly.
Couldn't quite follow what the rest of your post was saying, what was the problem exactly?
PS had another look - are you saying that a fine camber and a fine cap iron set are incompatible? This would be true of course, unless you file the cap iron to match. That way madness lies! For a very fine set and camber I'd expect only to be using the middle part of the blade, which would solve the problem of vanishing camber at the edges.


----------



## Jacob (24 Apr 2021)

Adam W. said:


> I was having trouble visualising 30º as 1/3 of 90º. I always thought it was 2/3 of 45º


That'll do nicely. Near enough for me. Well done!


----------



## Adam W. (24 Apr 2021)

Jacob said:


> That'll do nicely. Near enough for me. Well done!


You're welcome, I'm glad I've cleared it up for you.


----------



## thetyreman (24 Apr 2021)

I honestly think a hock cap iron is one of the best investments you can make for your old planes, I've tried both and know which one I prefer, I like the thin vintage blades with modern thick hock cap irons, you can get the cap iron right up close to the edge, and it removes all chatter, and also makes it easier to plane exotics and figured woods.


----------



## Ttrees (24 Apr 2021)

I meant the even profile of a graduated camber Jacob.
If one can achieve that camber consistently, something quite like which I've shown in the time you say it takes, whatever that is, but it sounds a heck of a lot faster than me.
I definitely regard that as a serious achievement!
I often go back to the hone after pairing with the cap as it's not a good enough profile to plane the timber I work with.

p.s "directed pressure" is often utilized for scrapers, which I presume
you might have seen in articles before.
Spreading the fingers on as much surface area, some even using two hands to cover the entire area to be sharpened.

I haven't heard of the suggestion to try the same principal so clearly even after watching Cosman, for instance.
Maybe I'm just a bit thick, but was coming away with the suggestion this was for stability rather than your finger placement playing a part.

Tom


----------



## Ttrees (24 Apr 2021)

Jacob said:


> Well yes - you put more pressure where you want more metal removed (or more wood, cake, ice-cream, whatever  call it "directed pressure" if it helps!)



Hope I've cleared that up with my last comment, saying what I've found useful,
If anyone's got a more fitting name derived from scrapers or some other tool, in which this method is employed, then I'm all ears?...

It makes quite different results for me to do it this way, rather than the way you're suggesting.
(Not in any way whatsoever suggesting your methods don't work for you)

Tom


----------



## ivan (24 Apr 2021)

I'm hopeless at hand sharpening, although I can guess 25deg pretty well if I have to grind a primary bevel. But any sharpening would get a bit convex and long winded, 'cos I'd never know if I was sharpening at the base or the pointy tip of the bevel. I think it would take me a lot more than 10 mins so I could do this sucessfully on autopilot. (I have tried)
Using a guide, a handfull of strokes at the sharpening angle on 600grit diamond turns up a burr, half a dozen more on 6000 grit waterstone polishes an edge, and a similar number of back and forths removes the burr and cleans up the flat side. If the 600 grit stage takes too long, it's time to grind some more away at the lower grinding angle.

Making a camber is fairly straightforward using the guide, with pressure applied by thumb (blade towards you) only at the 1,2,3,4,5 positions across the width of the blade. Same number of strokes at 1 & 5, half the number at 2 & 4, none at 3 if blade already sharp. Use one finger if you prefer to have the blade on the far side of the guide.

Have a look here: Camber With a Honing Guide | Popular Woodworking Magazine


----------



## Jacob (24 Apr 2021)

Ttrees said:


> ....p.s "directed pressure" is often utilized for scrapers, which I presume
> you might have seen in articles before.
> ...


I don't read the mags. I don't think I've bought one in 30 years or more. I guess that's why I've never heard of "chatoyancy" or "directed pressure"  .
I read a lot of books though.


ivan said:


> I'm hopeless at hand sharpening, although I can guess 25deg pretty well if I have to grind a primary bevel. But any sharpening would get a bit convex and long winded, 'cos I'd never know if I was sharpening at the base or the pointy tip of the bevel.


You turn them over at intervals and look at the other side, to see how you are getting on


> Have a look here: Camber With a Honing Guide | Popular Woodworking Magazine


Thanks but I think I'll pass on that one!


----------



## Ttrees (24 Apr 2021)

Aye, I could use the cheap guide I have, it might work better now since I've picked up a grinder since, and made the decision on what works for me with water, it would likely be a lot quicker than it was before TBH.

For those who decide to go freehand, which I choose personally as the grinder is often obstructed by some large K9's and/or the lawnmower 
I can get away with tipping up another degree until the grinder is free until then.
The method is worth trying, if all else fails.

Tom


----------



## Jacob (24 Apr 2021)

Ttrees said:


> Aye, I could use the cheap guide I have, it might work better now since I've picked up a grinder since, and made the decision on what works for me with water, it would likely be a lot quicker than it was before TBH.
> 
> For those who decide to go freehand, which I choose personally as the grinder is often obstructed by some large K9's and/or the lawnmower
> I can get away with tipping up another degree until the grinder is free until then.
> ...


If you have a normal double sided oil stone you just grind on the coarse side.


----------



## Ttrees (24 Apr 2021)

Could do, but with water everything seems to glaze.
I think I might just stick to the 3 quid diamond hones which bonded nicely to some granite bits for doing most of the work.

It's partly an individual thing that I choose water, but disregarding that
and using oil, using the technique is likely a messy affair.
Saying that it's the best way I've came across to make the camber even
if your off center a bit.

Not an issue for a plane which the cap is set away, as there is some room for error with it further away, but when it's snugged up small things get very noticeable, (for the timbers I work).

All the best
Tom


----------



## Fergie 307 (24 Apr 2021)

I have always found that whatever you are honing, spreading your fingers out across the whole width of the piece gives a much better feel. You can then quite easily control the angle of the blade, and create whatever profile you want. It does take practice to achieve a consistent angle admittedly. I don't do this very often and find it's definitely one of those skills that goes stale through lack of practice. I have some old irons and chisels that I use as gasket scrapers . If I have to sharpen one I tend to use one of these first to have a quick practice and get my eye in again before doing the real thing. If you find that is made easier for you by using a guide, then use one.


----------



## Jacob (25 Apr 2021)

Fergie 307 said:


> I have always found that whatever you are honing, spreading your fingers out across the whole width of the piece gives a much better feel. You can then quite easily control the angle of the blade, and create whatever profile you want. It does take practice to achieve a consistent angle admittedly.


They way to get it right is to keep looking at the workpiece, not your fingers. Turn it over and see how it is going. If in doubt colour it in with a felt tip so you can see where you've been


> If you find that is made easier for you by using a guide, then use one.


Or bin it and try just a little harder to do it properly. It never was a problem until the modern sharpening craze kicked off - mid 80s as far as I can see


----------



## Derek Cohen (Perth Oz) (25 Apr 2021)

Jacob said:


> A bit severe!
> The questions Paul has to answer come from novices - obviously, or he wouldn't get asked them. So he gives simple practical answers. People go away and find that things work. For instance his 3 stone simple freehand sharpening is spot on and dead easy. Nobody needs much more than that. In fact less will do; one oil stone if you do it a little and often enough.
> In the meantime they've escaped having to work their way through the maze of hysterical half baked opinion and sheer alchemical madness which surrounds the subject, as we see in this thread!
> They can always stick their nose in later, but best advised not to bother in my opinion!
> ...



Jacob, I am happy to watch Sellers. He is a good teacher for what he has to teach - however the limitation here is that it only includes his way, and by actively excluding or, worse, disproving other methods, he misinforms his students. He has a closed mind.

Examples? There is the current video on the chipbreaker. He has no clue what to do in setting it up because he rejected it since it is different to his own method (he would not question that he may be doing something wrong since others are successful at this and he is not). He is happy taking the thinnest shavings in straight-grained softwoods.

I once "discussed" with him his criticism of a LA Jack, which he claimed tears out in Pine. I asked him what angle was the bevel. He was adamant that he set it up at 50 degrees. Well, we all know that would it would be impossible for a plane to tearout out with a 62 degree cutting angle in such wood. He rigged the demonstration.

He likes playing to his choir and will create situations which are a solution without a problem. An example (again one I wrote to him about was his difficulty in clamping down the blade on a Veritas router plane. He came up with some contraption to tighten the screw .... when all he needed to do was oil the mechanism. I showed him this, and he deleted my correspondence completely from the on-line discussion.

Regards from Perth

Derek


----------



## Adam W. (25 Apr 2021)

It's the refusing to listen to anybody else's experiences or blatantly refusing to read or dismissing articles which others link to which gets me.

