# german planes



## lurcher (26 Jun 2014)

hi do any of you have any experience of the german type of planes the 1s with the front horns on .
i have got a collection of 6 now and well i can say that they do perform very well for me .
well today i needed to shoot some 14" wide boards so used 1 of my german type as it is made of wood i could make it a true 90
to the sole alot better than a cast steel also the sides are much thicker so giving more surface to the shooting board.
also i used 1 to do the smoothing and i am very impressed with them .


----------



## Phil Pascoe (26 Jun 2014)

You don't need the sole and the side to be at 90 degrees, just the side and the cutting edge.


----------



## Corneel (27 Jun 2014)

Yes, I have a few too. They were sold and even made overhere in The Netherlands a lot. My favorite is the Ulmia smoother with lignum vitae sole. That plane is a miracle :lol: 

I prefer to have a shooting plane with the relevant side at 90 degrees. You can of course compensate with the later adjustment, but everything is just easier when it is square to start with.


----------



## Jacob (27 Jun 2014)

I've got the ECE scrub which is brilliant. Had to open the mouth a bit for max effect. 
Have also a similar (wider) single iron "jack" which is basically a finer scrubber. 
But my favourite is an old home made scrub from a cabinet makers collection which is the only native scrub plane I've ever seen (i.e. old and in use before they became fashionable)


----------



## bugbear (27 Jun 2014)

Jacob":loixv8ey said:


> I've got the ECE scrub which is brilliant. Had to open the mouth a bit for max effect.
> Have also a similar (wider) single iron "jack" which is basically a finer scrubber.
> But my favourite is an old home made scrub from a cabinet makers collection which is the only native scrub plane I've ever seen (i.e. old and in use before they became fashionable)



Why not just use a Bailey #5 with blade skewed? With a good tilt you get a wedge shaped deep shaving - and bingo you have a scrub plane.

BugBear


----------



## pedder (27 Jun 2014)

If you do a lot of scrubbing, it is easier with a leighter plane. These tools were made for workers who scrubed the hole day. 

Cheers 
Pedder


----------



## Jacob (27 Jun 2014)

bugbear":tud0y2zq said:


> Jacob":tud0y2zq said:
> 
> 
> > I've got the ECE scrub which is brilliant. Had to open the mouth a bit for max effect.
> ...


A good idea (mine I think - you've been in the archive again!) but the proper scrubber is better, both the cut and the light weight.


----------



## MIGNAL (27 Jun 2014)

I have an ECE, with the Hornbeam sole and wedge. I bought it from German Ebay but the blade must have been badly overheated. I never did get it back to good metal. It's the double iron version with the abutments that swivel. I had to fit it with a very good old Sheffield blade. 
At one time I had the very fancy ECE Primus, with all it's fancy adjustments. Crikey! What an obstacle course whenever one wanted to do the simple task of sharpening a blade! Must be one of the worst designs I have ever had the misfortune of coming across. I sold it. Seriously, the simple wedge is a far better concept.


----------



## Noggsy (27 Jun 2014)

I've got an Ulmia smoother and I love it. Very smooth moving over the wood and easy to adjust.


----------



## AndyT (27 Jun 2014)

MIGNAL":1imnc8lt said:


> I have an ECE, with the Hornbeam sole and wedge. I bought it from German Ebay but the blade must have been badly overheated. I never did get it back to good metal. It's the double iron version with the abutments that swivel. I had to fit it with a very good old Sheffield blade.




Snap!

Shown here taking a light pass to remove old French polish. I used it again recently on an idigbo barge board where it was nice and light to use.
Further proof that just putting a horn shaped handle on a plane doesn't mean it can only do coarse work. Original blade performing nicely.


----------



## bugbear (27 Jun 2014)

Jacob":18kcvtcr said:


> A good idea (mine I think - you've been in the archive again!) but the proper scrubber is better, both the cut and the light weight.



Indeed. Unsurprisingly, dedicated designs to tend to perform their task better.

BugBear


----------



## JohnPW (27 Jun 2014)

I've got this massive German rebate plane, 440mm long, with a skewed iron.


----------



## CStanford (27 Jun 2014)

bugbear":2xq22a3c said:


> Jacob":2xq22a3c said:
> 
> 
> > I've got the ECE scrub which is brilliant. Had to open the mouth a bit for max effect.
> ...



Percy Wells and John Hooper in Modern Cabinet Work describe the handiness of having a 'Bismarck' roughing plane in one's kit which by description is clearly a horned scrub plane; there is a line drawing too I believe. If precedence is needed in the British tradition, then, there you have it.


----------



## CStanford (27 Jun 2014)

AndyT":2sfurdj9 said:


> MIGNAL":2sfurdj9 said:
> 
> 
> > I have an ECE, with the Hornbeam sole and wedge. I bought it from German Ebay but the blade must have been badly overheated. I never did get it back to good metal. It's the double iron version with the abutments that swivel. I had to fit it with a very good old Sheffield blade.
> ...



Nice bench, can you post photos of it if you have time?


----------



## bugbear (27 Jun 2014)

CStanford":2n7g94xm said:


> Percy Wells and John Hooper in Modern Cabinet Work describe the handiness of having a 'Bismarck' roughing plane in one's kit which by description is clearly a horned scrub plane; there is a line drawing too I believe. If precedence is needed in the British tradition, then, there you have it.



Or it might just be a jack; this Melhuish catalogue caused me to take pause and consider:

post725105.html?hilit=scrub%20textual#p725105

BugBear


----------



## Cheshirechappie (27 Jun 2014)

Jacob":45ra4wxx said:


> bugbear":45ra4wxx said:
> 
> 
> > Jacob":45ra4wxx said:
> ...



