# Record 077A plane.



## garywayne (11 Jul 2005)

I was on my weekly tour of the local car-boot sale, and I came across a Record 077A plane, It's the one with the detachable nose. It had a price of £20.00. It looked in quite good condition.

1)Is it worth £20.00?
2)Can you still get replacement blades?

I have looked on the net, and seen prices of between £60.00 to £99.00, which made me think I had found a bargain. Then on e-bay there was one going for a quid, another for £5.00.

I must admit, I would rather buy the one from the car-boot if it's worth it, as I can see that one. As for the ones on ebay, you just don't know what your getting do you.


----------



## Alf (11 Jul 2005)

garywayne":2pc9bwjc said:


> Record 077A plane
> 
> 1)Is it worth £20.00?


Yes



garywayne":2pc9bwjc said:


> 2)Can you still get replacement blades?


Yes <- Link

Cheers, Alf


----------



## bugbear (11 Jul 2005)

If you order a Ray Isles blade, try to make sure you get the Record blade, not the (very similar) Preston blade.

Surprisingly, the Preston blade is much thinner, although it will fit.

Words from the wise; the Clifton equivalent won't fit - it's too thick.

BugBear


----------



## bugbear (11 Jul 2005)

> Then on e-bay there was one going for a quid, another for £5.00.



Neither has sold yet, if you mean the current ones.

The cheap one has NO lever cap - useful only for spares. Might be a source of a blade. It appears to have a long-ish blade (ask the vendor?)

The better (complete!) one is now up to a tenner, with 2 days to go. It WILL go higher.

I own one of these tools, but use it rarely. Bull nose shoulder planes sound fancy ("it's a shoulder plane. *AND* it's bullnosed") but have limited areas of utility.

BugBear (who spent too much on his)


----------



## garywayne (12 Jul 2005)

Thanks for your reply, Alf.
I will probably buy the plane from the car-boot, and thank you for the link.

bugbear, - I am only but a novice, all I have is a bit of common sense, and you lot.

I thought some sort of shoulder / rebate plane would be useful for shaving tenons and shoulders and the like, and with a detachable nose so the blade can go right to the edge.

If there is a better option, please tell, bearing in mind I can only just afford the £20.00 plane, and will have to save for a new blade.

Thanks for the advice on the blades.

All the best, Gary.


----------



## Adam (12 Jul 2005)

I bought one of these for £45 or £50 (can't quite remember). So sounds a good price. Is the blade damaged? I've had no problems using the "standard" blade which came with mine.

Adam


----------



## Derek Cohen (Perth Oz) (12 Jul 2005)

Gary

The question is why you would want a bullnose plane? As Bugbear said, they have limited usefulness. Some think that they can be used as shoulder plane, but they are really quite poor in this regard (they lack the nose for registering the plane). Their intended use is to make stopped dados. I suppose that they can be used as a small block plane (but really they are very much narrower than a true block plane).

As good a bargain as it may sound, you could better spend your 20 quid on a plane that you actually would use regularly.

Regards from Perth

Derek


----------



## bugbear (12 Jul 2005)

> As good a bargain as it may sound



Of course, the car boot 077 could be bought (for no more than 18, if the asking is 20), cleaned, sold at a profit on Ebay, and the money used to buy a more useful plane ;-)

BugBear


----------



## Alf (12 Jul 2005)

Derek Cohen (Perth said:


> The question is why you would want a bullnose plane?


<*Warning!* User Error. Query does not compute. Slope runtime error. Unsaved Slope greasing will be lost. Reboot from The Handplane Book>


----------



## garywayne (13 Jul 2005)

Hi All,

As I am looking for a hand plane to clean up tenon checks, shoulders, rebates, and dado's, and the like.
What would be the plane of your choice?

This is what I have so far:-

1/ Record 0120 block plane. (6 7/8").
2/ Stanley SB3. (8 3/8") Not used.
3/ Acorn No.4. (9 1/4").
4/ PM No.10. (10"). Sorry, I forgot the name. It has a very short blade that goes right to the outside edge of the plane.
5/ Hilka No.4. (9 7/8"). rubbish engineering.
6/ Record T5. (12 3/4"). Nice plane. £15.00 car-boot.