It's the sure sign of an insecure narcissist.


----------



## Jacob (25 Apr 2021)

Derek Cohen (Perth Oz) said:


> .....
> 
> He likes playing to his choir and will create situations which are a solution without a problem........


Well nobody is perfect!
His job is to keep it simple so that people can do stuff. They have minds of their own and can go on to "higher levels" if they wish.
Conversely the sharpening craze is managed by people who _want_ to keep things difficult for at least two reasons; 1 to produce "solutions" to these fantasy problems and to be accredited as gurus, 2 to sell gadgets as solutions to these fantasy problems, chief amongst these being the sharpening jig - which, amazingly, does exactly the opposite of what it is supposed to and makes sharpening more difficult.
Instead of binning them people take this as confirmation that sharpening really is difficult and it gives impetus to the whole craze.
Sellers has his failings - he can ramble on boringly, his design work is not too hot and I bet he's never heard of "chatoyancy "or "directed pressure" 
His greatest strength is that he doesn't seem to be selling anything except himself and his teaching of methods which are basically very practical, accessible and fairly traditional.


----------



## Sgian Dubh (25 Apr 2021)

Jacob said:


> I don't read the mags. I don't think I've bought one in 30 years or more. I guess that's why I've never heard of "chatoyancy" or "directed pressure"  .
> I read a lot of books though.


Ha, ha. You must have missed, or forgotten, discussion of chatoyance in Cut & Dried at section 7.9.

As to planes and the correct setting and preparation of their cap iron, aka chip breaker, if they have one, I prefer to remain an inactive observer in this thread. For that matter, I like to be no more than an observer of all plane sharpening, setting, and their use threads. Slainte.


----------



## Jacob (25 Apr 2021)

Adam W. said:


> It's the refusing to listen to anybody else's experiences or blatantly refusing to read or dismissing articles which others link to which gets me.
> 
> It's the sure sign of an insecure narcissist.


Or heard/read it all before!


----------



## Fergie 307 (25 Apr 2021)

Jacob said:


> They way to get it right is to keep looking at the workpiece, not your fingers. Turn it over and see how it is going. If in doubt colour it in with a felt tip so you can see where you've beenOr bin it and try just a little harder to do it properly. It never was a problem until the modern sharpening craze kicked off - mid 80s as far as I can see


I wasn't suggesting looking at your fingers, simply that spreading several fingers across the width gives a better feel for what is going on. Of course you need to check progress on the actual face, that goes without saying. As to using a guide, I have no idea why you get so worked up about it. Just because you don't like it doesn't make it wrong, if someone finds it helpful then frankly so what.


----------



## Jacob (25 Apr 2021)

Fergie 307 said:


> .... As to using a guide, I have no idea why you get so worked up about it. ....


Interested , not worked up about it. It keeps coming up in threads though and there's something weirdly ritualistic about the modern sharpening cult, the gurus and their occult procedures!
e.g. just a detail - it seems odd to me that so many have been persuaded to use water as a sharpening medium, in spite of its well known association with rust, not to mention the messiness they all complain about. Smacks of self punishment. At least it's not actually acidic. You can of course buy an anti rust additive  - which means having to persuade people that oil is really bad for everything!
Not to mention another faction who have been persuaded to buy honing fluids more expensive than good whiskey, or camellia oil more suited to coiffure!
Keeps me entertained anyway.


----------



## John Brown (25 Apr 2021)

I can't understand why D_W isn't posting in this thread. Maybe he thinks it's a trap...


----------



## Cabinetman (25 Apr 2021)

John Brown said:


> I can't understand why D_W isn't posting in this thread. Maybe he thinks it's a trap...


 Maybe he’s like me, life is too short and I think you must all be lacking something worthwhile to do, plane gets blunt, 1/2 a minute up and down an oilstone, back to work again. No great mystery and I can’t imagine what you’ve been talking about for four pages.


----------



## Ttrees (25 Apr 2021)

There was talk of the leading angle and also iron profiles which is a joined subject regarding use of the cap iron.
Worth reading if you haven't used the cap iron to its full potential yet, after reading Davids "Setting a Cap iron" article on a woodcentral website.

That was 2012, and David has put a lot of effort into making this old knowledge widely published.
Yet people think its only about as well performing as a scraper!
Either that, or it's only a method of tearout reduction, rather than total
elimination of any hint of tearout.
Chatoyancy might not be important for a lot of folks, but it suggests that one gets a dang good surface from a plane.

Could talk about more stuff yet, like being able to comb the fibres
(Someone else might have a good word for it) and that might sound odd to some who've not used a smoother to that extent, but they might have noticed it with a scraper before.

Another possible humorous part in all this is the quick sharpening and there's nothing to it suggestion,
Which is fine if your using a heavy jack plane, on easy stock,
but for a smoother or jack with less camber, working on tough stuff, geometry is my preference over sharpness.
An iron needing sharpening, which has the profile correct will outperform (as in leave a better surface) than a freshly sharp iron that's too much camber)

Tom


----------



## hennebury (25 Apr 2021)

A blade and a chipbreaker in harmony. Mechanics not opinion.


----------



## Droogs (25 Apr 2021)

@hennebury , you sir are the new Hugh Heffner. just think of the veneers you could make if you had one of these beauties


----------



## hennebury (25 Apr 2021)

All samples done on a supersurfacer.


----------



## hennebury (25 Apr 2021)

A chipbreaker and a blade. The shape and position of the chipbreaker is not just important but critical! ( you may notice that there is no setting for 1/32" -1/8")


----------



## hennebury (25 Apr 2021)




----------



## Adam W. (25 Apr 2021)

Cabinetman said:


> Maybe he’s like me, life is too short and I think you must all be lacking something worthwhile to do, plane gets blunt, 1/2 a minute up and down an oilstone, back to work again. No great mystery and I can’t imagine what you’ve been talking about for four pages.



That's about right.


----------



## Jacob (25 Apr 2021)

Ttrees said:


> ....
> 
> Another possible humorous part in all this is the quick sharpening and there's nothing to it suggestion,
> Which is fine if your using a heavy jack plane, on easy stock,
> .....


Completely wrong! It's even more essential on difficult stock - you need to refresh the edge far more frequently. Quick/easy sharpening means sharper edges more of the time.


----------



## Adam W. (25 Apr 2021)

hennebury said:


> All samples done on a supersurfacer.
> 
> 
> View attachment 109034
> ...


That's mad. How much is that thing ?


----------



## hennebury (25 Apr 2021)

I taught woodworking classes in my shop in the evenings 40 years ago. 
The first two course that i taught were on wood structure, moisture content and wood movement, and tuning up handplanes. My thoughts are that you need to understand the tools and materials from the getgo. 

If you want to see an enthusiastic beginner, see someone that has spent a long grueling 24 hour course (3 hours a night, once a week for 8weeks) filing, lapping and sharpening their handplane, finally taking paper-thin shavings, and running around the shop showing everyone, then carefully wrapping up their delicate treasures to take home and show their partners and friends. They left having an intimate understanding of the nature of wood, the tools and how they relate to each other. 
I only had students for a short time, i could have shown them how to make a project or two, or how to understand the tools and materials so that they could apply that knowledge to all projects that they would undertake in the future.

Wood is fairly simple material and tools are simple, people make it complicated. 

A hand plane will work with no chipbreaker, or one set back 1/8", in some circumstances, soft wood, perfect grain direction etc. but a handplane properly tuned up with close-set chipbreaker will work through the tough stuff with ease leaving a beautiful surface without any tearout, whereas a plane with the chipbreaker that is the wrong shape and set to far back will simply tear the wood. 
Learning the basics at the beginning is worth the effort, and it is information that you will carry with you your entire life and you will apply it to every project that you work on. Cutting tools and how they relate to wood are not a matter of opinion they are a matter of fact, a matter of mechanics.


----------



## hennebury (25 Apr 2021)

Adam W. said:


> That's mad. How much is that thing ?


New supersurfacers start at around $25,000 That would be the Marunaka one in the video. they make larger ones that will cut up to 24" wide and special custom machines up to 40" wide for slicing plastic. ( if you have a spare $500,000 ) Many companies make supersurfacers, Makita, Hitachi, Ryobi, Marunaka, Heian Takakawa, Shinx etc. You can get smaller machines from Makita, Hitachi, Ryobi. You can get Marunaka machines with standard knives or disposable knives. You need a Marunaka grinder for the standard knives. they have two grinding heads, a "rough" and a finish hone. Slick machines.