From 'Hand Tools - Their Ways and Working' by Aldren A. Watson (pub. 1982), page 246 - "To remove a lot of wood in a hurry, set the cutter askew." There is a drawing of a 9" Bailey-type smoothing plane being used across grain with the lateral setting full to one side, leaving deep tram-lines diagonally across the board.

I'm not sure it would be my solution of choice - not quite as good as a 'proper' jack - but if only a very limited selection of planes is to hand, it's a dodge worth knowing.


----------



## AndyT (27 Jun 2014)

CStanford":1qhsfd3n said:


> Nice bench, can you post photos of it if you have time?



Thanks! I will try and do a separate thread some time soon, but just at the moment my workshop has a lot of wood in it which is normally stored elsewhere and so although I can manage close-ups, I can't actually see across the room or take good pictures. The bench is strictly utilitarian but may help encourage others by its simplicity. Meanwhile there must be some views of it in earlier posts of mine!


----------



## Jacob (27 Jun 2014)

Cheshirechappie":37rwt7ah said:


> Jacob":37rwt7ah said:
> 
> 
> > bugbear":37rwt7ah said:
> ...


There you go then - I didn't imagine I was the first person to think of it!
It's not a substitute for a jack but is an alternative to a scrub i.e. a way of removing a lot of material fast - deep and narrow removes more material than shallow and wide, given the same amount of effort. In theory the nearer you get to a semi circular trough the faster the rate of removal.


----------



## bugbear (27 Jun 2014)

Jacob":u6ga9itb said:


> In theory the nearer you get to a semi circular trough the faster the rate of removal.



And yet actual evolved-over-time scrubs don't remove semi circles. I think that theory is (at best) unproven. Where did you see it, or did you make it up yourself?

What's the reasoning and/or evidence?

BugBear


----------



## CStanford (27 Jun 2014)

bugbear":1drmzjwm said:


> CStanford":1drmzjwm said:
> 
> 
> > Percy Wells and John Hooper in Modern Cabinet Work describe the handiness of having a 'Bismarck' roughing plane in one's kit which by description is clearly a horned scrub plane; there is a line drawing too I believe. If precedence is needed in the British tradition, then, there you have it.
> ...



The line drawing on the plate on page 8 of the Wells book shows essentially the old Ulmia scrub plane. The horn is the typical one found on ECE and Ulmia planes and not the turned handle of the illustration in Melhuish. They were referring to a German plane.

FWIW, there is a line drawing of a typical English jack plane found on the same plate.


----------



## bugbear (27 Jun 2014)

CStanford":1zd6egwo said:


> bugbear":1zd6egwo said:
> 
> 
> > CStanford":1zd6egwo said:
> ...



Yes, that's all quite well understood. But the usage in the Melhuish catalogue is quite unexpected.

BugBear


----------



## CStanford (27 Jun 2014)

Melhuish does say the plane is available with a 'ram's horn' instead of a peg. 

Imitation is the sincerest form of flattery I suppose.

Anyway, the British kit has included dedicated scrub planes at points in the past. Too bad Larry Williams doesn't hang out here. He was quite sure that this was never the case. Taken with a grain of salt of course. He doesn't think chipbreakers work either.


----------



## Jacob (27 Jun 2014)

bugbear":qpqb3q63 said:


> Jacob":qpqb3q63 said:
> 
> 
> > In theory the nearer you get to a semi circular trough the faster the rate of removal.
> ...


Theory is the operative word. In _theory_ the ratio of cross sectional area of removed material to the length of the cutting edge is greatest for a semicircular trough. The shorter the cutting edge the less the effort required. The scrub (and any cambered blade) is _towards _the semi circle but in practice there are other issues.


----------



## bugbear (27 Jun 2014)

Jacob":2halb3a9 said:


> Theory is the operative word. In _theory_ the ratio of cross sectional area of removed material to the length of the cutting edge is greatest for a semicircular trough.



Well, that's true. It's not a theory or a hypothesis, it's a arithmetic fact, as far as it goes.



> The shorter the cutting edge the less the effort required.


That's certainly not true, at least not without MASSIVE amounts of qulifiying gumph.



> The scrub (and any cambered blade) is _towards _the semi circle but in practice there are other issues.


In any well thought out _theory_ there are other issues, like chip deflection effort and a funny little thing called "grain". Have you noticed that wood isn't homogenous?

Who proposed this silly theory?

BugBear


----------



## Jacob (28 Jun 2014)

erewego back to the playground! 
No BB, just because you don't understand it, doesn't mean it's silly. You really must try harder.

Consider the following tools for maximum material removal:
turning; roughing out gouge, semi circular.
chopping; adze with deep near semi circular profile
plane; scrub with deep camber verging on the semi circular.
For each of these (depending on the material) there is a maximum size beyond which they are less usable (for max removal) due to the effort required (or power of the lathe).
No doubt other examples could be found.

Conversely for fine finish in all three cases a straight (or straighter) edge.

Think about it BB before you start dismissing it as silly. Or perhaps don't bother, I don't think you will get it.


----------



## bugbear (28 Jun 2014)

Jacob":v72nezuu said:


> erewego back to the playground!
> No BB, just because you don't understand it, doesn't mean it's silly. You really must try harder.
> 
> Consider the following tools for maximum material removal:
> ...



In the plane case you cited, the notion that the force required is simply proportional to the length of the cutting edge simply doesn't stand up to consideration.

Everybody with a plane knows that despite the blade staying 2" wide, altering the depth of cut has a massive effect on the force required to push it.

Simple, clear, move along, nothing to see here.

(oh, and your last conclusion (maximum size) is quite a separate concept from a semi circle being optimal in some way, is obviously true, and not very relevant to anything)

The leap from "some real world tools don't have straight" and "a semi crcle is optimal" is a leap too far.