So what would be a more useful one?
I'm getting the impression that this plane is a bad investment.

I would also like a jointing plane No.7 or 8, but that's out of my reach at present.

Would someone please explain the pros and cons of the low angle and standard angle plane angles.


----------



## Alf (13 Jul 2005)

garywayne":3axs59ih said:


> 1/ Record 0120 block plane. (6 7/8").


A #110 with depth adjustment, so my Record catalogue tells me. Any good?



garywayne":3axs59ih said:


> 2/ Stanley SB3. (8 3/8") Not used.


Very wise. However, it has potential as a scrub plane according to some.



garywayne":3axs59ih said:


> 3/ Acorn No.4. (9 1/4").


Either by Chapman or Stanley GB's secondary line after they'd acquired them. Never had one but I bet BB could comment on whether they justify any tuning effort.



garywayne":3axs59ih said:


> 4/ PM No.10. (10"). Sorry, I forgot the name. It has a very short blade that goes right to the outside edge of the plane.


Ah, one of those Paramo planemaster things or whatever they're called? Apparently rather frustrating to use.



garywayne":3axs59ih said:


> 5/ Hilka No.4. (9 7/8"). rubbish engineering.


Yep. They _can_ be made to work, but really it's hardly worth the effort.



garywayne":3axs59ih said:


> 6/ Record T5. (12 3/4"). Nice plane. £15.00 car-boot.


Vrooooooooom... I choke in the dust of such a beautifully teed-up drive-by gloat. The pick of the lot.



garywayne":3axs59ih said:


> So what would be a more useful one?


Depends what you're going to be making, but if it's going to be cleaning up tenons and rebates and etc then personally I'd unhesitatingly choose the LV medium shoulder. But, I have a feeling price may be the stumbling block? So, might I suggest instead of 


> getting the impression that this plane is a bad investment.


you start to look on it as a _good_ investment that you sell on for a good profit towards a shoulder plane. And then maybe look out for an unremarkable but useable craftsman-made infill shoulder plane, which can sometimes be had for sensible prices if you're fortunate. Or talk to Peter Maddex about making your own... Or you might get lucky on a Stanley 9X series and find one that actually works I suppose.



garywayne":3axs59ih said:


> I would also like a jointing plane No.7 or 8, but that's out of my reach at present.


How d'you feel about wooden planes? A wooden jointer can be had cheaply, or again, you could make your own.



garywayne":3axs59ih said:


> Would someone please explain the pros and cons of the low angle and standard angle plane angles.


You're thinking of block planes I assume? Standard angle gives a more robust blade bed with less likelihood of damage to the rear of the mouth (which used to be an issue before modern materials). Low angle gives you greater flexibility of angles depending on the bevel angle you use on the blade, a lower profile plane to hold and is generally a more useful type all round.

Cheers, Alf


----------



## garywayne (13 Jul 2005)

Alf,
I don't know what a 110 is.  
My 0120 does have blade adjustment, and in my opinion is quite good, as long as you have a sharp blade. There again, I have nothing to compare it against.

What is a scrub plane?
I don't use the SB3 because it's to fiddly to set up and adjust.

I do have a wooden plane, 17" by 2 3/4" wide, with a blade of 2". I like to use it when I can, I am still learning how to adjust the blade more accurately. I am still trying to plane or joint an edge properly. They never seem to be level. My thinking is the longer the better, or leveler.

Thanks for your knowledge and advice Alf.

Regards, Gary.


----------



## Alf (13 Jul 2005)

garywayne":1nvv02eu said:


> I don't know what a 110 is.


Yeah you do. It's like a 0120 but without the depth adjuster :wink: (and by Stanley, come to think of it, 'cos it'd be a 0110 if it was a Record... :-k ). I only threw that reference in for those folks who might know off-hand about a 120, but not its adjusting brother, but here's one. Heck, I had to look up the 0120... 



garywayne":1nvv02eu said:


> My 0120 does have blade adjustment, and in my opinion is quite good, as long as you have a *sharp blade*.


