# Not a flat world Record



## dickster2112 (8 Dec 2011)

A while ago I acquired a Record no6 plane. I was told it was bought new in the 60's.







The bottom looked a bit scratched so I gave it a little bit of a rub on some 60 grit paper on a saw table.
This seemed to take ages to get anywhere so I checked with a good straight edge, there is a 10thou gap
at the back. Also some strange blotchy marking on the metal.
( the black lines are my pen marks left from sanding)






My questions are - has anyone seen this sort of marking before, and if so do you know what causes it?
Also what do people think about the merits of trying to to get this thing flat, is it worth the hours of sanding at the table saw?
O and any ideas on date, is it from the sixties?



Any ideas appreciated

Ric


----------



## DTR (8 Dec 2011)

That frog looks a lot older than 1960s (not that I am expert by any stretch of the imagination).

As for the blotchiness, I have no idea what it is but my no 7 is the same (actually worse if that photo is anything to go by)


----------



## RogerP (9 Dec 2011)

There's website here about dating Record planes.


----------



## dickster2112 (9 Dec 2011)

RogerP":2kppfftl said:


> There's website here about dating Record planes.




Thanks

Ric


----------



## Jacob (9 Dec 2011)

dickster2112":17fqvy6v said:


> .............
> My questions are - has anyone seen this sort of marking before, and if so do you know what causes it?


The original casting would have been dark grey to black. Machining the sole takes off the high points so the low points stay grey until the machining reaches them. Your grey patch is the last vestige of a hollow, but so shallow that you can just ignore it.


> Also what do people think about the merits of trying to to get this thing flat, is it worth the hours of sanding at the table saw?


Complete waste of time, don't bother, rarely necessary. Ten thou "at the back" is nothing; being slightly convex over the length is perfectly OK. Being concave in the middle could be a problem (unlikely) but I wouldn't even look at it until I'd done everything else i.e. sharpen set, test drive with a few hours of planing.
"Flattening" is very fashionable but wastes a lot of time and could spoil tools in the process.


----------



## bugbear (9 Dec 2011)

dickster2112":32z9lwkk said:


> Also some strange blotchy marking on the metal.



Blotchey marks may well be where the sole was rusted and then cleaned. Some rust penetrates into the cast iron.

A plane needs to be flat to work well - the big question is *how* flat.

Flattening needs to be done properly - just rubbing away can have a nasty tendancy to generate convexity, making the problem worse.

However, there's plenty of good advice out on the web about how to flatten effectively and well.

BugBear


----------



## yetloh (9 Dec 2011)

The 60s were when it all really started to go wrong for Record and Stanley with the qualty going down the pan, so not an obviously good vintage, although it is probably fair to say it got even worse in the 70s.

Jim


----------



## Jacob (9 Dec 2011)

yetloh":1knmtq2h said:


> The 60s were when it all really started to go wrong for Record and Stanley with the qualty going down the pan, so not an obviously good vintage, although it is probably fair to say it got even worse in the 70s.
> 
> Jim


My Record 5 1/2, new 1982, is spot on.
Our OPs plane is a lot older and obviously has been very well used in the intervening 50 or more years (as indicated by the short blade, probably only another 30 years left in it!). 
If it needs flattening why did the previous users not bother, and how did they manage to do all that planing? 
The 10 thou at the back is most likely just normal wear and almost certainly won't have any bearing at all on the planing performance. But until it's put to use there's no way of knowing. I guess our OP is a bit of a beginner (or he wouldn't be asking these questions) so I reckon he'll have enough to do just getting the thing sharp and working properly before he starts worrying about fine details


----------



## jimi43 (9 Dec 2011)

yetloh":k0jrwahf said:


> The 60s were when it all really started to go wrong for Record and Stanley with the qualty going down the pan, so not an obviously good vintage, although it is probably fair to say it got even worse in the 70s.
> 
> Jim



+1

In fact I would go further and say the rot started earlier.

However, any older vintage is preferable to the rubbish being produced as "stock" today. Getting a good newer one is more a case of luck than design.

Within reason, as long as the mouth and two ends are in the same plane ( :roll: ) or near as damn it...the rest of the sole can be as concave as you like. Convexity is another matter entirely!