And I think I've worked out who proposed this theory.  

BugBear


----------



## Jacob (28 Jun 2014)

bugbear":1hm479zl said:


> .....
> Everybody with a plane knows that despite the blade staying 2" wide, altering the depth of cut has a massive effect on the force required to push it....


Yes. 
Except if the blade is cambered _the cutting edge_ doesn't stay 2" wide. 
A slight adjustment and it will go from a narrow paring from the centre (easy) to a wide full width paring (more difficult).
If the blade is dead straight it will go from easy when it is taking off just the high points, to difficult when the blade is full width engaged. This is one reason why people have so much difficulty with perfectly straight edges - there isn't an in between, it's all or nothing.
I'm talking about "cutting" here, not "digging" where the blade prizes up and brakes out the shaving, as you might do with a plough plane or an over extended plane of any sort.


----------



## bugbear (28 Jun 2014)

Jacob":3fe114zt said:


> bugbear":3fe114zt said:
> 
> 
> > .....
> ...



If we continue to consider the case of a straight blade, and avoid changing the subject to general planing technique, my simple point remains perfectly accurate.

I am happy to cede that I should have stated clearly that I was analysing a straight blade, but I thought that was obvious. Still:

Everybody with a plane _(with a straight blade)_ knows that despite the blade staying 2" wide, altering the depth of cut has a massive effect on the force required to push it. 

(e.g. when taking a full length full width shaving of 1/100" changing the depth of cut to be 2/100", or vise versa)

We can have a lovel discussion about the advisability and use of a cambered blade for general planing some other time, in a thread of its own.

I wish to bring the discussion of your theory about semi circles to some kind of conclusion first.

BugBear


----------



## Jacob (28 Jun 2014)

You haven't understood anything so far. I suggest you go away and think about it for a few days before replying.

Basically a device which _cuts_ (not levers, digs etc) a semi circular groove will remove most material for a given effort as it has the least material to cut (least length of cutting edge) for the greatest cross section area of waste.
Hence the tools mentioned above.


----------



## bugbear (28 Jun 2014)

Jacob":39hcxfia said:


> Basically a device which _cuts_ (not levers, digs etc) a semi circular groove will remove most material for a given effort as it has the least material to cut (least length of cutting edge) for the greatest cross section area of waste.



Yes, the maths of that is simple. If (and only if) the force required is directly (and only) proportional to the length of cut, it follows immediately that a semi circular cut of some size will remove the most material for a given force, in the same way that a fence of a given length will enclose the most land is made into a circle. 

So the question falls on the axiom - is the force required to make a cut directly (and only proportional) to the length of cut?

The simple example of changing the depth of a normal bailey plane when taking a normal, full length full width shaving (yes, with a straight blade :roll: ) demonstrates clearly that the force required is in fact also governed by other factors (including at least depth of cut).

Thus the axiom is false, and the theory with it.

BugBear


----------



## Jacob (28 Jun 2014)

You are getting closer! Well done BB. :roll:

NB I didn't say it was the _only_ factor.
How do you yourself account for the ease of cut and speed of waste removal of a scrub plane? With a narrow blade (30mm ish) you can do a 1/4" deep cut quite easily. Your adapted no 4 (5?) is probably too wide for this.


----------



## CStanford (28 Jun 2014)

Good Lord surely there isn't an argument going about whether a dedicated scrub plane with a thick iron and curved blade will remove wood faster and easier than a Stanley/Record/Bailey pattern No. 5 jack plane.


----------



## woodbrains (28 Jun 2014)

Hello,

The reason behind the cambered blade of a scrub has little to do with the effort required to push it, so the debate is moot. The width of the plane iron regardless of the profile, is what dictates the effort needed to push it, for a given amount of removed material. The reason the scrub is cambered is because we would not want to plough flat bottomed grooves as we work, but a series of overlappable scoops. A shaving of this type will lift up more readily than a flat bottomed one, since the sides will still be attached in the latter case, for a deep cut, the radiussed used ones are free.

Ideally a scrub should cut right to its edges, or neat enough, or we might just as well use a 25 mm iron. so a plane cutting right to its edge of the iron, whether flat of cambered are to all intents and purposes equal, for such a narrow blade. So arguing about which is easier to push is a bit academic. We might have to think more in terms of volume of wood removed in shaving, which will be hard to calculate in a meaningful way.


----------



## Carl P (28 Jun 2014)

On a more practical note, how does this relate to an ideal camber on a scrub? Has anyone tried using a semicircular profile? Would a 'U' shape with a flat bottom be as effective?

Cheerio,

Carl


----------



## woodbrains (28 Jun 2014)

Carl P":3tekeaaj said:


> On a more practical note, how does this relate to an ideal camber on a scrub? Has anyone tried using a semicircular profile? Would a 'U' shape with a flat bottom be as effective?
> 
> Cheerio,
> 
> Carl



Probably, the shaving would be released at the edges, so it would work well. I doubt the shape of the scallop would have any advantage over the standard scoop, and the blade would be a little fussier to sharpen, so it is unlikely to be useful.

It is the release of the heavy shavings that makes a scrub efficient, not its ease/difficulty to push. It is for the same reasons roughing gouges, carving gouges, trimming axes, whatever are radiused, any other discussions are incidental.

Mike.


----------



## bugbear (28 Jun 2014)

CStanford":3bw2mhsc said:


> Good Lord surely there isn't an argument going about whether a dedicated scrub plane with a thick iron and curved blade will remove wood faster and easier than a Stanley/Record/Bailey pattern No. 5 jack plane.



Good $DEITY, No!

Scrubs are great. 

The "debate" is about a trivial (and invalid IMHO) little piece of mechanical analysis.