----------



## Droogs (25 Apr 2021)

Adam W. said:


> That's mad. How much is that thing ?


About fifty pence cheaper than a leigh nielsen #8 

i saw this morning a 2nd hand for sale at 8K USD when I did a little bit of searching but it was in the far east


----------



## Ttrees (25 Apr 2021)

Jacob said:


> Completely wrong! It's even more essential on difficult stock - you need to refresh the edge far more frequently. Quick/easy sharpening means sharper edges more of the time.


Try it with a near blunt iron for yourself on the toughest stuff you have, or stuff with knots and compare it to a freshly sharpened one,
Or even with an iron needing a lick, compare that one to the sharpened one, and do another round and see how you get along afterwards.

Without tearout its easier on a dull edge vs a rapidly decreasing sharp edge which is tearing out chunks.


----------



## John Brown (25 Apr 2021)

Cabinetman said:


> Maybe he’s like me, life is too short and I think you must all be lacking something worthwhile to do, plane gets blunt, 1/2 a minute up and down an oilstone, back to work again. No great mystery and I can’t imagine what you’ve been talking about for four pages.


Not me, guvnor. I haven't participated in this thread at all up to now. But it is one of D_W's pet subjects, I believe, and he obviously doesn't have better things to do, as is demonstrated by his numerous essays on just about everything.


----------



## Hornbeam (25 Apr 2021)

A chip breaker is not essential, look at all the old wooden mounding planes that work fairly well. That being said there are 3 things that make a plane work well assuming all the issues with sole flattening etc are good

a sharp blade. If teh blade is sharp and you are planing with the blade it will work
the mouth opening. This limits the size of shaving so when planing against the grain/wild grain the plane cant physically dig in as far
the chip breaker. The tighter the chip breaker the shorter the shaving before it has to deflect
So if you want to take large shavings in soft wood with the grain. A sharp blade wide moth and chip breaker set back is fine. Try that on wild grain and you will end up with a mess


----------



## D_W (25 Apr 2021)

Nobody who does much planing would pay attention to what Paul sellers says about planing.

But some of his bad advice does create a practical problem- throngs of people who think he's a high end maker run around ignoring advice or historical literature written by trained high end makers.


----------



## Adam W. (25 Apr 2021)

It's not worth ignoring the past.


----------



## D_W (25 Apr 2021)

Hornbeam said:


> A chip breaker is not essential, look at all the old wooden mounding planes that work fairly well. That being said there are 3 things that make a plane work well assuming all the issues with sole flattening etc are good
> 
> a sharp blade. If teh blade is sharp and you are planing with the blade it will work
> the mouth opening. This limits the size of shaving so when planing against the grain/wild grain the plane cant physically dig in as far
> ...



Moulding planes do the finish work after most of the profile volume is done by other planes or saws, and on wood that's selected to be ideal. I suspect the reason they don't have a cap iron is because each is used too little to justify the cost of a cap iron, and because we can work around any issues by setting aside the most ideal wood for mouldings. 

You can do dimensioning work without cap irons, but in anything other than perfect wood, it takes twice as long and getting a clear even surface is a lot harder.

I tried to do dimensioning with single iron planes first because Larry Williams said they were better but even fas cherry is too much for them. It was agonizing and I resolved to figure out the cap iron or just quit making anything other than menial stuff for the house (closet shelves, etc.).


----------



## D_W (25 Apr 2021)

Admittedly, even out of fas lumber, I have trouble getting ideal cherry sticking to cut mouldings with a nice set of Griffiths 55 degree h&r's


----------



## D_W (25 Apr 2021)

My comment about Paul isn't a slight. Mastering planing isn't his business. His business is getting beginners started and drawing people to pay for classes and buy videos and subscriptions. He's good at that. A true master class in each area of woodworking would drive most students away.


----------



## Adam W. (25 Apr 2021)

D_W said:


> Moulding planes do the finish work after most of the profile volume is done by other planes or saws, and on wood that's selected to be ideal. I suspect the reason they don't have a cap iron is because each is used too little to justify the cost of a cap iron, and because we can work around any issues by setting aside the most ideal wood for mouldings.
> 
> You can do dimensioning work without cap irons, but in anything other than perfect wood, it takes twice as long and getting a clear even surface is a lot harder.
> 
> I tried to do dimensioning with single iron planes first because Larry Williams said they were better but even fas cherry is too much for them. It was agonizing and I resolved to figure out the cap iron or just quit making anything other than menial stuff for the house (closet shelves, etc.).


Moulders don't have a cap iron because firstly, there isn't enough room and secondly, they don't need them anyway as the position and shape of the wedge pinning down the iron and directing the shaving into the side escapement negates the need.


----------



## D_W (25 Apr 2021)

They actually work better with a cap. There are two iron Japanese profile planes the size of our molders, and the second iron is fitted precisely to the blade even though the primary iron is plenty thick to work by itself. Making a double iron moulder in the late 1700s would've involved a loose second iron and a lot of extra cost when the planes only finish after much of the waste is already removed by other planes or means. 

I have no idea what the Japanese use those profile planes for.


----------



## Adam W. (25 Apr 2021)

My English ones work fine and dandy as they are. I can't honestly see how a cap could make them any better.

I can create a complex sprung cornice in walnut just fine and all it needs is a little burnish at the end of the day.

Photo of offcut.


----------



## Fergie 307 (25 Apr 2021)

Jacob said:


> Interested , not worked up about it. It keeps coming up in threads though and there's something weirdly ritualistic about the modern sharpening cult, the gurus and their occult procedures!
> e.g. just a detail - it seems odd to me that so many have been persuaded to use water as a sharpening medium, in spite of its well known association with rust, not to mention the messiness they all complain about. Smacks of self punishment. At least it's not actually acidic. You can of course buy an anti rust additive  - which means having to persuade people that oil is really bad for everything!
> Not to mention another faction who have been persuaded to buy honing fluids more expensive than good whiskey, or camellia oil more suited to coiffure!
> Keeps me entertained anyway.


like you I can't understand the idea of using water. The clue is in the name, oilstone.


----------



## paulrbarnard (26 Apr 2021)

Fergie 307 said:


> like you I can't understand the idea of using water. The clue is in the name, oilstone.


I took a clue from my stones too. They are water-stones.


----------



## Phil Pascoe (26 Apr 2021)

Fergie 307 said:


> like you I can't understand the idea of using water. The clue is in the name, oilstone.


I've used water stones for nearly forty years. I find them much less messy than oil, and haven't see a single speck of rust in that time. I'd rather get water on my wood than oil.


----------



## Jacob (26 Apr 2021)

Sgian Dubh said:


> Ha, ha. You must have missed, or forgotten, discussion of chatoyance in Cut & Dried at section 7.9.


Well it did ring a bell!


> As to planes and the correct setting and preparation of their cap iron, aka chip breaker, if they have one, I prefer to remain an inactive observer in this thread. For that matter, I like to be no more than an observer of all plane sharpening, setting, and their use threads. Slainte.


Very wise!


----------



## ivan (26 Apr 2021)

Moulding planes usually have a steeper bedding angle than a bench plane, and the timber for moulding is usually selected for straight grain. No cap iron, means steeper bedding angle, for the same result quality wise.
There's no perfect universal setup, but understanding what's going on at the sharp edge, will point you in the right direction for a solution, _should you need one_.
The method of sharpening you choose is not important, but the bevel angle of the blade and cap iron is, as is also the cap iron position for difficult timbers.
Now on the wrong side of 75, I prefer bevel up and maybe cap iron fiddling on my smoother, as (for the same result as bevel down) it is easier to push forward and requires less downforce - oh! and what 's more I don't get tempted to buy a new plane.


----------



## Jorny (27 Apr 2021)

Paul Sellers has produced a lot of good videos and generally seems to make genuine and good recommendations. The problem is however that he has a way of dismissing everything that is done differently like he does. For instance he writes that: "_In the overall scheme of things I might reason that in over 97% of cases, woodworkers cut the tails first and make the pins follow. So in this case, the tails predetermine that pins follow the tail in like fashion that form always follows function in the real world of non-fantasy craftwork."_
This is obviously nonsense, for instance the 1934 classic "Hantverktets bok - Snickeri" a big beautiful reference book used by students at vocational schools studying to become cabinet makers states that dovetails are cut pins first. And the people writing that book were a lot more skilled furniture makers than Sellers.

Another thing is his convoluted and complicated way of making spoons which require a lot of tools to produce clumsy, impractical and rather ugly spoons.


