# Hand plane sole flatness?



## Sawdust=manglitter (6 Aug 2017)

I'm just in the middle of tuning up a Record 4 1/2 smoother plane so i'm flattening the sole. I've spent around 30mins on 800grit lapping film so far, but how much more flattening should i do on this?







Should i be getting it as flat as possible all the way across the rear of the mouth?


----------



## D_W (6 Aug 2017)

Are you intending to take smoother shavings with it or joint Edges? If so, I'd drop down to a coarser grit and get most of the rest of it out.


----------



## Sawdust=manglitter (6 Aug 2017)

I'd like to take smoother shavings, so i guess i'll drop grits and carry on through to get the sole completely smooth then is it?


----------



## custard (6 Aug 2017)

800 grit?

:shock: 

Life's too short! Start around 120 grit and watch your productivity rocket!


----------



## JohnPW (6 Aug 2017)

800 grit?

Knock off a zero from that!


----------



## skipdiver (6 Aug 2017)

My word, flattening that with 800 would be mind numbingly tedious. Did one with 120 grit recently and that was bad enough. Kudos for getting that far with it.


----------



## Sawdust=manglitter (6 Aug 2017)

Bought a roll of the Hermes self adhesive lapping film from Axminster in 800, 1200 and 2500... so i take it that 800 is nowhere near course enough for the bulk of the work then :? 

I'm glad you've said what you have though, i thought it was taking a while!! Who needs the gym when you've got 800 grit :lol:


----------



## nabs (6 Aug 2017)

in case it is useful, having experimented with a number of abrasives when flattening soles I found these rolls to be a good balance between cost and the amount of time you can use them before they clog/wear out/rip. 
https://www.workshopheaven.com/material ... rolls.html

If you have access to a long reasonably flat surface (e.g a bit of old marble fireplace) then it speeds things up enormously since you can clamp a long stretch down in one go. You can use 3m spray-on repositionable adhesive to stop the paper riding up (or if you are a cheapskate like me you can use a pritt-stick which works surprisingly well!).


----------



## Sawdust=manglitter (6 Aug 2017)

Thanks Nick, I'm already using a 750mm long piece of float glass which has come in very handy


----------



## bugbear (6 Aug 2017)

Sawdust=manglitter":24uz476d said:


> Bought a roll of the Hermes self adhesive lapping film from Axminster in 800, 1200 and 2500... so i take it that 800 is nowhere near course enough for the bulk of the work then :?
> 
> I'm glad you've said what you have though, i thought it was taking a while!! Who needs the gym when you've got 800 grit :lol:



If I could get 40 grit I'd use it! 60 or 80 would be a good start. You do ALL THE WORK on the first grit. The subsequent grits only have to remove the scratches of the grit before them, but the first grit has to make the sole flat.

BugBear


----------



## Phil Pascoe (6 Aug 2017)

I have a 5 1/2 Marples that was so far out I used a 120 flapwheel on it to start with. It's perfect now.


----------



## Sawdust=manglitter (6 Aug 2017)

I've taken heed of the advice everyone's given and jumped straight down to some decent quality 80grit, and needless to say it made a huge difference


----------



## custard (6 Aug 2017)

It's just a personal view, but 80 grit might be a bit _too_ coarse. You don't want to remove more metal than necessary, and looking at that sole there's a chance the first pass on 80 grit might see a deep scratch pattern go right into the hollows. In the ideal situation you're putting _faint_ scratches into the hollows only after several strokes, when that happens stop and move up a grit. That way you've minimised the work that you'll then have to do to remove those scratches with finer grits. 

Personally I go 120/180/240 grit. If I was feeling enthusiastic I might go to 300 grit and then use some wire wool with Autosol, but I doubt it's really necessary.

Good luck!


----------



## AJB Temple (6 Aug 2017)

OK, heresy here. If I have a lot of flattening to do, I clamp up and use a belt sander, or with small planes I use the Sorby linisher. Just do the finishing by hand (and may use a polishing mop with some polish paste at the end). I am however rather lazy.