Ooo, what am I sitting here pontificating for? You obviously already know the important bit. 



garywayne":1nvv02eu said:


> What is a scrub plane?


Tsk, not a fan of the reviews then?  :lol:



garywayne":1nvv02eu said:


> I don't use the SB3 because it's to fiddly to set up and adjust.


Not an issue with a scrub, which could explain the recommendation... :roll:



garywayne":1nvv02eu said:


> I do have a wooden plane, 17" by 2 3/4" wide, with a blade of 2". I like to use it when I can, I am still learning how to adjust the blade more accurately.


Good for you. Personally I hardly ever have the patience.  Oh, and that's a jack, btw. 



garywayne":1nvv02eu said:


> I am still trying to plane or joint an edge properly. They never seem to be level. My thinking is the longer the better, or leveler.


Within reason, yep. Me, I like using a jack for jointing 'cos most of the boards I joint are short. When you say level, are you meaning straight in length, or square in width? Or both? And are you using a cambered (slightly rounded) blade edge, or a straight one? If you want to go the former way like right-thinking folks do (e.g. DC, Jeff Gorman and me :wink: ) then I can pontificate further. If you want to use a straight edge then I suggest investigating simple jointer fence solutions like this one (hope you don't mind, Chris - it was handy  )

Cheers, Alf


----------



## Anonymous (13 Jul 2005)

Hi Gary,
As Alf mentioned earlier, your T5 is the plane where you should invest your time. As an alternative, you could probably sell your T5 on ebay and get enough to buy a #5 and a #7 with the proceeds.
Alf also mentioned using camber in your plane blades. I just want to emphasize that blade camber is one of the most important things to make a plane work properly. Sadly, it is too often glossed over when discussing sharpening.
I know Popular Woodworking is a bit of a sore point for my friends on that side of the pond but the latest issue has a great article by David Charlesworth on the subject of how to camber a blade during sharpening. 
The same issue has another excellent article by Adam Cherubini on classifying planes. This article helps to understand the relationship between various planes. I'm hoping this article will help Alf to understand that she is mistaking a *trying* plane (a longer plane with a cambered edge that is used to make an edge straight and square which belongs in the leveling plane family) with a *jointer* plane (a long plane with a straight across blade that is used to prepare the edge joint and belongs in the fitting plane family). :lol:
For the record, the try plane/jointer plane thing is a running joke between Alf and me. It is one of the few things where my opinion differs slightly from hers.


----------



## Alf (14 Jul 2005)

Roger Nixon":27mj89nn said:


> the latest issue has a great article by David Charlesworth on the subject of how to camber a blade during sharpening.


Or his first DVD, if you like the "see it done before your wondering eyes" option.



Roger Nixon":27mj89nn said:


> The same issue has another excellent article by Adam Cherubini on classifying planes.


I dunno, I was a bit disappointed. I need to read it again really.



Roger Nixon":27mj89nn said:


> This article helps to understand the relationship between various planes.


As _some people_ see them... :wink:



Roger Nixon":27mj89nn said:


> I'm hoping this article will help Alf to understand that she is mistaking a *trying* plane (a longer plane with a cambered edge that is used to make an edge straight and square which belongs in the leveling plane family) with a *jointer* plane (a long plane with a straight across blade that is used to prepare the edge joint and belongs in the fitting plane family). :lol:


Tsk, just 'cos some of us have barely stepped out of the 18thC and have to make allowances for less forgiving glues... :roll: Wake up and smell the Titebond, Roger! :lol: 

Cheers, Alf


----------



## garywayne (14 Jul 2005)

Alf wrote:
Tsk, not a fan of the reviews then? 

Slap on hand,  - I really must make time to read the reviews. :roll: 

Alf says:
Not an issue with a scrub, which could explain the recommendation.

#-o Now I know what a scrub plane is,(thanks to you), I can see where you're coming from.

plaining the edge level? Both, straight in length, and square in width, with a straight edge blade. I have made a fence for the T5, but it's not really deep enough. (I ought to make a new one).