BugBear


----------



## Jacob (28 Jun 2014)

woodbrains":3nthshno said:


> Hello,
> 
> The reason behind the cambered blade of a scrub has little to do with the effort required to push it, so the debate is moot. The width of the plane iron regardless of the profile, is what dictates the effort needed to push it, for a given amount of removed material. ...


Nope. You try scrubbing with narrow rebate plane frinstance. Impossible.
Interesting that so many people go on for years about camber, scrub planes etc without the foggiest idea of how/why they work. Well now you know! :lol: (except it'll take bugbear some time to catch up).


----------



## bugbear (28 Jun 2014)

Jacob":18ouhnn7 said:


> NB I didn't say it was the _only_ factor



You said:



Jacob":18ouhnn7 said:


> The shorter the cutting edge the less the effort required.



I didn't see any qualification, although plenty is needed, as I've been carefully pointing out.

Since blade length being the only factor affected the force is required for the "semi circle is optimal" theory
to be true, I guess the theory is now dead.

BugBear


----------



## woodbrains (28 Jun 2014)

Jacob":1lo6ixzr said:


> woodbrains":1lo6ixzr said:
> 
> 
> > Hello,
> ...



Hello,

Jacob, this is what I just said, it is clear you do not understand the points written. The scrub works because it releases the shaving, which is why it was designed like it is, NOT to make it easier to push, a plough of a similar dimension COULD be pushed, but it wouldn't release the shaving. if there is a minuscule and immeasurable advantage in pushing a scrub it is entirely beside the point.

Mike.


----------



## Jacob (28 Jun 2014)

woodbrains":2oq6vt1v said:


> ...I if there is a minuscule and immeasurable advantage in pushing a scrub it is entirely beside the point.
> 
> Mike.


There is a huge advantage in pushing a scrub plane - which is the whole point of using it. It's easy to take out a deep shaving with a scrub, but not with a rebate plane.
Keep thinking about it I'm sure you will get there in the end. Dunno though, maybe you won't! 
Anyway I've explained it and I can't be bothered to keep repeating myself so I won't post again in this thread. Cheers!

PS :roll: except to say - yes a scrub plane "releases" the shaving as you term it. But so does a shallow cambered plane. But the scrub plane shaving is fatter - more wood removed for the same effort (AOTBE).


----------



## woodbrains (28 Jun 2014)

Jacob":8ih2z9gp said:


> But the scrub plane shaving is fatter - more wood removed for the same effort (AOTBE).



Hello,

That is clearly IMPOSSIBLE isn't it, Jacob. More effect for the same effort! Builders could use mini diggers instead of full sizes JCB's and remove more earth! Small hammer could knock in bigger nails than framing hammers. Wow, we've all been doing everything wrong! (hammer) 

Mike.


----------



## Jacob (28 Jun 2014)

woodbrains":1j3v1dp2 said:


> Jacob":1j3v1dp2 said:
> 
> 
> > But the scrub plane shaving is fatter - more wood removed for the same effort (AOTBE).
> ...


Clearly possible if you actually try to use a scrub plane which you obviously haven't.
Think of slicing a cake - same amount of cutting effort to take out a thin slice as to cut out a fat one, even to cut it in half. A MIRACLE!
Otherwise what we be the point of using a scrub plane?


----------



## woodbrains (28 Jun 2014)

Hello,

Cutting cake; the amount of material removed is the same, for the same effort, irrespective of the size of the slice. (The material removed is in the knife cut only, the slice of cake is incidental) This is entirely NOT the same as removing different amounts of material for the same effort as you fallaciously believe happens during planing. This would have to breach the laws of conservation of energy, I'm afraid and is not possible. Scrubs work by releasing the shaving at the edges which is why they work, nothing more.



Mike.


----------



## Jacob (28 Jun 2014)

Yes think "cake". Same cut thicker slices. Yep thats it.
This is probably the silliest discussion I've had with BB and WB - and there have been some very silly ones!


----------



## CStanford (28 Jun 2014)

woodbrains":nz51ad5b said:


> Hello,
> 
> Cutting cake; the amount of material removed is the same, for the same effort, irrespective of the size of the slice. (The material removed is in the knife cut only, the slice of cake is incidental) This is entirely NOT the same as removing different amounts of material for the same effort as you fallaciously believe happens during planing. This would have to breach the laws of conservation of energy, I'm afraid and is not possible. Scrubs work by releasing the shaving at the edges which is why they work, nothing more.
> 
> ...



All planes work by releasing the shavings at the edges. One never uses a perfectly straight cutter on a workpiece wider than the cutter. Straight cutters are reserved for working edges so the cutters' edges are never in wood, they span it on both sides. Planing wood wider than a perfectly straight cutter is a miserable experience, try it some time. Add curve to the cutter and a depth setting consistent with the amount of curve and the going is much easier. More curve, deeper setting is possible. A profoundly curved cutter with a light depth setting is the definition of easy planing.


----------



## Jacob (28 Jun 2014)

woodbrains":2ckmbuhu said:


> Hello,
> 
> Cutting cake; the amount of material removed is the same, for the same effort, irrespective of the size of the slice. (The material removed is in the knife cut only, the slice of cake is incidental) This is entirely NOT the same as removing different amounts of material for the same effort as you fallaciously believe happens during planing. This would have to breach the laws of conservation of energy, I'm afraid and is not possible. Scrubs work by releasing the shaving at the edges which is why they work, nothing more.
> 
> ...


Hello 

Do you have an opinion on the laws of conservation of cake? Cake knives work by releasing the cake at the edges apparently, nothing more. So I'm told anyway. Something new every day! :lol:


----------



## JohnPW (28 Jun 2014)

Can someone rename this thread as most of it not actually about German planes...or split off the relevant posts to a new thread.