Cheers

Jim


----------



## yetloh (9 Dec 2011)

jimi43":rgnx7vcg said:


> Within reason, as long as the mouth and two ends are in the same plane ( :roll: ) or near as damn it...the rest of the sole can be as concave as you like. Convexity is another matter entirely!
> 
> Cheers
> 
> Jim



Couldn't agree more, Jim. It's just a matter of how much effort you want to put in, and that often comes down to whether you are a toolmaker or a furniture maker at heart. I am the latter and i suspect you are the former.

Jim


----------



## dickster2112 (9 Dec 2011)

Jacob":2hdha2vc said:


> Complete waste of time, don't bother, rarely necessary. Ten thou "at the back" is nothing; being slightly convex over the length is perfectly OK.
> 
> "Flattening" is very fashionable but wastes a lot of time and could spoil tools in the process.


 

Surely if the back is not reasonably flat over its length then it effectively shortens the sole as regards planing long edges. 

Would this not be like trying to true an edge with a smoother?


----------



## Jacob (9 Dec 2011)

dickster2112":3jvhqrxd said:


> Jacob":3jvhqrxd said:
> 
> 
> > Complete waste of time, don't bother, rarely necessary. Ten thou "at the back" is nothing; being slightly convex over the length is perfectly OK.
> ...


Well yes if a plane was seriously out. I'm not saying it doesn't happen, it's just that flattening has become priority number one with plane fiddlers, but is often unnecessary IMHO.


----------



## Mike Wingate (9 Dec 2011)

If you know what you are doing , flatten away, also flatten the face of the frog and claen off the paint on the underside of the frog and the main body casting to get a metal to metal contact. Get a nice stiff Quangsheng chipbreaker and put a good edge on your blade, after working up to a 1200 diamond stone , I use an 8000 ceramic stone which really makes a difference, then a bit of a strop with gold or green compound on leather gives me a great blade to plane with.


----------



## wcndave (9 Feb 2012)

Does anyone have pictures of what you use to flatten a plane (regardless of what extent you take it to).

In my mind i am picturing lots of very fine grit paper or a HUGE stone of some form. I am looking into getting some old planes off the bay and sorting them uot a little however want to know what type of flattening kit investment i might b letting myself in for...


----------



## MIGNAL (9 Feb 2012)

That Plane is older than the 60's. Try sharpening the blade and see how it cuts, it just might not be a bad idea! 
Strange but I have a 70's Stanley N0. 5.5 that works superb and it's had very little done to it. The only thing that might set it apart is the old thin Acorn blade - one of the best blades I have!


----------



## No skills (9 Feb 2012)

Should you get a plane that actually needs flattening then a reasonable sized flat surface and some abrasive paper is a good start, I would imagine some on here would recomend some float glass or a piece of machined stone (granite offcut etc) for a flat surface. For cheapness a bit of mdf would prolly do (check what ever you use with a straight edge and some feeler gauge), just make sure your abrasive goes on flat with no ripples.

Anything much beyond that is for people that just like to polish things  ( dons flame suit and stands back....)


----------



## Cheshirechappie (9 Feb 2012)

There's a couple of reasons for a plane sole being out of flat. 

The first is the release of casting stresses. As a casting cools from molten, it wants to contract. If the mould it's in prevents the casting from moving, internal stresses build up. Good practice is to stress-relieve the casting before machining by heating it to about 600C and allowing it to cool very slowly (makers like Clifton and LN do this, but it's an extra operation, and therefore an extra cost.) If it isn't done, the stresses release themselves over several months, distorting the casting slightly. It used to be the practice to 'season' castings by stacking them in the yard for a year or so before machining, but no manufacturer can bear the capital tie-up that entails these days, and anyway, annealing is more certain. 

The other reason is wear due to prolonged, heavy use.

The good news for you is that since the plane is at least 40 years old, the casting will now be stable, so if you do flatten it, it will stay flat.

The usual advice is to apply a straightedge to the sole of the plane, and sight with a good light-source behind the straightedge. If there is contact at the toe, at the front and back of the mouth, and at the heel, all is well. Slight hollows between the toe and mouth, and between the mouth and heel, don't matter much. Humps would, though, and would have to be flattened out.

Try sharpening the iron and seeing if the plane will a) take a consistent heavy shaving, and b) perhaps more tellingly, take a gossamer-thin shaving with the plane set very fine. If it does, all is well. If it won't take a fine shaving (with a razor-sharp, fine-set iron) then flattening the sole probably is needed. But if the plane works to your satisfaction - well, don't fix what ain't broken!