I do have a cambered blade in the Paramo Planemaster thingy because they where the only ones I could find locally, (Fareham area). Haven't had a chance to use it yet, due to state of dinning room come workshop.

If you have the desire to pontificate further on cambered / straight edge blades be my guest, for I am willing to listen and learn. I thought straight edge = straight blade, or, visa versa.

Thanks Alf, I appreciate your input.

Hi, Roger,

I use the T5 more than any other plane that I have. I think it's a really nice one. (NOT FOR SALE THOUGH).

I will see if I can track down the articles you mention.

Thanks very much Roger.

Regards, Gary.


----------



## froglet (14 Jul 2005)

Can I second the pontification thing Alf (I think you should take it as read that we want you to pontificate unless told otherwise) as having seen DC's sharpening video its annoying that he makes the statement that you can't get a straight edge without a cambered blade but doesn't explain why (I suppose I should really invest in the rest of his videos to find out.)

Graeme


----------



## Alf (14 Jul 2005)

garywayne":20fv1lst said:


> If you have the desire to pontificate further on cambered / straight edge blades be my guest, for I am willing to listen and learn. I thought straight edge = straight blade, or, visa versa.


Like a lamb to the slaughter...

Well start with this, a copy of this, and/or probably this (Volume 1). By and large I think the DVD is probably the most helpful, but the book, well both of them, are chocker with much valuble additional - if occasionally daunting - info. The current Pop WW covers DC's method of sharpening the cambered blade well, but is a little lighter on jointing with it. It'd probably be enough info, but the other sources are better.

S'no good me pontificating 'cos I just do what DC does (the DVD was the last fatal influence :lol: ) and he explains it better than what I do. The basic gist of how it works is in the first link from Jeff Gorman. Essentially it removes the onus on you, the poor sap pushing the plane, from having to be a genius and hold said plane absolutely square and level in order to plane a square edge - the cambered edge is not relevant to the straightness, btw. Say looking from one end along the length you've got your edge sloping like / right? Well it's an exaggeration, but you see what I mean; the right edge is higher than the left. Well with a straight blade you apparently have to balance the plane, square and level, on that high edge and plane down, square and level, until you're taking full width shavings. With a cambered blade you've effectively got three ways to take a shaving, 'cos it's kinda shaped like \__/ (exaggerated to the point of craziness). So to get the / edge like __ you'd rest the sole of your plane on the edge of the work so the left edge of the blade is doing the cutting. i.e. Making the shaving tapered so the thickest shaving is being taken over the highest point, with it feathering away to almost, or even, nothing at the lowest edge. It doesn't depend on you being able to balance the plane square on only a tiny portion of the edge, so it's much less demanding on your own sense of what's "plumb". You keep doing that 'til it's square, moving the plane sideways as required to square up the edge. Does that make any sense at all? :-s

Cheers, Alf


----------



## froglet (14 Jul 2005)

What a really neat idea and like all the best ideas so obvious once its explained.

Graeme


----------



## garywayne (14 Jul 2005)

My sentiments exactly froglet.

I knew all that really, I was just testing :^o 

Thanks Alf, much appreciated.

Regards, Gary.


----------



## Anonymous (14 Jul 2005)

Alf
Tsk said:


> I tried Titebond once. It made a horrible mess in my glue pot! :lol:
> 
> To clarify a little, Adam's article suggests returning to Mercer's system of classifying planes. Planes used for making stock flat and square were classified as "leveling" planes. All planes in this category should have blades that are cambered to some extent. Planes used for making joints are classified as "fitting" planes and the blades are honed straight across. This makes sense to me.
> When I square an edge, I use the method shown on Jeff Gorman's site as Alf mentioned. I normally use a #7 but sometimes a #5 or #5 1/2 on shorter boards, all with slightly cambered blades.
> Once an edge is "tried and true", I am done with it unless I am edge gluing boards into a panel. For edge jointing, I plane two matching edges at once (match plaining) with a jointer plane (straight blade). The reason isn't because of unforgiving glue but to make sure the boards match and that the panel will lay flat even if my planing is a bit out of square.