:mrgreen:


----------



## Jacob (28 Jun 2014)

woodbrains":2ru2kl5x said:


> Hello,
> 
> Cutting cake; the amount of material removed is the same, for the same effort, irrespective of the size of the slice. (The material removed is in the knife cut only, the slice of cake is incidental) T.....


Do you mean the crumbs? Possibly a blunt knife? Sharpen it?
The slice of cake may be incidental to you but it could be everything to me (it depends on the cake). Are you on a diet?


----------



## Billy Flitch (28 Jun 2014)

JhonPW Iàm sorry you feel like that about this thread but it is definitely about German hand planes in particular the scrub plane. The problem is standing on the side lines watching all this it is quit obvious that some people have never used a German scrub plane but that dose not stop them making comments about it.


----------



## MIGNAL (28 Jun 2014)

No, no, no. It was originally concerned with German, horn handled planes. No mention of scrubs. It morphed into scrubs and obviously some people want their cake and eat it. I'm not the slightest bit bothered, providing I get the biggest slice.


----------



## Billy Flitch (28 Jun 2014)

Well the German horn handled scrub plane is very much German and in no way related to any British plane or any thing that Stanley made in America.So on that definition I think it belongs very much in this thread.


----------



## JohnPW (28 Jun 2014)

Well obviously a German horn handled scrub plane is German :roll: but most of the posts are about the cutting action of a scrub plane vs a no 5 plane with the blade set wonky.

Is a scrub plane specifically German? And I would say horn handled planes are continental rather than German.


----------



## bugbear (28 Jun 2014)

CStanford":1jm0rru1 said:


> All planes work by releasing the shavings at the edges. One never uses a perfectly straight cutter on a workpiece wider than the cutter. Straight cutters are reserved for working edges so the cutters' edges are never in wood, they span it on both sides. Planing wood wider than a perfectly straight cutter is a miserable experience, try it some time. Add curve to the cutter and a depth setting consistent with the amount of curve and the going is much easier. More curve, deeper setting is possible. A profoundly curved cutter with a light depth setting is the definition of easy planing.



As ever, Charles is quite accurate; not the most cheerful of souls, but accurate.

I notice that Jacob has totally dropped the silly semi circle claim in favour of generalities diversions, and jokes. The Butler Swerve rides again. Good night all.

BugBear


----------



## Jacob (28 Jun 2014)

bugbear":2voao2bj said:


> ...
> I notice that Jacob has totally dropped the silly semi circle claim ..


No I haven't!

I came on to this thread because I've got 3 "german" planes and have used them. 
But I got sidetracked by Beavis and Butthead who obviously have no experience of them and probably don't even know what day it is :roll: 
Funny though. Well I thought so anyway. Sorry if it was a bit annoying.
Help yourself to a slice of cake.


----------



## CStanford (28 Jun 2014)

JohnPW":4uvzyg8q said:


> Well obviously a German horn handled scrub plane is German :roll: but most of the posts are about the cutting action of a scrub plane vs a no 5 plane with the blade set wonky.
> 
> Is a scrub plane specifically German? And I would say horn handled planes are continental rather than German.



Probably not if you go back far enough in history. However, Ulmia and ECE have been supplying these for so long that the moniker "German" does apply and is understood by all. Stanley of course had its cast iron version which is not nearly as pleasant to use as a wooden one. The Lie Nielsen copy is abominable since it only comes with a cutter in insipid A2 tool steel (at least that used to be the case).


----------



## Noel (29 Jun 2014)

Can the two handbag swingers give it it a rest. That's Bugbear and and Jacob. One is worse than the other, don't make me make a choice.


----------



## dm65 (29 Jun 2014)

Can I propose a new forum section - perhaps called irrelevant but entertaining arguments ??

I also have one of these horned planes, given by the op, but no blade yet, so whilst nice to look at, it's currently an ornament


----------



## bugbear (29 Jun 2014)

Jacob":2x5n7uur said:


> bugbear":2x5n7uur said:
> 
> 
> > ...
> ...



OK. let's try to resolve it, bring it to a close, cutting out the verbiage, cake, distractions and side issues:

We have (all from Jacob):

A) The effort required for a cut depends purely on the length of the cut.

We also have

B) The shape of cut that removes most material for a given effort is a semi-circle.

This follows nicely from (A) and was first proved by Archimedes. Very basic,
well established maths.

But we also have

C) Factors other than the length of the cut effect the effort required.

A and C are directly contradictory, and cannot both be true. So;
which is true?

Personally, I believe C to be true, since observation shows that depth of cut certainly affects
the efffort required.

Over to Jacob: A or C? (*)

BugBear

(*) will I have to do a Paxman and ask 12 times...


----------



## MIGNAL (29 Jun 2014)

dm65":1rg8a5qv said:


> Can I propose a new forum section - perhaps called irrelevant but entertaining arguments ??
> 
> I also have one of these horned planes, given by the op, but no blade yet, so whilst nice to look at, it's currently an ornament




You should be able to get a suitable replacement from gandmtoolsales, Ebay. That's what I did to replace my original soft ECE blade. Most of the continental blades are 48 mm's, I bought an old Sheffield 1 7/8 th's blade. I think it even came with a chipbreaker.


----------



## dm65 (29 Jun 2014)

Thanks Mignal, it is on my todo list (page 46 I think )


----------



## Jacob (29 Jun 2014)

Or if it's a single iron scrub someone on ebay has been selling new blades (old stock "Herring") for a long time. he must have a big box of them. 30 or 32 mm wide can't remember which.