----------



## Daniel2 (27 Apr 2021)

My way or the highway


----------



## Jacob (27 Apr 2021)

Jorny said:


> Paul Sellers has produced a lot of good videos and generally seems to make genuine and good recommendations. The problem is however that he has a way of dismissing everything that is done differently like he does. For instance he writes that: "_In the overall scheme of things I might reason that in over 97% of cases, woodworkers cut the tails first and make the pins follow. So in this case, the tails predetermine that pins follow the tail in like fashion that form always follows function in the real world of non-fantasy craftwork."_
> This is obviously nonsense, for instance the 1934 classic "Hantverktets bok - Snickeri" a big beautiful reference book used by students at vocational schools studying to become cabinet makers states that dovetails are cut pins first. And the people writing that book were a lot more skilled furniture makers than Sellers.
> 
> Another thing is his convoluted and complicated way of making spoons which require a lot of tools to produce clumsy, impractical and rather ugly spoons.


I've looked at lots of DTs in old work and can say that every DT in every drawer I've ever seen has been cut tails first and in pair together. It's immediately obvious when you dismantle them and put them together -. the DTs on opposite sides match exactly and must have been cut together. You can usually tell without dismantling, just by looking at the outside of a drawer.
It follows that they must have been cut first - if cut second they would have had to be matched to the pins already cut and would not be identical.
Also cutting the side DTs as a pair speeds the process.
What "Hantverktets bok - Snickeri" says is just another opinion. People get things wrong, proof readers miss things, then people follow them obediently and it becomes the norm.
Trade practice is often very different from notionally "correct" ways of doing things as found in books. In magazines it gets worse and they are 50% misinformation (amongst 75% advertising for things nobody needs!)


> Another thing is his convoluted and complicated way of making spoons which require a lot of tools to produce clumsy, impractical and rather ugly spoons.


Oh well nobody is perfect! 
I haven't looked at his spoons so can't comment, except that in general he isn't too hot on design in my opinion.


----------



## Adam W. (27 Apr 2021)

Checks Danish made draws....clearly pins first, as the tails don't match.


----------



## Adam W. (27 Apr 2021)

Jacob said:


> Snip/
> What "Hantverktets bok - Snickeri" says is just another opinion. People get things wrong, proof readers miss things, then people follow them obediently and it becomes the norm.
> Trade practice is often very different from notionally "correct" ways of doing things as found in books. In magazines it gets worse and they are 50% misinformation (amongst 75% advertising for things nobody needs!)Oh well nobody is perfect!
> 
> /snip



Have you not even considered for one moment that joiners in other countries or regions of the world might do things differently to the English ?


----------



## Jorny (27 Apr 2021)

Jacob said:


> What "Hantverktets bok - Snickeri" says is just another opinion. People get things wrong, proof readers miss things, then people follow them obediently and it becomes the norm.
> Trade practice is often very different from notionally "correct" ways of doing things as found in books. In magazines it gets worse and they are 50% misinformation (amongst 75% advertising for things nobody needs!)


In Sweden the tradition among cabinet makers was to cut pins first. The book I am refering to was written from the point of view of trade practice.



Adam W. said:


> Have you not even considered for one moment that joiners in other countries or regions of the world might do things differently to the English ?


Like Sellers, probably not.


----------



## Jacob (27 Apr 2021)

Adam W. said:


> Have you not even considered for one moment that joiners in other countries or regions of the world might do things differently to the English ?


Of course they may do.
Nothing wrong with Sellers recommendations here though.


> Like Sellers, probably not.


Should Sellers have embarked on a worldwide survey of DT practice and added appropriate footnotes?



> The book I am refering to was written from the point of view of trade practice.


I'd check it out -I'd be interested to see a few trad Swedish made drawers, but they don't come my way that often!
I wouldn't be surprised if they often did it the same way as the Brits - it's slightly quicker and easier, but some would follow an instruction book instead - no harm done!
It's not that uncommon - for instance nearly all the books recommend 1/6 or 1/8 for DT angles but nobody told the trad joiners who more often than not do it randomly and quite differently


----------



## Jacob (27 Apr 2021)

Adam W. said:


> Checks Danish made draws....clearly pins first, as the tails don't match.


Interesting. So the brits do it slightly more efficiently! I'd check a few more example before coming to a conclusion though.
In any case Sellers was talking about UK practice and was quite correct. The clincher being that it is slightly quicker.


----------



## Adam W. (27 Apr 2021)

It was your comment about typos that I was referring to Jacob.


----------



## EddyCurrent (27 Apr 2021)

The title of this thread is very misleading because Paul Sellers did not say cap iron position does not matter.
He said, "a 1/32 of an inch to an 1/8 of an inch, anywhere in between it'll work fine"


----------



## D_W (27 Apr 2021)

EddyCurrent said:


> The title of this thread is very misleading because Paul Sellers did not say cap iron position does not matter.
> He said, "a 1/32 of an inch to an 1/8 of an inch, anywhere in between it'll work fine"



That's not much better for advice, but I understand he trained as a joiner and not as a cabinetmaker. His demonstrations of dimensioning make my brain ache. I can think of a very small group of folks who would be able to demonstrate working entirely by hand. One of the legit guys is at Colonial Williamsburg, working by hand, neatly and quickly, but he's forced to use single iron planes because that's the rule there - the curators determined that they didn't think double irons were common enough for them to be in regular use there. George Wilson could always work entirely by hand (you can see him doing it - also at williamsburg, making a harpsichord - including the large bits - entirely by hand. All the way down to the action inside the harpsichord), but he, too, was dictated to work only with single iron planes. 

That leaves not a great chance for people to observe someone working efficiently by hand and understanding what the cap iron is for and how much it can speed up hand work without spoiling it, and without having quite the need for ideal lumber. I have seen a couple of french makers working soft wood with mid planes (but the videos are 40-50 years old now), and the shaving comes out of the plane showing a good cap iron set. 

Problem two with demonstrating how it works in context and using it is that people going to Paul's classes aren't really going to care if he's that good at each aspect or not - they want to believe he is, and that's enough. 

At one point in a forum on the US, someone said to George that his advice conflicted with Paul's. George doesn't lack confidence, but I don't think he had any idea who Paul Sellers was. Some of George's work has been given to your queen and Margaret Thatcher as gifts, so when someone said that Paul's shop made a piece for George Bush (which is more a matter of proximity - the piece was just OK, and it appears that it was made by a group and not just paul), it didn't really rattle George. 

George is flatly honest about everything, too - when I asked him why he never mentioned anything to me about using a cap iron, he said "I didn't have much of a chance. We weren't allowed to, and I wore my body out when I was young, so I take advantage of power tools when I'm working on the side as much as I can". He's retired now. 

The odds are in your favor as a hand tool worker more if you teach yourself with an eye toward making certain things that seem difficult pedestrian and push to do it. You'll end up sharpening quickly and really well (I don't know any hand tool only workers who don't sharpen to a fine edge across the board), you'll end up sharpening your rip saws quite a bit (and not jointing them all the time to sharpen) and you'll end up using lighter planes and using the cap iron. It'll just happen - it's noticeably easier, and you won't be able to avoid it if you use planes for a couple of hours at a time on a regular basis.


----------



## paulrbarnard (27 Apr 2021)

EddyCurrent said:


> The title of this thread is very misleading because Paul Sellers did not say cap iron position does not matter.
> He said, "a 1/32 of an inch to an 1/8 of an inch, anywhere in between it'll work fine"


So it doesn’t matter if it is any value at all between 1/32 and an 1/8th. As apposed to many that say much less than 1/32 or much more than ⅛...


----------



## Jacob (27 Apr 2021)

paulrbarnard said:


> So it doesn’t matter if it is any value at all between 1/32 and an 1/8th. As apposed to many that say much less than 1/32 or much more than ⅛...


He didn't say that though.
He said up to an 1/8th "it will still cut".
That's not to say a bit of adjustment won't make any difference - it may do, depending on your desired quality/depth of cut and the nature of the wood.
Below 1/32nd is for planing obsessives really, where a scraper might be a better choice. And of course it will cut above 1/8th but you may run out of adjustment, depending on the plane.


----------



## Ttrees (27 Apr 2021)

Might be worth trying it first before discounting this near lost knowledge.

To suggest that someone could use a scraper in tough timbers instead is daft.