----------



## Alf (14 Jul 2005)

Roger Nixon":87nadpvb said:


> Once an edge is "tried and true", I am done with it unless I am edge gluing boards into a panel. For edge jointing, I plane two matching edges at once (match plaining) with a jointer plane (straight blade). The reason isn't because of unforgiving glue but to make sure the boards match and that the panel will lay flat even if my planing is a bit out of square.


But Roger, it's such an unnecessary extra step if you can square up boards with a cambered blade. Why?! Unless there's some sort of plane justification going on here... :-k 

Cheers, Alf


----------



## Anonymous (14 Jul 2005)

Alf":179nsjdk said:


> Roger Nixon":179nsjdk said:
> 
> 
> > Once an edge is "tried and true", I am done with it unless I am edge gluing boards into a panel. For edge jointing, I plane two matching edges at once (match plaining) with a jointer plane (straight blade). The reason isn't because of unforgiving glue but to make sure the boards match and that the panel will lay flat even if my planing is a bit out of square.
> ...



If I was good enough to get an edge perfectly straight and square, it would be unnecessary. But I'm really not very good at all.  A board can commonly be 10 times as wide as it is thick so just a degree or two out of square (hard for me to see) can make a big difference in the panel laying flat. A couple of passes with a jointer and the edge angles complement each other nicely and the panel lays flat.
It might be unecessary but it is faster for me to get a joint right this way. I can always justify it by pompously saying it is historically correct! :lol:


----------



## MikeW (14 Jul 2005)

Alf":3ghhs1ba said:


> _...Snip..._
> Well with a straight blade you apparently have to balance the plane, square and level, on that high edge and plane down, square and level, until you're taking full width shavings. With a cambered blade you've effectively got three ways to take a shaving, 'cos it's kinda shaped like \__/ (exaggerated to the point of craziness). So to get the / edge like __ you'd rest the sole of your plane on the edge of the work so the left edge of the blade is doing the cutting. i.e. Making the shaving tapered so the thickest shaving is being taken over the highest point, with it feathering away to almost, or even, nothing at the lowest edge. It doesn't depend on you being able to balance the plane square on only a tiny portion of the edge, so it's much less demanding on your own sense of what's "plumb". You keep doing that 'til it's square, moving the plane sideways as required to square up the edge. Does that make any sense at all? :-s
> 
> Cheers, Alf


Oh, the contrarian in me rises once again :lol: 

Obviously there are at least 2 more ways of accomplishing any given task than the number of people asked...

"My" way? Aside from the ghastly admission some time ago that I have and use a R / L-handed pair of #95s, when I use, say a #8 or #6 (yes, I own two #6s...how's that for useless <g>) and I care a long board's edge is square to one face or the other, I just use that little lever thingy to adjust the blade a little. I was told this would produce a tapered shaving. 

Even to the point that one could have the entire plane all but centered lengthwise down the board and take a shaving that tapers down to nothing. Just by moving a little lever and not balancing the plane precariously on a board's edge or nearly off one side of the board in order to use the opposite side of the plane.

But then, on glue-ups that involve large panels, I just use the method Roger uses. Angles compliment each other and then as long as a little care is used, the boards fit properly. 

I'd stick a link in here showing a display case with its glued up top of Bubinga (which should make seeing the joint easy) that was edge jointed with the cute little #95s (it's only 20" long or so) and offer a fine prize if someone can find the joint in the pics, but what's the point    

We all have and use methods that someone told us about, pointed us to another, such as DC, or maybe even reasoned out for ourselves. It's all good. Most advice will produce the desired result. The thing that *really *takes practice is being open to try other ways, giving them our best effort.


----------



## Alf (14 Jul 2005)

Roger, a thousand apologies for bringing about this terrrible confession. I'm sure you're not really that bad at all, and if only you could lose the training wheels you'd be just fine...



MikeW":2z0a90dx said:


> I just use that little lever thingy to adjust the blade a little. I was told this would produce a tapered shaving.