----------



## dm65 (29 Jun 2014)

Thanks Jacob - I don't suppose you have a link ? (at work so SHOULDN'T be searching through ebay)


----------



## Cheshirechappie (29 Jun 2014)

The Ebay seller Jacob is referring to is G and M Tools; they have an Ebay presence as 'The Plane Iron Shop' as well as their main business in secondhand machinery and general tools. Here's the link - http://www.gandmtools.co.uk/product-cat ... ane-irons/

Other UK sources for plane irons would be the secondhand tool dealers - there's a good list on Alf's website 'The Cornish Workshop'. As AndyT mentioned earlier, Bristol Design have a fairly extensive stock, including some pretty esoteric sizes.

For the real thing, it may be best to try one of the big German tool dealers, Dieter Schmidt or Dictum.


----------



## dm65 (29 Jun 2014)

Brilliant - thanks CC


----------



## JohnPW (29 Jun 2014)

Update on the plane I posted earlier, it's stamped "H. Himstedt, Hamburg".









.
From bottom of page at: http://www.holzwerken.de/museum/herstel ... burg.phtml

English translation:


> Johann Heinrich Christian Himstedt
> Born 30/08/1851 in Bruchmacktersen.
> Proved in 1882 as a toolmaker, since 1887 as the "Liidecke successor".
> From 1900 to 1914 "Tool factory spec. Tools f Carpenter & Carpenter, only own manufacture."
> ...


----------



## Bedrock (30 Jun 2014)

+1 for G and M Tools. I bought several unused Herring blades from them including a couple of apparently scrub plane blades, already ground to U shaped profile. At work at moment, but IIRC one is about 1" and the other c.1 1/2" for scrub planes yet to be made. So far steel seems good quality. Both are not "cut", if I understand the term, in that they are plain, without any holes or slots. 
I have no idea of the vintage, but these suggest that some English plane maker was making scrub planes?

Mike


----------



## bugbear (30 Jun 2014)

Bedrock":1qiuj5ni said:


> +1 for G and M Tools. I bought several unused Herring blades from them including a couple of apparently scrub plane blades, already ground to U shaped profile. At work at moment, but IIRC one is about 1" and the other c.1 1/2" for scrub planes yet to be made. So far steel seems good quality. Both are not "cut", if I understand the term, in that they are plain, without any holes or slots.
> I have no idea of the vintage, but these suggest that some English plane maker was making scrub planes?



As I posted earlier, Melhuish listed them. IIRC Preston 1909 lists them too.

BugBear


----------



## MIGNAL (30 Jun 2014)

The Herring blade that I bought from G and M was the hardest steel I've come across! I was worried because my stones didn't seem to be having much effect. It was more like trying to sharpen HSS. Even my medium grit waterstone was really struggling. That's when I put it to the hand crank grinder and removed a couple of mm's. Thankfully it then settled down to acting more like high Carbon tool steel.


----------



## bugbear (30 Jun 2014)

MIGNAL":2tj7pz10 said:


> The Herring blade that I bought from G and M was the hardest steel I've come across! I was worried because my stones didn't seem to be having much effect. It was more like trying to sharpen HSS. Even my medium grit waterstone was really struggling. That's when I put it to the hand crank grinder and removed a couple of mm's. Thankfully it then settled down to acting more like high Carbon tool steel.



Sounds like it was heat treated after the bevel was ground/cut into place.

BugBear


----------



## Racers (30 Jun 2014)

Usually the first part of the blade is soft caused by the carbon being lost from the surface, you usually get harder steel and you grind back.
Sounds like a heat treating problem, but the edge is thinner and easier to heat so it shouldn't happen.

Pete


----------



## bugbear (30 Jun 2014)

Racers":1u3trkoy said:


> Usually the first part of the blade is soft caused by the carbon being lost from the surface, you usually get harder steel and you grind back.
> Sounds like a heat treating problem, but the edge is thinner and easier to heat so it shouldn't happen.
> 
> Pete



IIRC Odate speaks of a new blade needing to be "tamed" because the edge is too hard.

BugBear


----------



## MIGNAL (30 Jun 2014)

I've certainly read of (and experienced) both 'states'. That Herring blade is the only one that I have come across where the tip has been noticeably harder. The opposite, soft and then hard, I've come across on at least two occasions. 
Here I'm referring to new blades or new old stock, as in that Herring. I can't think that a few decades of storage would affect the hardness in any way, so I can only assume it was something in the original manufacture. At a guess the Herring looked to be relatively recent - maybe '60's or perhaps '50's?


----------



## Racers (30 Jun 2014)

bugbear":1yppg0dn said:


> Racers":1yppg0dn said:
> 
> 
> > Usually the first part of the blade is soft caused by the carbon being lost from the surface, you usually get harder steel and you grind back.
> ...




Didn't he have to leave one on a metal roof, or was advised to?

Pete


----------



## bugbear (30 Jun 2014)

Racers":2qz5bj2p said:


> bugbear":2qz5bj2p said:
> 
> 
> > Racers":2qz5bj2p said:
> ...



The passage I'm recalling, he just ground some blade away. I had the book from a library, so I can't check.

BugBear


----------



## Racers (30 Jun 2014)

I will check tonight, if I get chance.

Pete


----------



## Racers (30 Jun 2014)

Toshio Odate book page 156 A story of a blade that was to hard and chipped during use the advise was to "keep the blade on a hot tin roof"
Or sharpening fast with lots of pressure to heat up the blade, which he (Odate) says happens even on waterstones.

Pete


----------



## CStanford (30 Jun 2014)

Well, if either of those two strategies is something somebody thinks will actually work then "Old Sheffield" is to be excused for the occasional clunker piece of steel it produced.

Both of these 'strategies' by Odate amount to no more than superstition or old wives' tales at the very best. The only thing happening on the waterstone (waterstone!) is that he might be removing metal past the problem area. There most certainly is not enough heat being generated to affect the properties of tool steel. 