----------



## hennebury (28 Apr 2021)

"Obsessives" What exactly is Obsessive about having a handplane that works. Rather it seems somewhat dimwitted to have one that doesn't, You can use it some of the time, Soft wood, perfect grain, then you have to use something else, because it won't work for planning normal wood. You can use a scraper or sandpaper. It doesn't make much sense. really, why not just learn how to set your plane up and use it. Of course it will cut with the chipbreaker set back1/8" , it will in fact still cut if you take the chipbreaker and bury it in the back yard. It will just work better if you set your chipbreaker properly. And a good point is, it doesn't cost you any more to move the chipbreaker forward so that it actually functions.


----------



## jcassidy (28 Apr 2021)

I hesitate to step into this whirlpool of opinion and belief, but here goes...

Paul Sellers is aimed squarely at the zero-to-minimum skilled people. His objective is to get people working with wood.

In that context, for someone just picking up a plane, setting the damned cap somewhere 1/32 and 1/8th from the edge is fine.


----------



## Jacob (28 Apr 2021)

jcassidy said:


> I hesitate to step into this whirlpool of opinion and belief, but here goes...
> 
> Paul Sellers is aimed squarely at the zero-to-minimum skilled people. His objective is to get people working with wood.
> 
> ...


Exactly.
The interesting question is why the "black belts" (if that is what they deserve to call themselves ) get so excited about Sellers. Page after page! In other threads too - arguing about his dovetailing and so on.
I think I know the answer to this question but I'll keep my mouth shut!


----------



## jcassidy (28 Apr 2021)

Well I went back and edited my post to take out that rather argumentative comment, in the interests of polite discourse... We can start an another thread on why highly skilled people getting upset.


----------



## simoncmason (28 Apr 2021)

Some really interesting information in this thread, I've had good results controlling tearout with my #4 smoother after paying close attention to the angle of the cap iron and its set which I picked up from a David Charlesworth book and Richard McGuire video - for me it has been worth spending the tiny amount of extra time this involves to set up.

I also read with interest the comments about using moulding planes with no cap iron - i.e. try to use straightgrained wood - which makes sense where possible.

However, where does this leave the moving fillister plane? I recently made a window frame and casement and was able to cut the first few rebates easily and quickly with my 1960's Record #78, but then I ran into an area with a swirling grain around a small knot and no matter how sharp my edge or how light my set I still got a small amount of tear. (30 year old, dry ~10% humidity white oak)

I resorted to my electrical router which I don't mind, but as I have 12 windows and 3 doors to make over the next few months I'd be very interested to know if there is a good way of controlling tearout with a moving fillister, for example do skew bladed fillisters work better (I would imagine they'd actually be worse for tearout), or should a steeper or shallower edge angle be adopted - I'm hollow grinding at ~25, going to a fine diamond at 30 and stropping with green compound on MDF at just above that which gives good results for most things - but always interested to hear what has worked well for others.


----------



## jcassidy (28 Apr 2021)

@simoncmason, sounds like a subject for a new thread!!


----------



## Jacob (28 Apr 2021)

Doing rebates by hand I'd be inclined to start a rebate with the 78 as it scores the line according to the fence, but then to carry on with a skew rebate plane once the rebate is well started. They were very heavily used which is why there are so many of them still about. Also a pleasure to use. Moving fillister is a bit over fussy for production work.
The narrow and thin blade of a rebate pane doesn't really need a 25º grind - just go straight for 30º - slightly convex bevel is normal. Best to leave as much metal in place for stiffness as they easily snatch - if worked really hard you can hear a zip noise as they chatter and leave little marks. First time I saw the zip marks on old work I thought it was some sort of machine roller impression, later realised it was hard worked rebate plane chattering.
PS knot prob - use the 78, try freshly sharpened blade, finer set, candle wax sole of plane. Try zero depth of cut and bring it up very gently to take thin shavings.
PPS Always mark up first (though the 78 does it's own marking) - then whichever plane you use - once the rebate is started it's much easier to proceed without the fence or the nicker. If it wanders off the mark just clean up with the plane on its side instead. The skew of a skew rebate tends to keep it up to the mark.


----------



## simoncmason (28 Apr 2021)

Jacob said:


> Doing rebates by hand I'd be inclined to start a rebate with the 78 as it scores the line according to the fence, but then to carry on with a skew rebate plane once the rebate is well started. They were very heavily used which is why there are so many of them still about. Also a pleasure to use. Moving fillister is a bit over fussy for production work.
> The narrow and thin blade of a rebate pane doesn't really need a 25º grind - just go straight for 30º - slightly convex bevel is normal. Best to leave as much metal in place for stiffness as they easily snatch - if worked really hard you can hear a zip noise as they chatter and leave little marks. First time I saw the zip marks on old work I thought it was some sort of machine roller impression, later realised it was hard worked rebate plane chattering.
> PS knot prob - use the 78, try freshly sharpened blade, finer set, candle wax sole of plane. Try zero depth of cut and bring it up very gently to take thin shavings.
> PPS Always mark up first (though the 78 does it's own marking) - then whichever plane you use - once the rebate is started it's much easier to proceed without the fence or the nicker. If it wanders off the mark just clean up with the plane on its side instead. The skew of a skew rebate tends to keep it up to the mark.



All makes sense - I'll try adjusting the grind for the #78 and my #10 and setting an even finer depth next time I come up against swirling grain in a rebate I'm cutting with the 78. Maybe steepen the final angle on my edge as well. 25 grind is due to the fact I have my bench grinder set up at this point and it seems to work well as a starting point for most edges I want, so it only gets altered for really low angles for a couple of chisels I have set up at 20 ish for end grain pairing only in soft stuff.


----------



## Adam W. (28 Apr 2021)

Get a straight set wooden rebate plane and go both ways over the spot. If it's a rebate for glazing, I'm not fussed about a bit of tearout, as it gets filled by glass and putty.

Seeings as I am friendly with the conservation department at the council, I get away with single glazing and use old crown and cylinder glass, so it's putty and paint for me.


----------



## Jacob (28 Apr 2021)

simoncmason said:


> All makes sense - I'll try adjusting the grind for the #78 and my #10 and setting an even finer depth next time I come up against swirling grain in a rebate I'm cutting with the 78. Maybe steepen the final angle on my edge as well. 25 grind is due to the fact I have my bench grinder set up at this point and it seems to work well as a starting point for most edges I want, so it only gets altered for really low angles for a couple of chisels I have set up at 20 ish for end grain pairing only in soft stuff.


Another PS when I said _doesn't really need a 25º grind - just go straight for 30º_ I meant doesn't need grind at all, on a power grinder at least. Blades too thin and get damaged IMHO


----------



## Jacob (28 Apr 2021)

Adam W. said:


> Get a straight set wooden rebate plane and go both ways over the spot. If it's a rebate for glazing, I'm not fussed about a bit of tearout, as it gets filled by glass and putty.
> 
> Seeings as I am friendly with the conservation department at the council, I get away with single glazing and use old crown and cylinder glass, so it's putty and paint for me.


Actually straight rebate woodies are scarce - they are nearly all skew and right handed.


----------



## Adam W. (28 Apr 2021)

True, but they do come up on ebay now and then.

A fine set skew will work too, but it's not as good and you have to keep a bit of sideways pressure on it and only good for cleanup.

Addendum.

After 5 minutes of looking, here's one.









Vintage Emsley ? 1 3/4" wooden rebate plane | eBay


Looks like it's stamped Emsley but I don't know for sure.



www.ebay.co.uk





Plane the base flat and off you go.

And another....








VINTAGE 7/8 " REBATE PLANE | eBay


Find many great new & used options and get the best deals for VINTAGE 7/8 " REBATE PLANE at the best online prices at eBay! Free delivery for many products!



www.ebay.co.uk





And another...








Square Rebate Plane 1" by S.Tyzack Ltd. London. | eBay


Very good clean square mouth rebate plane 1" size by Samuel Tyzack Ltd. Has full length iron and very sharp cutter blade. Very good condition.



www.ebay.co.uk





Shall I stop?








9 1/2" x 3/4" Vintage Wooden Rebate Plane 36768 | eBay


Find many great new & used options and get the best deals for 9 1/2" x 3/4" Vintage Wooden Rebate Plane 36768 at the best online prices at eBay! Free delivery for many products!



www.ebay.co.uk


----------



## Ttrees (28 Apr 2021)

What's so difficult about trying something so basic and easy, if you don't think honing a camber like I shown the hard part?
That's where I'm confused.

The fact is that everyone and their dog has made a stack of videos about most aspects of basic planing.
Why muddy the waters by making a video especially about the cap iron and then discount it?

Must be strange to make a video or talk about it, whilst knowing it works like a silver bullet, yet pretend it doesn't work well at all.
I suppose that would be forgivable if it was the 1990's,
But its 2021 and you've seen David's videos. 