Ach, forgot that one. But what d'you do when the high edge switches from one side to the other along the length?

Oh well, I'd better try and keep an open mind I s'pose, bearing in mind the BUT* showing up at some point and the increased difficulty of getting a suitable camber on a bevel-up iron. :roll: 

Cheers, Alf

Bevel Up *Try* plane  :lol:


----------



## MikeW (14 Jul 2005)

Alf":2ub7hbju said:


> ...
> 
> 
> MikeW":2ub7hbju said:
> ...


What do **you** do?

It's probably the same/similar--'cept on my part fixing the problem is probably never consistent :lol: (The results are though.)

If, which isn't all too often the bevel goes side-to-side, I do a little judicious fixing with a block plane, itself canted a little to correct those relatively small areas. Then I switch back to the long thingy and then possibly, once the edge is straight, but maybe off square to a face, I use the #95s set very fine. Swipe or two and it is square. No constant sighting down the board, etc. 

Sometime I start with the little #95s to first square the edge and take one or two full swipes with one of the long things. After all, making a long joint even down its length and keeping it square to a face is easy if it starts out square...


----------



## Anonymous (14 Jul 2005)

It's not a terrible confession. :lol: For me, woodworking and tools are a journey of discovery with no particular destination.


----------



## Anonymous (14 Jul 2005)

One more thing about match planing. You don't have to have a perfectly flat face to reference from. Often I'll glue up rough or partially flattened boards and then flatten the entire panel.


----------



## Alf (14 Jul 2005)

What do I do? I just move the plane sideways, left or right, as I go along in order to take the thicker cut in the necessary places. Same plane. When the gods are with me, and it happens more often when I'm in practice, squaring up and straightening can all get done in just a couple of passes - assuming that all saw or tailed demon marks are gone of course. 

'Course the truth is that jointing edges for gluing is one of the woodworking tasks I enjoy doing most; I like pitting my cambered edge and small square against the board without the help of fences or mechanical adjustments. It's one of the few tasks I can accurately do without recourse to them I suppose, hence the enjoyment, and the resistance to square edges! :lol:

Roger, fair point about not needing a reference face. That didn't occur to me because I use those four-way clamp things to glue up panels, and you need the faces parallel anyway.

Cheers, Alf


----------



## MikeW (14 Jul 2005)

"'Course the truth is that jointing edges for gluing is one of the woodworking tasks I enjoy doing most..."

And that [enjoying the journey] is what makes us all strive to adjust how we do something to acheive our best at the task at hand, in our own way, at our own pace.

And to quote Roger, "For me, woodworking and tools are a journey of discovery..."

Absolutely.


----------



## Frank D. (14 Jul 2005)

I felt kind of bad reading the Charlseworth article in PWW, since I prefer using a flat blade for most tasks and Charlesworth is kind of a hero of mine, but I was comforted reading Cherubini. He says a gluing jointer plane (for preparing edges) is a fitting plane and should have a straight blade. I've never had problems jointing with a straight blade.
Frank


----------



## Chris Knight (14 Jul 2005)

Careful Frank, you will have the thought police on your tail (aka Bugbear and Alf - who have never learnt to use a plane with a straight edge)

Personally I put it down to an inability to create a straight edge (ducking and diving :lol: )

"INCOMING!!" (pasties that is)


----------



## Frank D. (15 Jul 2005)

You may be right Chris. :lol:
I tried explaining how I joint an edge once, it's buried somewhere in the forum, thank God; it sounded like rubbish when I reread it. Now all I have to do is refer to Cherubini, Mercer et al. Life is good. 
Frank


----------



## garywayne (15 Jul 2005)

Hi everyone,

I have come to the conclusion to buy the Record 077A, plane, and see how I get on with it. [-o< I can always sell it on later to fund another tool.

Excuse my ignorance. What does # stand for when you refer to plane numbers/No? (So I can look them up on the net, and know what your talking about). 

Please carry on the discussion, I'm learning a lot of different ways of planning an edge that I can try, and see what suits me personally. I belive that's what it's all about, finding different ways to do things, and see what best suits the individual. At the moment I am leaning towards the convexed blade. :-k 

I totaly agree with the open mind thing. 
"The mind is like a parachute. It only works when it's open". :idea: 

Regards, Gary.