Did he make these statements in his dotage or years ago? One hopes the former.


----------



## bugbear (30 Jun 2014)

CStanford":bz77lgt3 said:


> Well, if either of those two strategies is something somebody thinks will actually work then "Old Sheffield" is to be excused for the occasional clunker piece of steel it produced.



I don't think "Old Sheffield" was very influenced for better or worse by a book published by a Japanese Craftsman in 1984. :lol: 

BugBear


----------



## CStanford (30 Jun 2014)

One hopes not....


----------



## Racers (30 Jun 2014)

CStanford":1oyspopp said:


> There most certainly is not enough heat being generated to affect the properties of tool steel.



Are you sure, even at a microscopic level? ever seen sparks from a powered waterstone?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K0BtDfJCNL8

Pete


----------



## CStanford (30 Jun 2014)

Racers":2gm6z339 said:


> CStanford":2gm6z339 said:
> 
> 
> > There most certainly is not enough heat being generated to affect the properties of tool steel.
> ...



That's all well and good but I'm sure that the only thing that happens with respect to this issue when one uses a waterstone in the vigorous manner described by Odate is that a lot of steel is removed, and in the instant case steel that wasn't heat treated properly. The bad steel is simply honed away back to the good stuff. There is no annealing going on or re-hardening or whatever it is Mr. Odate surmises may be happening.


----------



## Cheshirechappie (30 Jun 2014)

I think it is possible to alter the heat-treatment state of a tool edge whilst grinding it. We are all familiar with the phenomenon of softening - over-tempering - that can occur on a small bench grinder if the tool is allowed to dwell too long. The grindstones used by the old Sheffield makers were far larger, and were of two types. The first, large water-cooled stones running far faster (wheel peripheral speed, not RPM) than most bench grinders run today, used for rough shaping of the forged and heat-treated blanks, and the second a smaller (about 24" diameter) wooden wheel faced with leather and dressed with emery, run fast and uncooled, and used for 'glazing' or finish grinding.

It is quite possible for the heat generated by either wheel to raise the thin section at the cutting edge of the tool being ground to hardening temperature, and for the tool edge to 'quench' fast enough for hardening to occur as the cooler bulk of the tool sucks away the heat when the tool leaves the stone surface. (If anybody doubts that sufficient heat could arise, consider the sparks from grinding, some of which come off white. That indicates particles at close to or above the melting point of the steel.) As others have noted, the hard part is seldom more than a few thou thick, and can fairly easily be ground away to properly hardened and tempered metal - the hardening happens only very close to the cutting edge.


----------



## woodbrains (30 Jun 2014)

Cheshirechappie":2gdy2tnr said:


> I think it is possible to alter the heat-treatment state of a tool edge whilst grinding it. We are all familiar with the phenomenon of softening - over-tempering - that can occur on a small bench grinder if the tool is allowed to dwell too long. The grindstones used by the old Sheffield makers were far larger, and were of two types. The first, large water-cooled stones running far faster (wheel peripheral speed, not RPM) than most bench grinders run today, used for rough shaping of the forged and heat-treated blanks, and the second a smaller (about 24" diameter) wooden wheel faced with leather and dressed with emery, run fast and uncooled, and used for 'glazing' or finish grinding.
> 
> It is quite possible for the heat generated by either wheel to raise the thin section at the cutting edge of the tool being ground to hardening temperature, and for the tool edge to 'quench' fast enough for hardening to occur as the cooler bulk of the tool sucks away the heat when the tool leaves the stone surface. (If anybody doubts that sufficient heat could arise, consider the sparks from grinding, some of which come off white. That indicates particles at close to or above the melting point of the steel.) As others have noted, the hard part is seldom more than a few thou thick, and can fairly easily be ground away to properly hardened and tempered metal - the hardening happens only very close to the cutting edge.



Hello,

The melting point of steel can and is reached by grinders, which is why diamond dry grinders are never used and CBN must be used instead. If the heat generated is that great, I doubt water will prevent it at the extreme, ultra fine tip of the tool. I recall that Jim Kingshott even commented that wet grinding only helped with not drawing temper, but not prevent it entirely, if used carelessly.

Mike.


----------



## CStanford (30 Jun 2014)

Cheshirechappie":2uw4fzw8 said:


> I think it is possible to alter the heat-treatment state of a tool edge whilst grinding it. We are all familiar with the phenomenon of softening - over-tempering - that can occur on a small bench grinder if the tool is allowed to dwell too long. The grindstones used by the old Sheffield makers were far larger, and were of two types. The first, large water-cooled stones running far faster (wheel peripheral speed, not RPM) than most bench grinders run today, used for rough shaping of the forged and heat-treated blanks, and the second a smaller (about 24" diameter) wooden wheel faced with leather and dressed with emery, run fast and uncooled, and used for 'glazing' or finish grinding.
> 
> It is quite possible for the heat generated by either wheel to raise the thin section at the cutting edge of the tool being ground to hardening temperature, and for the tool edge to 'quench' fast enough for hardening to occur as the cooler bulk of the tool sucks away the heat when the tool leaves the stone surface. (If anybody doubts that sufficient heat could arise, consider the sparks from grinding, some of which come off white. That indicates particles at close to or above the melting point of the steel.) As others have noted, the hard part is seldom more than a few thou thick, and can fairly easily be ground away to properly hardened and tempered metal - the hardening happens only very close to the cutting edge.



Well, yes, but apparently Odate is asserting that this can be accomplished when honing on a waterstone, by hand.


----------



## Cheshirechappie (30 Jun 2014)

CStanford":24059p19 said:


> Well, yes, but apparently Odate is asserting that this can be accomplished when honing on a waterstone, by hand.



Well - that's not how I interpreted it. 