One method is to use a piece of float glass (most flat glass is float glass these days - it's made by floating molten glass on a bed of molten tin) layed on a flat bench, with coarse emery cloth glued to it. Work the plane on this (iron in, but fully retracted) until toe/mouth/heel show even abrasion, then change to a finer grade of emery and ditto repeato. Keep working through the grades until you get a polish - and a polished sole does work better on the wood. The hard work is the first (coarse) grade - something like 60 grit to start with. If you don't glue the emery down, it rucks up and abrades the toe-end excessively.

I've only ever flattened short-bodied planes, but didn't find it too onerous a process.

Hope that helps!


----------



## wcndave (10 Feb 2012)

Helps very much.

Was thinking i needed one of those veritas lapping planes, silicon carbide grits, etc...

Emery cloth i can do ;-)


----------



## bugbear (10 Feb 2012)

wcndave":1so4ty6d said:


> Helps very much.
> 
> Was thinking i needed one of those veritas lapping planes, silicon carbide grits, etc...
> 
> Emery cloth i can do ;-)



I put a lot of thought and effort into flattening at one time; here's my story and conclusions, from my (defunct) website.

Narrative version:

http://web.archive.org/web/200905291005 ... atten.html

Cleaned up, definitive (hah!) version:

http://web.archive.org/web/200904140443 ... heory.html
http://web.archive.org/web/200904140443 ... ctice.html

BugBear


----------



## Sawyer (10 Feb 2012)

Before even thinking about flatting, &c. the first thing I'd do is sharpen it up and see how it planes: chances are, it will be fine. 
If not, try investigating, but if it ain't broke, don't fix it.

Much great work over the centuries has been done with wooden planes, untouched by feeler guages.


----------



## bugbear (10 Feb 2012)

Sawyer":1r9h7lsa said:


> Before even thinking about flatting, &c. the first thing I'd do is sharpen it up and see how it planes: chances are, it will be fine.
> If not, try investigating, but if it ain't broke, don't fix it.
> 
> Much great work over the centuries has been done with wooden planes, untouched by feeler guages.



Wooden planes were routinely flattened, mainly the (assumed accurate) jointer plane. This is why the mouths open over time.

BugBear


----------



## wcndave (10 Feb 2012)

I am sure that they could be fine, just wanted to make a well informed choice, was not assuming I would have to flatten ;-)

I fell now i can indeed make a very informed choice.

FWIW i took my £10 B&Q stanley SB3, and now that i put the iron in bevel down, (i swear i bought it with the bevel up), and i had already scary sharpened, i proceeded to try to flatten a (very) uneven and rough board by hand, first board flattening of my life by hand.

got the depth to take decent amount, think i had the iron parallel in horizontal way, got it pretty good, few edge gouges where you'd have camber on a plane for that normally, took it down to "wafer" and got it really smooth, was surprised by how flat it was, slightly high in middle, perhaps 0.1mm, soon sorted that, amazed and happy...

then I did the other side, and it all went wrong, huge gouges, i would set depth, find i was getting nothing, change it 1/8 of a turn (less than 1/64") and suddenly take 3m out and get jammed in, then move up, get it about right, and suddenly after 2 strokes nothing again. that side was not so lumpy to start with, however it really felt like the iron was moving inside the plane depth-wise. (I had checked the grain orientation, however was almost dead straight along board, which was about 12" long). So went from ecstatic to depressed in about 10 mins flat. 

One very key advantage of hand planing over machines i can clearly see now though is the ability to have a beer whilst you work ;-)


----------



## Crooked Tree (10 Feb 2012)

wcndave: are you sure that the blade has not gone blunt? That is how mine behaves when it reaches the "no more cutting" limit. Also try the other grain direction. It may just be that SB3 that is the problem - my SB4 will encounter problems like that on more challenging grain where the Record does not - maybe because it is more difficult to adjust.

Sorry if this is suggesting the obvious to someone who already knows their stuff.


----------



## Racers (10 Feb 2012)

Hi, Chaps

This is my flattening set up.






Its a lenght of 6mm glass on my bench the abrasive is clamped down and stretched tight.
If you don't stretch it you will get a wave in the paper and it will round the edges over.
I should use a better paper but thats all I had at the time.
You can start by fileing the worst parts it the sole if far out.

Pete


----------



## wcndave (10 Feb 2012)

Crooked Tree":2u1130vx said:


> wcndave: are you sure that the blade has not gone blunt? That is how mine behaves when it reaches the "no more cutting" limit. Also try the other grain direction. It may just be that SB3 that is the problem - my SB4 will encounter problems like that on more challenging grain where the Record does not - maybe because it is more difficult to adjust.
> 
> Sorry if this is suggesting the obvious to someone who already knows their stuff.