Not that Sellers is the only guru who discounts the tool
Cosman does be at that also.
It seems those two and a few others think they have something to lose from showing how to use the cap iron.

Bizarre clandestine advice to keep folks awaiting expecting the second part to a certain video, or others selling some sort of kit to try an get the best edge for those tough examples, when any sharp edge would be grand instead, regardless what method/abrasive one uses for honing.

When will these folks realize that this is their cash cow, and it's been hiding under curly shavings because it's not being used. 

Would love to see Cosman give it a bash, because he actually is honest regarding the work, like he did with say the Chris Pye carving video, but he's got like 10 kids to feed, so suppose it might be risky if he stands to loose money on unnecessary sharpening stones.
I'm sure there lovely, but outta my price range.

What does it matter I suppose, anyone can demonstrate skills to be learned...
Suppose I just want to see some other folks take on honing an iron nicely for the cap to work in various fine cambers.


Tom


----------



## Jacob (28 Apr 2021)

Adam W. said:


> True, but they do come up on ebay now and then.
> 
> A fine set skew will work too, but it's not as good and you have to keep a bit of sideways pressure on it and only good for cleanup.
> 
> ...


No carry on if it keeps you happy!  
They are less common than skew in my experience but I'm not going to start counting them!


----------



## Adam W. (28 Apr 2021)

Jacob said:


> No carry on if it keeps you happy!
> They are less common than skew in my experience but I'm not going to start counting them!


Oh dear !


----------



## thomashenry (28 Apr 2021)

jcassidy said:


> I hesitate to step into this whirlpool of opinion and belief, but here goes...
> 
> Paul Sellers is aimed squarely at the zero-to-minimum skilled people. His objective is to get people working with wood.
> 
> In that context, for someone just picking up a plane, setting the damned cap somewhere 1/32 and 1/8th from the edge is fine.



Zero-to-minimum skilled people? If these are projects for 'zero-to-minimum skill' hand tool woodworkers, I'd love to know what sort of things 'basic to intermediate' people make, let alone 'moderately advanced' and above.









Laptop Desk: Info Page - Woodworking Masterclasses


Paul’s latest design for a laptop desk combines opposing curves and rounded sections to create a new and modern look. It features shaped legs, dovetailed aprons AND desk-top bins for convenient storage with neatness. This is a great project for developing new woodworking skills and techniques...




woodworkingmasterclasses.com












Sellers Home Rocking Chair - Woodworking Masterclasses


This is the first design for the houseful of furniture we are designing and making for sellershome.com. It has been an exciting development and from here on you will be able to follow the whole design process from beginning to end on through to the installation. The journey has already begun!




woodworkingmasterclasses.com












Baby's Cot - Woodworking Masterclasses


Paul introduces this safe, strong and sturdy cot made to his own design.




woodworkingmasterclasses.com





Whether intentional or not, your post comes across as rather arrogant and dismissive.


----------



## Jacob (28 Apr 2021)

Ttrees said:


> What's so difficult about trying something so basic and easy, if you don't think honing a camber like I shown the hard part?
> That's where I'm confused.
> 
> The fact is that everyone and their dog has made a stack of videos about most aspects of basic planing.
> ...





thomashenry said:


> Zero-to-minimum skilled people? If these are projects for 'zero-to-minimum skill' hand tool woodworkers, I'd love to know what sort of things 'basic to intermediate' people make, let alone 'moderately advanced' and above.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


He does cover more ground than just beginners' stuff but he is very good on basics. Breath of fresh air in fact.


----------



## simoncmason (28 Apr 2021)

Adam W. said:


> Get a straight set wooden rebate plane and go both ways over the spot. If it's a rebate for glazing, I'm not fussed about a bit of tearout, as it gets filled by glass and putty.
> 
> Seeings as I am friendly with the conservation department at the council, I get away with single glazing and use old crown and cylinder glass, so it's putty and paint for me.



I don't have a wooden rebate plane, but I do have a #10 and a #90 so I can go both ways - but I'm not sure how this would help? It'll either tear one way or the other as the grain reverses around the knot.

I was able to get fairly minimal tear in this case, but unacceptable as it was for the window frame which can be seen when the window is open, and of course the figure around the knot draws your eye to it. But I'm wondering about eliminating it altogether with a rebate plane with no cap iron to save having to go to the electrical router and then sand the router marks out. Are you saying the wooden rebate planes are better at controling tear out?


----------



## Jacob (28 Apr 2021)

simoncmason said:


> ... Are you saying the wooden rebate planes are better at controling tear out?


No they aren't but they are easy to use. But if you are talking about big rebates not glazing rebates, then a 10 should be good rather than the narrower 78.
A 90 is a shoulder plane for cross grain and not too good for long grain rebates.


----------



## simoncmason (28 Apr 2021)

Jacob said:


> No they aren't but they are easy to use. But if you are talking about big rebates not glazing rebates, then a 10 should be good.



OK - I expect the problem is with the operator  More practice needed with the #10 then!

Thanks for the advice


----------



## jcassidy (28 Apr 2021)

thomashenry said:


> Whether intentional or not, your post comes across as rather arrogant and dismissive.



Well, I was aiming for arrogant, dismissive, and condenscending. Two out of three ain't bad, I suppose.


----------



## Adam W. (28 Apr 2021)

You've got to be quick here.......

I'd try and plane from one side of the knot, change direction then plane the other way.

It's a bit of grief, but it's a workaround. Wooden rebate planes aren't any better than metal rebate planes, but I find the large metal ones uncomfortable to hold. If you already have a No.10 try that, but it may be a bit large to use on a window rebate.

If a wooden one is too large, just cut it down in length.


----------



## simoncmason (28 Apr 2021)

Adam W. said:


> You've got to be quick here.......
> 
> I'd try and plane from one side of the knot, change direction then plane the other way.
> 
> It's a bit of grief, but it's a workaround. Wooden rebate planes aren't any better than metal rebate planes, but I find the large metal ones uncomfortable to hold. If you already have a No.10 try that, but it may be a bit large to use on a window rebate



OK - I'll keep practicing with the #10 - I've only really used it for cleaning up big tenons for timber framing work which it is a dream at - but it gives me the chance to try in both directions for difficult wood. These rebates were quite big to accommodate the casement and draught excluder so would have been OK with the #10.

Thanks for the advice.


----------



## Droogs (28 Apr 2021)

Having the cap iron in a position where it can have an effect on the shaving as it passes over the back of the iron as it passes the edge has been proven to be beneficial. However the physics and logic dictate the the gap between the iron edge and the cap iron should be the same as the thickness of the shaving you want to produce. This is however almost impossible to do on a consistently repeatable basis and so having it roughly where it needs to be is what we as the planer settle for. Attempting anything else is anal and just stupid, especially when you consider the time you would waste doing so with these tools that were not invented or made for la de da pussy cat footing around use by amatuers but quick efficient use by people making a living from there use. The argument is moot therefore as neither of you do woodwork for your daily bread.


----------



## Ttrees (28 Apr 2021)

Jacob said:


> He does cover more ground than just beginners' stuff but he is very good on basics. Breath of fresh air in fact.


Which is basically saying you agree that the video in question is misleading.


----------



## Ttrees (28 Apr 2021)

Aye simples it is.
The camber gets matched with the timber in question, or one could even have a different iron or plane for the job if there was a lot of variance in the work.
I agree that it's better than the suck it and see, as many have mentioned, better to use a smoother on near finished work so you can trust that tearout won't be a problem,
And likewise with rougher timber using the largest distance you can achieve, if you work with timber that shares the same characteristics, you should have settled on the profile what suits the work.

I wouldn't pair a super dense example of iroko with a light piece in a project, as I'd rather use the heavy stuff for nice things.
When I go through all the good stuff, I'll consider what project the less dense stuff might be a better application for using.

Tom


----------



## D_W (28 Apr 2021)

Ttrees said:


> Which is basically saying you agree that the video in question is misleading.



we've not seen evidence of any planing that would make credible agreement or disagreement in this case.


----------



## D_W (28 Apr 2021)

simoncmason said:


> OK - I'll keep practicing with the #10 - I've only really used it for cleaning up big tenons for timber framing work which it is a dream at - but it gives me the chance to try in both directions for difficult wood. These rebates were quite big to accommodate the casement and draught excluder so would have been OK with the #10.
> 
> Thanks for the advice.