I read it that if Odate came across a tool that was brittle - too hard - his solution was to get it to tempering temperature, either on a hot ti roof (maybe just about possible on a very hot day) or by getting enough heat into the edge by friction on a sharpening stone to temper it back a bit (probably just about possible with a lot of energy exerted). He wasn't suggesting that friction on a hand hone would cause enough heat to bring the tool edge to hardening temperature.

What I was suggesting is a possible cause for the phenomenon noted by various people that some Sheffield-made plane irons (and also noted more recently with Ashley Iles chisels) are very hard and brittle at the cutting edge when brand new, but perform perfectly once the 'bad steel' is ground or honed back. That may also explain why Odate's tools were brittle when new, too - overheating local to the cutting edge on the manufacturer's grindstone.


----------



## CStanford (30 Jun 2014)

Chisels can certainly come with a small brittle portion at the end. In fact a lot do. Any treatment of this problem on one's honing stone (regardless of what kind) is not tempering this portion but simply removing it. The easiest thing to do is ignore the problem and continue to use and hone the chisel and soon enough all will be put right. If used only in paring and light chopping, the extra hardness isn't necessarily a drawback. At any rate, it'll be gone before you know it.

People run to the grinder too fast just because they notice a little nick. Just keep honing and using the chisel. Most of the time the nick won't even be a factor during use. No need to panic and no need to do a lot of grinding.


----------



## Racers (1 Jul 2014)

CStanford":11tmprpq said:


> Chisels can certainly come with a small brittle portion at the end. In fact a lot do.



Well that statement seems to go against everything I have read or experienced making my own blades. Decarburization is something I have found when heat treating blades in either the BBQ or MAPP torch.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Decarburization

Pete


----------



## CStanford (1 Jul 2014)

I should say that people often complain of this problem over the years on the boards (perhaps not this one though) -- chipping at the end of a new chisel. Seems to be a common enough complaint. The standard, and good advice received, is to just grind it back a little or tolerate it until the small portion of brittle steel is honed away.

If it means anything, Odate has apparently experienced it enough times to have his pet remedies for it as well.


----------



## Corneel (1 Jul 2014)

Just an idea. Maybe a bit of case hardening going on? When the iron is heated in a coal furnace, I could imagine that some of the carbon migrates into the steel, carbonising the surface, and thus making the tip too highly carbonised to be usefull as a chisel. Grind it back abit and this area is quickly removed.


----------



## Sheffield Tony (1 Jul 2014)

According to our local smith Magnus ... placing the steel close to the air blast in the forge, where there was excess oxygen, tends to deplete the carbon from the steel. Whereas placing it to the side, away from the air where the fuel is burning with barely sufficient oxygen, allows carbon to be incorporated into the steel. This may of course be just an old blacksmiths tale. 

Since the tempering temperatures for O1 or similar carbon steel are around 200C and hardening about 800C, compared to the boiling point of water at 100C, I cannot see a waterstone having a tempering or hardening effect - unless it is not wet ! Neither, to be honest, do I think that a hot tin roof is likely to make much difference. A domestic oven cranked to max will.


----------



## bugbear (1 Jul 2014)

Sheffield Tony":76ui7n2t said:


> According to our local smith Magnus ... placing the steel close to the air blast in the forge, where there was excess oxygen, tends to deplete the carbon from the steel. Whereas placing it to the side, away from the air where the fuel is burning with barely sufficient oxygen, allows carbon to be incorporated into the steel. This may of course be just an old blacksmiths tale.



Managing and controlling the distinction between an oxidising fire and a reducing fire is all part of the craft of the smith, where steel is concerned. No myth.

BugBear


----------



## Cheshirechappie (1 Jul 2014)

I think there may be a bit of confusion between faults occurring during heat treatment, and faults occurring during grinding.

The phenomenon of brittle cutting edges might (I emphasise might) be down to heat generated during grinding being sufficient to re-harden metal close to the edge. If the tool was properly hardened in the first place, it's unlikely to be a failure of tempering, because the problem can be solved by grinding away a small amount of metal at the edge. That wouldn't be the case if hardening hadn't occurred properly.

I've never seen any report of small workshop grinders being able to generate enough heat for this to occur - usually any problems they cause are softening due to reaching the higher tempering heats. However, the bigger grinders, running faster, used by Sheffield grinders may have been capable of bringing localised parts of tools to hardening heat - every picture I've seen of them in use showed bright sparks thrown from the job, so there was heat, water-cooled or not.

I don't know whether it IS the explaination, but all sorts of odd things happen to metal surfaces when being ground - it can be a very (locally) hot process.


----------



## G S Haydon (1 Jul 2014)

The only edge tools so far that have chipped in my hands during normal use are the Narex chisels. Both a mortice and the 8105's have brittle tips when brand new. I seem to recall it being down to heat treatment after grinding? In this case a few honings removed the issue.


----------



## Silas Gull (1 Jul 2014)

I have a 1938 Focke-Wulfe.


----------



## Phil Pascoe (1 Jul 2014)

One of those Fokkers that aren't Messerschmitts?


----------



## dm65 (1 Jul 2014)

Oh, the good old days when Jim Davidson was funny


----------



## Phil Pascoe (1 Jul 2014)

No, it's older than that, even.


----------



## Carl P (2 Jul 2014)

Wasn't there a film...


----------



## AndyT (29 Jul 2014)

AndyT":xz0p1rzy said:


> CStanford":xz0p1rzy said:
> 
> 
> > Nice bench, can you post photos of it if you have time?
> ...



- Update - see pictures in the Projects section - https://www.ukworkshop.co.uk/forums/my-old-cheap-easy-bench-t82290.html


----------



## CStanford (29 Jul 2014)

Fantastic... thanks....


----------