No, it's all useful, i am new to hand planing!


----------



## Cheshirechappie (10 Feb 2012)

wcndave - I'm sure you've worked this out anyway, but how you hold the wood to plane it can make a big difference. To plane the faces, you really want the wood flat on a solid, supportive surface (bench top, ideally, but I got away with a Workmate for a year or two when I started - not ideal, wrong height, not very rigid, but better than nothing). Trying to grip it by the edges in a vice means that there's not much support under the middle of the board, and the downward force you need to apply to the plane will deflect the workpice. For the edges, holding in a vice is OK, because there's now enough depth of wood under the plane to resist the downward forces.


----------



## jimi43 (11 Feb 2012)

Hi Dave

It sounds like you may be going against the grain on the other side.

Planing should be with the grain...downhill as it were....there is some useful information on Wiki: HERE

Try getting used to the plane with relatively easy woods...be careful because some "soft" woods such as the "shed" stuff can be tricky with tearout just as much as wild wood. Once you get used to planing relatively easy woods...move on to trickier wood that may have the grain direction change along one face. This will show tearout or less smooth areas at these points and will show you what is happening more clearly.

Jim





wcndave":2h8cx7hh said:


> I am sure that they could be fine, just wanted to make a well informed choice, was not assuming I would have to flatten ;-)
> 
> I fell now i can indeed make a very informed choice.
> 
> ...


----------



## Benchwayze (11 Feb 2012)

MIGNAL":3tmeyv51 said:


> That Plane is older than the 60's. Try sharpening the blade and see how it cuts, it just might not be a bad idea!
> Strange but I have a 70's Stanley N0. 5.5 that works superb and it's had very little done to it. The only thing that might set it apart is the old thin Acorn blade - one of the best blades I have!




Agreed... and about the 'Acorn' blade too! 

The 70s Baileys needed a bit of work, and if you could get one with wooden handles, (or replace the plastic tat) that was nice. Overall, they work well after fettling. But I still love my older Baileys and LNs.


----------



## yetloh (11 Feb 2012)

Racers":357f9ha8 said:


> Hi, Chaps
> 
> This is my flattening set up.
> 
> ...



Hi Pete,

I can't tell you what a joy it was to see someone with a bench that is every bit as messy as mine. I know I should fight it but you have to accept who you are. At least my wife no longer regards the state of my bench as worthy of comment.

Jim


----------



## Benchwayze (11 Feb 2012)

yetloh":2wewli29 said:


> Racers":2wewli29 said:
> 
> 
> > Hi, Chaps
> ...



Me too! :mrgreen:


----------



## jimi43 (11 Feb 2012)

I feel strangely happy now! :mrgreen: 

Jim


----------



## Vann (11 Feb 2012)

jimi43":3qetlhfd said:


> Planing should be with the grain...downhill as it were....


Interesting how terminology can mean different things to different people. I'd have considered _with the grain _to be "uphill", with the grain rising in the direction of planing. :duno: 



mignal":3qetlhfd said:


> Strange but I have a 70's Stanley N0. 5.5 that works superb and it's had very little done to it.





benchwayze":3qetlhfd said:


> The 70s Baileys needed a bit of work, and if you could get one with wooden handles, (or replace the plastic tat) that was nice. Overall, they work well after fettling.


I'm sure not all post-1950 planes were rubbish, it's just that the chances of getting a rubbish one were much higher - but there must have been one or two good ones produced (by accident, of course) over the years since 1960. :mrgreen: :mrgreen: 

Cheers, Vann.


----------



## wcndave (11 Feb 2012)

Thanks guys. I am holding it on bench with dogs, and have the grain running up as i cut to prevent tearout. Wasn't really tear out as gouge out, and the blade "seemed" to change depth all the time. Hey ho, first time, so wasn't expecting much, of course i need los of practise. Just a bit disheartning after the earlier amazing success. Will definately try sharpening first, but i had not done much, if you have to sharpen after each 6" x 12" face, would spend a lot of time sharpening, sure it's just patience and practise.