----------



## David C (6 Aug 2017)

I stop at blunt 240 grit and follow with wire wool and metal polish (Autosol).

This last step reduces friction significantly.

Wax comes next.

David Charlesworth


----------



## Hot stuff (6 Aug 2017)

Big Axminster linisher for me too. For everything, chisels, plane blades, soles, if it'll fit on then that's the first step.
You just have to watch you don't heat the steel up too much.


----------



## Sawdust=manglitter (6 Aug 2017)

Well that was a workout! Thanks for the advice. It's not perfect, but i thinks its pretty much flat now. And can take some nice shavings now too.












I had a question though, what lapping fluid do others recommend? I've been using workshop heaven's HoneRite when using the scary sharp system and its nearly finished now, but I'd like to find something just as good but more cost effective.


----------



## custard (6 Aug 2017)

Good result Manglitter!

Doubly so, as working spalted stuff is a tough test for any tool. Having harder and softer fibres bunched up next to each other in a single board like that, well it shows what a good job you've done.

=D>


----------



## G S Haydon (6 Aug 2017)

Great result, good on you for sticking with it. 60 grit is now my preferred choice, once it looses it's bite I move to a fresh piece. When the plane is flat just use the dull paper for a bit longer to reduce the scratches.


----------



## AndyT (6 Aug 2017)

Re fluid for scary sharp - discussed before with plenty of choices.
Jacob suggested single malt whisky, as cheaper than Honerite.
Some people like spray window cleaner.

You can use the papers or film abrasive dry, but I think a liquid helps; I just use plain water in a spray bottle.


----------



## Sawdust=manglitter (6 Aug 2017)

Thanks Custard, that's why I use drugs that piece of spalted English walnut to test the plane on.

Thanks Andy, I'll have a loook for those posts. Sure I've seen GT85 being mentioned somewhere too


----------



## rafezetter (7 Aug 2017)

Pound store window cleaner here, can be as liberal as you like for nowt. Prefer it to water, especially for lapping as there's less chance of rusting occuring if it's not thoroughly dried. Some people prefer gt85 / wd40 but I've always been wary of residue transfer to the wood.


----------



## Phil Pascoe (7 Aug 2017)

I use isopropyl alcohol on my stones and diamonds, it just wipes off perfectly cleanly.


----------



## ED65 (7 Aug 2017)

That looks ace, well done.

Now with respect to everyone else I think they missed an important point here yesterday in that you could probably have stopped at the stage shown in the first photo! To me that looked more than flat enough to work well. Flat (co-planar) in front of the mouth is important, at the rear edge of the mouth, not so much. As long as there are shoulders to both sides to provide the necessary support, which you already had. That hollow behind isn't just okay to leave, it may actually be preferable. 

Also, since you say it can take some nice shavings _now_, out of curiosity did you check it before starting work and it didn't? I only mention it because it's so common these days for people to go ahead and lap regardless, when there's a decent chance a plane without a lot of wear will already do what you need it to do. One should always check first before going ahead with flattening, whether by scraper or by lapping.


----------



## ED65 (7 Aug 2017)

G S Haydon":33teqg43 said:


> 60 grit is now my preferred choice, once it looses it's bite I move to a fresh piece.


I would use 60 too if I could get it easily. Once the need for flattening has been established then I immediately reach for 80, and fresh 80 if I have it. I might do a quick few passes with 150 to just give a quick read on flatness before starting but I'd only stick to that if the sole were already very flat and I was just tarting it up a bit. 

If there is any decent amount of metal to remove I would never begin with anything finer than 80, even for something as small as a block plane. Now that I have been lucky enough to acquire a proper scraper though it's time to try scraping instead of lapping \/


----------



## xy mosian (7 Aug 2017)

ED65":18mfzspg said:


> G S Haydon":18mfzspg said:
> 
> 
> > 60 grit is now my preferred choice, once it looses it's bite I move to a fresh piece.
> ...