A #10 is going to be a bear to use in difficult wood - BTDT. You're essentially trying to make a controlled cut laterally in difficult to plane wood (but the plane will mitigate tearout). In narrower rebates where you can take a bigger bite, they're awkward. Unless you're just smoothing something with them, a better policy is using a coarser plane to cut the rabbet and a fine plane to finish it if for some reason it will show (ulmia made a nice double iron rebate plane that is the cats rear end for this in the cases that wood isn't good enough to have a predominant direction from end to end in a rebate - like curly or whatever else).


----------



## D_W (28 Apr 2021)

jcassidy said:


> I hesitate to step into this whirlpool of opinion and belief, but here goes...
> 
> Paul Sellers is aimed squarely at the zero-to-minimum skilled people. His objective is to get people working with wood.
> 
> In that context, for someone just picking up a plane, setting the damned cap somewhere 1/32 and 1/8th from the edge is fine.



or, you can learn it at the outset and take continuous shavings in difficult wood and avoid the what iffery about all kinds of nonsense (Scraping planes, high angle planes, etc). 

There's a parallel here in that hobbyists don't want to learn anything about design. You can "learn it later". It's a very arbitrary thing to suggest that someone who thinks they'll tackle woodworking couldn't have rudimentary discussions about design and proportion to avoid making horrid looking things and staring at the dovetail sockets endlessly while doing it. 

In the case where someone decides they really don't want to use planes much at all and sticks with it, then that's fine. I doubt there are many professional guitar makers planing wood at this point - they're not working much wood and the portable drum sanders eliminate the need to handle figured wood (especially thin figured wood), and guaranteed, the customers won't care.


----------



## thomashenry (28 Apr 2021)

jcassidy said:


> Well, I was aiming for arrogant, dismissive, and condenscending.



Why?


----------



## Ttrees (28 Apr 2021)

Agreed I was just about to dive further into the deep end of nonsense and 
expensive to buy/time consuming to make BU tools before I stumbled across your SMC posts, and Woodcentral article.

I wouldn't say that there aren't many pros luthiers using a plane though...


And the folks who don't use a plane, their sanders get really easily clogged on the exotics like cocobolo.
I was about to build one of those thickness sanders until I heard the name Rob Cosman, thanks to one of Steve Maskery's name dropping in one of his vids.


----------



## hennebury (28 Apr 2021)

If you want to do woodworking, just do it, you will learn some stuff on the long and painful path.
If you want to learn woodworking, learn about wood and cutting tools, you will have a much more enjoyable journey. 

Understanding handplanes is;
Not new, not complicated, not BS. and worth the effort.
Anyone that teaches different is sending you down the hard road.

Move the chipbreaker back when the going is easy, move it close to the cutting edge when the grain is causing issues, and the chipbreaker will help prevent torn grain. 

"and capable of adjustment to different distances from the cutting edge, according to the kind of work and the character of the material." etc..

Set the cap iron close. experiment with how close according to the work and material, you will figure it out.

First lesson done. Not a difficult lesson was it. A beginner should be able to handle all that information.


----------



## D_W (28 Apr 2021)

Ttrees said:


> Agreed I was just about to dive further into the deep end of nonsense and
> expensive to buy/time consuming to make BU tools before I stumbled across your SMC posts, and Woodcentral article.
> 
> I wouldn't say that there aren't many pros luthiers using a plane though...
> ...




classical guitars are one of the few places where lots of money is spent and much of the work is done by hand. Even Yamaha, I believe, has some high end models (some people are going to laugh at this, but consider being in japan and talking about $12,000 guitars, not $500 guitars distributed in the USA) with a french polish finish (with low string energy, stuff like thick finishes start to matter a lot - and avoiding them is a better outcome). 

That said the typical $4000 american acoustic guitar with a red spruce top will go through a drum sander (a good one) to be thicknessed for stiffness. This is a whole lot easier to do with a drum sander (no, I don't have one) to achieve a desired stiffness. Production guitars aren't going to get that kind of attention, but at the $4000+ level, buyers don't want to get guitars where some are lively and some are dead, so someone with skill will find ideal stiffness instead. Not sure if that makes sense to folks, but it means each guitar that comes out of a small production shop is going to have pretty close to ideal timbre. 

But, on a day to day basis, that also needs to be done faster than by hand. 

I plane and scrape everything that I can on electrics so far, and at some point will move to acoustics and do all of it by hand, but aside from a few one man shops, there's not a lot of guitar making taught or practiced with mostly hand tools (lots of scraper, chisels for bracing and chisel work done fitting neck dovetails, etc, but much of the rest sees people avoiding maximizing hand work. Too bad - even very crude guitars like fender benefit from some hand tool clean up, especially in regard to bedding the neck pocket and bottom of the neck).


----------



## D_W (28 Apr 2021)

Mark H above is one of about three or four people who had ever talked about using a cap iron (accurately) before I started gimmicking it everywhere in 2012.

Without separate discussion, at best, we'd still have people claiming that you need to cut a large flat 80 degree wall on a plane cap iron and set it at 8 thousandths of an inch. 

There was someone on here from finland who mentioned using one to mitigate tearout (after figuring it out, I dredged the forums to find anyone who actually ever talked about it other than Warren Mickley, and there wasn't much - knowing that as soon as you show how to use something, the "I already knew that" jackwagons come out of the woodwork.....). 

There was one other member on here who had said something relevant in 2005 or 2007 or so, but I can't remember where from or who it was - it went over everyones' head. The fellow from finland said that he wasn't looking for any fights - that was butt deep in bevel up "this is better than anything ever made" talk at that time, and I guess he had been ridiculed at some point.


----------



## raffo (28 Apr 2021)

simoncmason said:


> I don't have a wooden rebate plane, but I do have a #10 and a #90 so I can go both ways - but I'm not sure how this would help? It'll either tear one way or the other as the grain reverses around the knot.


Is your #10's chipbreaker setup? a double ironed plane should take care of your knotty wood without any trouble.


----------



## Ttrees (28 Apr 2021)

D_W said:


> Mark H above is one of about three or four people who had ever talked about using a cap iron (accurately) before I started gimmicking it everywhere in 2012.


It was from the Official luthiers forum that I was suggested reading this article from popular woodoworking from 2011, 
in which Graham Blackburn suggests that he was very familiar with using the cap iron at the time.
Seems from reading the article he's worth a mention also.

That snippet from the old book describes things much clearer than what I have seen before, wonder why that wasn't used rather than the unclear planecraft article for the "I knew this all along" brigade. 

Graham Blackburn Steps in for Ailing David Charlesworth | Popular Woodworking Magazine


----------



## D_W (28 Apr 2021)

i forgot about blackburn - someone responded on wood central that he'd done a presentation at williamsburg with a claim of something like "any plane, any wood, any direction". (cap iron). 

The interesting thing is he would give a presentation like this and back then, people were just recording video, and nobody ever mentioned anything about it for at least a year (or three?). How do you see a demonstration like that and not find it useful. 

There's a local Marc Adams student here who set up a woodworking school and I said "have a look at this" (he bought my old bench for one of his beginning students). I took a huge leaf off of a piece of curly maple with a and he looked like he'd seen a ghost. He recognized what he just saw immediately, but said that he teaches the students to do most of the stuff with power tools and sanding and use hand planes for fitting etc (I get it, that's typical), but has had a handful of students who said they'd like to work entirely by hand. I told him I wasn't looking to teach any classes to people, neither making planes nor using them as I figured that of that , if one actually stuck it out, that would be my high estimate. Not that people wouldn't do it, but it feels like exercise when you do it. 

At any rate, if blackburn said what I mentioned above about any plane any direction and he meant it the way I think he did, then it's right on the mark. And nobody in person seemed to think it was worth repeating.


----------



## D_W (28 Apr 2021)

Ttrees said:


> Graham Blackburn Steps in for Ailing David Charlesworth | Popular Woodworking Magazine



OK, i'll admit I just read the article you linked after posting above - I see the reference, but it's Wia and not williamsburg (but he may have said the same thing in more than one place). Remarkable that nobody ever thought it was worth mentioning on a forum as those forums in the US are loaded with people who think going to WIA is absolutely mandatory "to learn".

A well known infill plane maker here told me at the time that I was wasting my time chasing the cap iron as he'd only met two professional woodworkers who ever told him he should use a cap iron for tearout reduction - one of those was definitely warren. I wonder if blackburn was the other.


----------



## Adam W. (28 Apr 2021)

Steve Voigt has done a useful article in M&T 6.

I know some on here are above reading magazines, but I like M&T because they don't ignore the past.