----------



## MikeW (15 Jul 2005)

garywayne":1exxnjvf said:


> ...
> I have come to the conclusion to buy the Record 077A, plane, and see how I get on with it. [-o< I can always sell it on later to fund another tool.
> ...


Oh good for you  

I have the earlier Preston one. It is a fine plane and I use it often enough I'm glad I have it.

Mike

(# = the word 'number' is all)


----------



## Alf (15 Jul 2005)

waterhead37":1opjez30 said:


> Personally I put it down to an inability to create a straight edge (ducking and diving :lol: )


More like somebody can't sharpen a decent camber...  :lol: 

Cheers, Alf

P.S. So dovetails then. Tails or pins first...? :-k :wink:


----------



## garywayne (15 Jul 2005)

Thanks Mike.

Yes, Alf.

Regards, Gary.


----------



## MikeW (15 Jul 2005)

Alf":3vnmh3cn said:


> P.S. So dovetails then. Tails or pins first...? :-k :wink:


Yes...


----------



## Chris Knight (15 Jul 2005)

Alf":20nhxc0d said:


> P.S. So dovetails then. Tails or pins first...? :-k :wink:



You know perfectly well that there is only one right way to do dovetails! :roll:


----------



## Alf (15 Jul 2005)

waterhead37":2g0vnizh said:


> You know perfectly well that there is only one right way to do dovetails! :roll:


Woodrat? 8-[ :-$ :lol:


----------



## garywayne (18 Jul 2005)

Hi everyone,

The guy with the 077A plane at the car-boot sale was not there this week, so I bought some other bits.

Makita 12v Hammer drill/driver with 1/2 hour charger. £5.00

Draftsmans drawing board, 720mm x 520mm with lock. £4.00

Two books:- router joinery. By Carol Reed. £5.00
Carpentry & Joinery. Bench & site skills. By Brian Porter & Reg Rose. £4.00

And another gizmo for edge marking. £0.50

All in all, not a bad days pickings. The books where more than I would usually pay.

So after all that I never got the plane. But, thanks to all of you, I have learned a lot.

Thank you all very much.
Best regards, Gary.


----------



## ydb1md (27 Jan 2007)

Roughly what are the dimensions of the record 077 or 077a? I just won one on eBay and am curious how big it will be. :wink: 

cheers,


----------



## Alf (27 Jan 2007)

4" long, 1 1/8" wide iron, 1 1/4lbs. Well it was in 1938 anyway. 

Cheers, Alf


----------



## Philly (27 Jan 2007)

Glad to see you've still got the tool bug, Dave :lol: 
Nice one,
Philly


----------



## ydb1md (27 Jan 2007)

Alf":1dn5jy2c said:


> 4" long, 1 1/8" wide iron, 1 1/4lbs. Well it was in 1938 anyway.
> 
> Cheers, Alf



Thanks very much for the info Alf! Here's the little pipper that I won on eBay. Probably paid too much but I like the old record planes. :wink:


----------



## ydb1md (27 Jan 2007)

Philly":k0hta93e said:


> Glad to see you've still got the tool bug, Dave :lol:
> Nice one,
> Philly



Hiya Philly!

Yep, still got the tool bug. Isn't there a vaccination yet? :roll: :lol: 

Been checking out your blog and gotta say, nice work you've been doing! Are you a full-time cabinetmaker or do you just get a lot of time in the shop from your missus? 

cheers!