Belts for belt sanders are available in coarse grits. I certainly have 60. They are also a convenient shape, when cut, for plane flattening.
HTH, xy


----------



## D_W (7 Aug 2017)

ED65":36j5ald2 said:


> That looks ace, well done.
> 
> Now with respect to everyone else I think they missed an important point here yesterday in that you could probably have stopped at the stage shown in the first photo! To me that looked more than flat enough to work well. Flat (co-planar) in front of the mouth is important, at the rear edge of the mouth, not so much. As long as there are shoulders to both sides to provide the necessary support, which you already had. That hollow behind isn't just okay to leave, it may actually be preferable.



Hollows behind the mouth like that of any considerable distance can cause trouble on the edges of boards or if you're smoothing any piece that's not wider than the hollow (thus the question that I had about just jacking, or smoothing and jointing. Even if you're using a smoother, eventually you will joint something with it). 

It's best for a plane to have that stuff removed even though it's not vital. A plane biased in favor of the user will generally have the toe and heel a couple of thousandths proud (but not much more than that if you can help it). 

I have a method to flatten planes within the thinnest feeler you can find, but it requires a little more than just lapping (the extra cost is only a good file, though, maybe 10 quid - but it has to be a file that has just enough spring and with the teeth nearly all the way to the end so that you can cut [ file or draw file] the center of a plane without cutting the sides).

The next time I flatten a plane, I will show it. It's something that will allow a user to square a plane by hand, too, which is otherwise fairly hard to do. Not something you'd do all the time, but I never heard anyone give me a good explanation of how to do it other than to scrape with a biax (which can do damage in inexperienced hands, and is also *extremely* expensive).


----------



## custard (7 Aug 2017)

D_W":z6cv7iju said:


> The next time I flatten a plane, I will show it. It's something that will allow a user to square a plane by hand, too, which is otherwise fairly hard to do. Not something you'd do all the time, but I never heard anyone give me a good explanation of how to do it other than to scrape with a biax (which can do damage in inexperienced hands, and is also *extremely* expensive).



I've never squared a bench plane, but shoulder planes are a different matter...not that I've ever been that successful! So I'll look out for your post with interest.

One more thing, what's a "biax"?


----------



## iNewbie (7 Aug 2017)

http://www.biax-germany.com/en/produkte ... ry=schaber


----------



## custard (7 Aug 2017)

Mmmm!

Likey, likey.


----------



## D_W (7 Aug 2017)

custard":3j99ep4b said:


> Mmmm!
> 
> Likey, likey.



Can't even find them cheap used. Somewhere in the range of $1,500 used for one that works. Double that new.

Simonds maxi cut file works with my method and costs $8 delivered here (probably removes metal a lot faster than a biax, but folks good with scraping can, I'm sure, get to tolerances that are in the ten thousandths of an inch. I don't want to scrape, though. It's difficult work and slow. 

I don't have any out of flat planes, so it could be a while (like until I get the next infill built), but I am going to make a video of it because people should be able to make their planes really flat if they'd like to - all you have to have is a good quality straight edge, a lapping surface and a file with the same characteristics as the simonds maxi cut files.


----------



## Sawdust=manglitter (7 Aug 2017)

I'll also be keeping an eye out for your plane flattening post/video with interest


----------



## bugbear (8 Aug 2017)

ED65":2dppxzgk said:


> is any decent amount of metal to remove I would never begin with anything finer than 80, even for something as small as a block plane. Now that I have been lucky enough to acquire a proper scraper though it's time to try scraping instead of lapping \/


Speaking as someone who has used scraping on a plane, I recommend against it. 

Mind you, I also recommend against lapping.

I like flat planes though.  

BugBear


----------



## Cheshirechappie (8 Aug 2017)

Modern engineering practice is to machine the surface flat - or where real precision is needed, machine off the bulk with a milling machine or similar, then refine the accuracy and surface finish by grinding in a big, rigid machine. (Obviously, a non-starter for the average woodworker.)

Older engineering practice was to machine to almost finished, then achieve accuracy and finish needed by hand scraping. (Still a non-starter for most woodworkers - milling machines are not stardard woody kit!)