----------



## Jacob (28 Apr 2021)

Adam W. said:


> Steve Voigt has done a useful article in M&T 6.
> 
> I know some on here are above reading magazines, but I like M&T because they don't ignore the past.


I don't much like M&T because they create a fantasy about the past, Steam Punk fashion.
It's very tempting though - all those pictures of "gorgeous" shavings and old tools!
I guess they wouldn't touch honing jigs with a bargepole, which is good.
Presumably they don't blag on about LN, LV new wave of retro-tools either
I'd be interested in the J Klein book if I can get my hands on a cheap copy, might order it from the library.
PS just read the reviews. Not inspiring. Glossy pictures with shaving on every page! Beardy chaps with pinafores and rows of pencils. I bet they all smoke pipes and play banjos.


----------



## Adam W. (28 Apr 2021)

Jacob said:


> I don't like M&T because they create a fantasy about the past, Steam Punk fashion.



You seem to be a bit of a Contrary Mary.


----------



## D_W (28 Apr 2021)

Not a matter of being above reading magazines, but sometimes it's like fishing in a pond with one fish and 10 guys standing on the bank trying to catch fish.

One of my articles on WC was distilled and published last year in print, so ...does that make me qualified to say that? And even I don't have the article in print, just a PDF of the layout. Couldn't figure out how to get a single printed copy without subscribing.


----------



## Adam W. (28 Apr 2021)

WC ?


----------



## Jacob (28 Apr 2021)

Adam W. said:


> WC ?


Glossy paper


----------



## Adam W. (28 Apr 2021)

Gawd! He said he wrote an article on WC.

What's that?


----------



## Jacob (28 Apr 2021)

Adam W. said:


> Gawd! He said he wrote an article on WC.
> 
> What's that?


You tell me. WC Fields? Winston Churchill?


----------



## Adam W. (28 Apr 2021)

I don't know, I can't think of anything.

It must be Winston Churchill then, he's quite popular at the moment.


----------



## Jacob (28 Apr 2021)

Adam W. said:


> I don't know, I can't think of anything.
> 
> It must be Winston Churchill then, he's quite popular at the moment.


Stumped too. Windsor Chairs?


----------



## Jacob (28 Apr 2021)

I've ordered the Fein book. Expensive and somewhat brief. I'll pass it on here if it's not a keeper. 
I'm already not impressed by his M&T technique - you'd think they'd get that right in view of the title of the mag!


----------



## raffo (28 Apr 2021)

This is ridiculous. WC stands for WoodCentral. SMC stands for Sawmill Creek. A google search should provide the link to the sites.


----------



## Adam W. (28 Apr 2021)

I'm surprised you went and bought it really.


----------



## Jacob (28 Apr 2021)

raffo said:


> This is ridiculous. WC stands for WoodCentral. SMC stands for Sawmill Creek. A google search should provide the link to the sites.


Never heard of either. I did google WC but found nothing I didn't already know!


----------



## Jacob (28 Apr 2021)

Adam W. said:


> I'm surprised you went and bought it really.


Why what's wrong with it?


----------



## Adam W. (28 Apr 2021)

I don't know, I haven't read it.

It might be a bit, you know, Kumbaya.


----------



## pidgeonpost (29 Apr 2021)

Jacob said:


> He does cover more ground than just beginners' stuff but he is very good on basics. Breath of fresh air in fact.


As a hobbyist I might go a year or more between hand-cutting dovetails, and plenty of other joints, so a reminder of the basics is something I find very useful whether from PS or anyone else. Yes, I can get the info from a book, but sometimes watching a video of someone else doing the job is invaluable and is indeed a breath of fresh air.


----------



## Jacob (1 May 2021)

Jacob said:


> I've ordered the Fein book. Expensive and somewhat brief. I'll pass it on here if it's not a keeper.
> I'm already not impressed by his M&T technique - you'd think they'd get that right in view of the title of the mag!


Book arrived. Yes expensive and brief!
Very nicely presented, lovely photos and some interesting bits and bobs but somehow more of a promotional brochure than a useful book. Promoting what though?
Well the magazine itself I suppose, and this whole ethos of beardy chaps, lovely workshops, glorious shavings. They are selling an idea, which to most of their consumers will remain as an idea; fantasy woodwork?
What else do they have to offer of value?
Refreshingly free of gadgets, jigs, expensive retro tools covered in brass knobs, tool polishing etc.


----------



## Adam W. (1 May 2021)

Glad you like it.

People love it, it's coffee table stuff. I really like the photos of the old furniture in the mag and there are some good contributors too.


----------



## Jacob (2 May 2021)

Just flipping through it on my coffee table.
There's a hint of modern sharpening there - the weirdly clumsy way he holds his chisel as he sharpens it on an oil stone. p15. Chisels have handles. You get a much more accurate bevel and much more force/speed if you hold the handle end and put your other hand pressing down hard somewhere about the middle of the whole thing. This is what handles are for in many ways, mainly for holding. Odd that he didn't know. I've seen this before and I think it's a modern sharpening convention - possibly a bad habit picked up from using jigs, which are innately clumsy.
He's also using a bevel edged chisel for chopping out DTs. Firmer is better - more wedge action, like a mortice chisel.
I'm planning to go through the book to nit-pick and find faults. 
Odd the uncomfortable side-saddle mortice chopping sitting position - why not sit astride in the normal way? It's not as though he's wearing a skirt .


----------



## Adam W. (2 May 2021)

I'm pretty confident that you'll be recommending to the peanut gallery in the end.


----------



## Jacob (2 May 2021)

Adam W. said:


> I'm pretty confident that you'll be recommending to the peanut gallery in the end.


Scanned through to the end. Yes it is good, with a few quibbles.
But what always makes me uneasy about this lot is the glorification of very ordinary woodwork - nothing here which would have been out of place in a pre 1960 woodwork mag. and non the worse for that.
But maybe it has to be glorified to counter the new wave glorification of gadgets, routers, modern sharpening nonsense and so on.
He glorifies nails, which interested me, as I have often pointed out how useful they are! I've inherited a simple book shelf done with rebates/dados/nails in the way he shows. The rebates/dados go on the verticals taking the weight of the horizontal shelves.
I've also got a drawer in a Welsh made table which is nailed together - no rebates just butt joints, the bottom nailed on to the sides. It's actually a very practical way of making a drawer.
But neither of these are glorious - they are utterly nondescript, cheaply done. Nails just ordinary everyday nails, not worth looking at.
PS forgot to say - the big secret of "fine" nailing is pre drilling, which Fein demonstrates, and probably the first time I've ever seen anybody else comment on this!


----------



## Adam W. (2 May 2021)

Jacob said:


> Scanned through to the end. Yes it is good, with a few quibbles.
> But what always makes me uneasy about this lot is the glorification of very ordinary woodwork - nothing here which would have been out of place in a pre 1960 woodwork mag. and non the worse for that.
> But maybe it has to be glorified to counter the new wave glorification of gadgets, routers, modern sharpening nonsense and so on.
> He glorifies nails, which interested me, as I have often pointed out how useful they are! I've inherited a simple book shelf done with rebates/dados/nails in the way he shows. The rebates/dados go on the verticals taking the weight of the horizontal shelves.
> ...



Well that's a fair comment about the glorification of something ordinary, but if it makes 10% of its readership change to making stuff instead of buying Ikea, it's a good thing, no?


----------



## Ozi (2 May 2021)

scooby said:


> Oh popcorn time..or is that only reserved for sharpening threads?
> 
> Not that it matters, but I've always set mine about the same distance as he said (just over a mm). The cap irons on my planes aren't the tightest so setting super close just causes problems.


Doesn't make the blindest bit of difference if you put the blade in upside down like I did this afternoon - it's a special kind of stupid not everyone can achieve. Still can't believe I did it


----------



## D_W (2 May 2021)

Adam W. said:


> Gawd! He said he wrote an article on WC.
> 
> What's that?



Site. The article also went into popular woodworking in a shorter format, but I don't believe that if I have something to share that someone should pay for it. I also tend to do things other people don't do with a level of experimentation that other people don't go to (This is different than being a master at doing something, or doing really neat work - I do OK work, I can do very neat work if I have to but you can't flow the same way doing the work. I fully get why you like the whole riving thing - it's a flow and the highest level work doesn't have the flow). 

WC is a relatively low traffic forum because it does tend to be pretty heavy discussion and the posters there want to know details (kind if like I asked you - we all want to "know stuff" and then decide if we'll make use of it, so if you get questioned over there, nobody sweats it...well, some do, but most of the long termers don't).


----------