----------



## Philly (27 Jan 2007)

Dave
No, just for fun. The Missus and I have a constant battle - me to get in the workshop, She to get me out :lol: 
Thanks for the compliment,
Philly


----------



## ydb1md (3 Feb 2007)

Hi Philly,

My 077 came last night. I'll post some pics in a bit. Had to say though, the shimmable nose piece is very nice. It took a bit to get the blade fettled up properly but it does quite a nice job now. I used it to clean up a rabbet that I cut in a cabinet to house a piano hinge and it worked very well. I had to pop off the nosepiece to clean up the corners of the rabbet and the chisel feature was really nice. Now I can hold off purchasing a medium shoulder plane until I really need one. I use my LN 60.5R to clean up tenon shoulders and a LN 140 skew to clean up tenon cheeks.

cheers,


----------



## Philly (3 Feb 2007)

Excellent! :tool: 
Look forward to the pics,
Philly


----------



## ydb1md (4 Feb 2007)

Hiya Philly,

Here are some pics of the 077 . . .


----------



## mambo (4 Feb 2007)

hi nice 077
i have one just like it, are you going to attempt the longer wooden nose to turn it into a shoulder plane?


----------



## Lord Nibbo (4 Feb 2007)

ydb1md":1r7da58x said:


> Hiya Philly,
> 
> Here are some pics of the 077 . . .



Thats some gloat pics :lol: 

Whats the big ugly plane on the left then? does it have a number? :wink: :lol:


----------



## Philly (5 Feb 2007)

Arggh! I can't see the pics!!!!
FrustratedPhilly


----------



## Colin C (5 Feb 2007)

Philly":h3u06xma said:


> Arggh! I can't see the pics!!!!
> FrustratedPhilly



Me too


----------



## CHJ (5 Feb 2007)

Here you are Philly.


















Don't think the forum software likes the address


----------



## Philly (5 Feb 2007)

Ahhhhh!!! Much better (I think :roll: )
Glad the "Art of Gloatage" is alive and well in Maryland :lol: 
Nice one, and also on the Anniversary. O.k., and the #1, too :lol: 
Cheers
Philly


----------



## ydb1md (5 Feb 2007)

LOL :lol: 

Glad you appreciated the gloat, Philly. :wink: 

Chaz, thanks for the rescue. I wasn't sure why sometimes my pics would show up for me and other times they wouldn't.


----------



## ydb1md (5 Feb 2007)

Philly":13lcof8z said:


> Nice one, and also on the Anniversary. O.k., and the #1, too :lol:
> Cheers
> Philly



Well, I just wanted to throw in some other planes to give an idea of scale.


----------



## Philly (5 Feb 2007)

ydb1md":38kvyemu said:


> Philly":38kvyemu said:
> 
> 
> > Nice one, and also on the Anniversary. O.k., and the #1, too :lol:
> ...


I'm even going to comment on that old chestnut..... :lol: 
Philly


----------



## Alf (5 Feb 2007)

ydb1md":3fgdv7ek said:


> Philly":3fgdv7ek said:
> 
> 
> > Nice one, and also on the Anniversary. O.k., and the #1, too :lol:
> ...


Ah yes, that world shortage of steel rules is really starting to kick in now... :lol:


----------



## CHJ (5 Feb 2007)

ydb1md":1tpj1du9 said:


> Chaz, thanks for the rescue. I wasn't sure why sometimes my pics would show up for me and other times they wouldn't.



If you have downloaded them in explorer , firefox et al by another method of access and they are sitting in your local machine cache then they may well show up on your machine which uses its local copy rather than go looking for the source.

That is how I got them (and changed the names/address before putting them on my server)

The Full address of your pics is:

http://lh3.google.com/image/ydb1md/RcYV ... /077_a.jpg

If you have a copy of the picture on your machine you may see it below.
If you then go into >control panel >internet options and delete the >Temporary Internet Files and refresh this page the picture will disappear.


----------



## ydb1md (16 Mar 2007)

I recently picked up the long nose piece from a 311 that I'm hoping to modify to fit my 077. 






The 311 and 077 both have two guide pins to align the nose pieces & the main body. I'm guessing/assuming/hoping that the 311's and 077's were made using the same castings. They take the same replacement blades.

The nose piece hasn't arrived yet but I'll post pics of the work in progress.


----------



## Colin C (16 Mar 2007)

Hi Dave 

I hope that the 311 long nose has the pins in the same place as the 311 can have the pins across or up and down.

I hope that is clear


----------



## ydb1md (16 Mar 2007)




----------