For what it's worth, i took the plunge and got a #5 quangsheng from WorkshopHeaven. Matt has been amazingly helpful with repying to emails, chatting on phone (i was torn between #5 and the low angle 62 with 3 irons..), and he also offered to set it up for me and more! Excellent excellent personal service, will defo be going back, in fact hard to stop myself, chisels, rasps, etc... Must resist, for a couple of weeks anyway ;-)


----------



## jimi43 (12 Feb 2012)

wcndave":1lucd8nf said:


> For what it's worth, i took the plunge and got a #5 quangsheng from WorkshopHeaven. Matt has been amazingly helpful with repying to emails, chatting on phone (i was torn between #5 and the low angle 62 with 3 irons..), and he also offered to set it up for me and more! Excellent excellent personal service, will defo be going back, in fact hard to stop myself, chisels, rasps, etc... Must resist, for a couple of weeks anyway ;-)



Hi Vann.....with the grain is probably more correct...exactly as the picture...rising out of the face. I like it to stroking a dog really....some woods being Rhodesian Ridgebacks! :mrgreen: 

Dave...you have now moved from a "toy" to a Ferrari...

I bet...anything you wish to bet...you will see that this is like dark and light and you will be reporting back to us..(this week knowing Matt) with a huge smile on your face.

Not only will you be able to finely adjust your work but it will skim along....

Good choice! Oh...and welcome to the slope! :mrgreen: :wink: 

Jim


----------



## Jeff Gorman (12 Feb 2012)

dickster2112 wrote:

>..... what do people think about the merits of trying to to get this thing flat, is it worth the hours of sanding at the table <saw?

You might find some help at:

http://tinyurl.com/3xjpbm2

Jeff

http://www.amgron.clara.net


----------



## Sawyer (12 Feb 2012)

bugbear":3qprzm5m said:


> Sawyer":3qprzm5m said:
> 
> 
> > Before even thinking about flatting, &c. the first thing I'd do is sharpen it up and see how it planes: chances are, it will be fine.
> ...


True enough, but that's because the sole used to wear and it only takes a few minutes (done it myself, by the way). Not the same as hours of work with abrasives and feeler guages.

I would resort to flattening a metal sole too, but only if it really needed it.


----------



## Sawyer (12 Feb 2012)

Does anybody think, by the way, that a metal sole which was perfectly flat in the summer for example, might be 'out' in the winter, just because of the change in temperature?

Does even age, have an effect?

I don't have an answer: all I can say is that I haven't noted any change in a plane's performance between hot and cold weather or age.
Which is perhaps more than can be said for their owner! :?


----------



## GazPal (12 Feb 2012)

Sawyer":t87y9mle said:


> Does anybody think, by the way, that a metal sole which was perfectly flat in the summer for example, might be 'out' in the winter, just because of the change in temperature?
> 
> Does even age, have an effect?




Wooden planes can sometimes vary depending on wind direction (Kidding), but iron soled planes tend not to wander in normal working conditions unless post casting stress' exist within the cast iron plane body.

Age? Nope, unless heavily worn through use or abuse, or burnt in a house fire and warped.


----------



## wcndave (13 Feb 2012)

jimi43":3mwuqupn said:


> I bet...anything you wish to bet...you will see that this is like dark and light and you will be reporting back to us..(this week knowing Matt) with a huge smile on your face.



Well, given my location, maybe 2 weeks ;-)

I have just today received a blockplane from Workshop Heaven, low angly QS with 3 blades... I know every workshop should have one, even if power tool focused, however i just never got round to it. Already I can feel the quality just from looking and holding it...

i am sure though that there's more to it than just the tool, otherwise we'd all be masters, however removing some of the other factors that let me focus on the skills is going to be great.



jimi43":3mwuqupn said:


> Good choice! Oh...and welcome to the slope! :mrgreen: :wink:



Yer, slippery indeed...

"When he turned 80, my grandad started to rub butter all over his body. He went downhill very fast after that."


Ok, real question now.

Given i know how some nice tools, ranging from festool dominos to QS hand planes, do I need to worry about storage?

My workshop is currently -12 c, and in summer will be up to 34 c, so a variation of 46 degrees! (Celsius!)

In summer it is bone dry, the atmosphere at 1,500m (about the height of Ben Nevis) is dry. However i am underground and it can get damp in winter. The pages of my manuals are a bit crinkly now, which is a tell tale sign.

I also noticed my cheap (£10) dovetail saw is getting rust patches.

My grandad used to cover everything in grease for the winter, however i actually want to use them, so should i keep in box? get some of that absorbent silicon you get with various things? wrap them in newspaper? do a satanic chant?

Please don't say "move workshop", i have to build the house first.... so that's 3-4 years away.

Cheers guys, I hope one day I'll be able to contribute more answers than questions!


----------



## jimi43 (13 Feb 2012)

That is another very largely debated topic....tool preservation...so do a search and you will find a lot about the subject.

Personally I use Camellia Oil (also from WSH and it is top quality) for regular use and if I'm storing it away for a few months..Protec Corrosion Shield.

Jim


----------



## Cheshirechappie (13 Feb 2012)

+1 for Camellia Oil. It doesn't stain any wood in the same way grease might if you forget to wipe all of it off before using said tool. A little goes a long way, too - I'm still using the bottle I bought about ten years ago.

One downside - it may not be so good at long-term rust prevention.

Tool storage is one of those questions with no 'right' answer, because it depends so much on individual circumstances - what you've got to store, how accessible do you need things to be, personal preferences and prejudices, how much you're prepared to spend, how much space you've got and so on.

The main solutions seem to be pegs on walls, racks behind benches, scrounged cupboards or recycled chests of drawers and the like. Quick, cheap and cheerful, and perfectly effective with a bit of applied common sense. Then there are custom-made wall-mounted cabinets - very swish, but time-consuming to build and not necessarily ideal for an expanding tool collection. Recently, there's been an upsurge of interest in the traditional cabinetmaker's tool-chest. Again, time-consuming to build, but generations of woodworkers used them all their working lives, so eminently practical.

I used a large cardboard box when I first started. Not ideal because things had to be piled on top of one another, but at least they had a home. Later, I built a wooden tool-chest (took ages, but great fun) which needs it's interior refitting because my original layout isn't very convenient, but the chest itself holds everything I need (except the cramps) and I've found it a very practical way to store tools.


----------



## wcndave (13 Feb 2012)

I have lots of storage space, really the problem is protecting from the elements, in an environment that has a very large range of conditions, tools that I will use every week.

The oil sounds good, I assume one just rubs on enough to make the surface slick, rather than gloopy and dripping like when you get your plane delivered. I will research some more online, just wondered if there was a silver bullet like "keep it in it's box with a little packet of moisture absorbing silicon, and it will never go rusty".

One thing i wasn't sure if is how tight to make the large wheel, ie should i be able to adjust the blade depth on the fly... seems from reading one of Ollie's posts that the answer is no, you have to loosen top, adjust depth, tighten again.

I wanna go play now!


----------



## Cheshirechappie (13 Feb 2012)

You're right about the Camellia oil - just a wipe over to lightly coat machined surfaces. It can be wiped clean when you need to use the tool very easily, and any remaining traces won't harm the job.

If you can keep tools in their original cardboard boxes, it does help a lot to protect them until you can get round to a 'proper' storage method. They often come wrapped in VPI paper (Vapour Phase Inhibitor) which is quite effective for a year or two, and if supplemented with a wipe of oil before putting away should keep them in very good order, even in the extremes of temperature you're having to cope with. My tools see a fair range of temperature and humidity too, and only those I haven't used for some years have shown signs of minor corrosion when so stored.

As to the large wheel, to start with, tight enough to be stiff to operate is probably best to start with (but not so tight that it's very hard to set the plane with the lever cap in place). Then experiment a bit - it may be that with your plane, slack enough to adjust 'on the fly' means that it won't hold it's setting. But hey, give it a go! Nothing ventured, nothing gained - and it's not as if you're going to damage anything, whatever you do!


----------



## wcndave (13 Feb 2012)

Thanks Chappie, i guess my question was "what is the 'proper' storage method you refer to..." however i would guess there's no magic answer...

As for the plane, sounds like you are suggesting that i can adjust the depth with the cap set tight enough to prevent movement, yet the depth adjustment is movement... anyway, will give it a try, wanna go home now so i can play with my new toys! (got some card scrapers too)


----------



## Jacob (14 Feb 2012)

wcndave":7568krmc said:


> .......
> One thing i wasn't sure if is how tight to make the large wheel, ie should i be able to adjust the blade depth on the fly... ....


Yes definitely. That's one of the many strengths of the Bailey design - you can set depth and tilt on the fly without letting go of the handle. From the cockpit. Pressure is right when it isn't too difficult to lift or put down the lever on the lever cap.
You can't adjust so easily with any of the BU planes I've seen - even when they have norris adjusters but you still need a little hammer!


----------