Even older engineering practice (probably defunct almost everywhere except in emergencies by about WW1) was to chip the bulk off the casting with crosscut and flat chisels, then file almost to a finish, then scrape.

In each of the latter cases, the scraping removes only the last thou or two, any more than that takes ages! Filing, on the other hand, can remove cast iron quite quickly (no need to chip an existing machined plane casting with chisels even if it's warped quite badly), and with the right files and reference surface to work to, and a methodical approach, is surprisingly quick - certainly quicker than lapping on abrasive sheets. It can also leave a surface accurate enough for a woodworking plane without resorting to scraping, though working through the grits of abrasive sheets to the finish you desire can improve polish once you've established the accuracy.

The one downside of this method is that you do need an accurate reference surface to work to (engineer's surface plate, for preference), and some non-woodworking tools like marking blue and a suitable selection of files; thus, it's a great method if you happen to have those to hand, or access to them, but something of a non-starter on cost grounds if you haven't.

That realistically leaves the average woodworker with a sheet of float glass and some abrasive papers of various grades as the most cost-effective, though not the fastest, method.


----------



## D_W (8 Aug 2017)

If you're going to do what I'll show, you only need one file, but you do need abrasive paper and float glass. I don't know how perfect the flat surface has to be. Mine is very close to it (perhaps not able to slip a .0015" feeler between an undamaged starrett 24" straight edge and any point on the surface, and the support for me is 4 1/8" of ash and I work over a leg, so it may stay relatively close to that. I'm sure that level of flatness isn't required, though). I also have two granite reference surfaces, but I never need them. 

I do have marking fluid, but someone could use a magic marker or something easy. If one already has the straight edge and the lapping surface, all you really need is a file that looks like the one I attached here (this is a simonds black maxi.), and a file card. 

https://s2.postimg.org/3l34v9wcp/s-l1600.jpg

The challenge with lapping only is that you will have a very hard time doing much metal removal and still be within a thousandth or two. You can certainly make a functional plane, though. The challenge is several multiples greater when you move to infills and start trying to lap mild steel instead of cast. It laps so slow that it's untenable, and draw filing (or filing in general, maybe not specifically draw filing) becomes the only reasonable hand method if there is more than a little to remove. Plus, you may pein everything together and find the sole proud a hundredth in the middle, which is a horrible situation for hand lapping, as you have to remove that hump and you may still have some cosmetic stuff on the ends to get through. I have no idea how long it would take, but that was the situation on my last infill and I wasn't willing to find out after I blew out one application of 80 grit PSA roll in about 5 minutes and didn't get very far. I would've also ended with a plane that had proud ends, and I didn't want to do that.

Here are the steps to what I do:
* examine the sole of the plane with a straight edge (a really good one that is known to be super straight). If you have a good lap, you can start by running the plane down the lap a few times with coarse paper, it will mark the high spots. 
* If the plane is high on the ends (ends touch a flat surface, but not the mouth) and made of cast iron, you can continue to lap if you'd like. You'll end up with a very flat plane if you stop at the right point, as long as the plane isn't coffin shape (coffin shape metal planes tend to end up with the sides relieved as well as the ends because there isn't enough forward and rearward metal, I guess, to keep you from accidentally dubbing the sides). If you overshoot, then you can go to filing below. 
* file the high spots with said file above by applying the file diagonally on the surface of the plane where the high spots are, but not overlapping the edge and with gentle care if crossing the mouth - no crossing the mouth if the file is pinned, and no harsh work at the mouth even if it isn't. The way to do this is to put fingers on top of the end of the file with the non-dominant hand and pull up on the handle with the non-dominant hand a little bit and push in short strokes. In doing this, you are flexing the file a bit and quasi draw filing with the first inch or two of the file only, never filing on the outside perimeter of the sole, but staying within it. As an amount of swarf builds up on the plane, stop and brush it off, and check the file for pinning. The files I showed above will flex slightly and you can quickly file material without filing sides or edges of the plane sole, and the file has teeth all the way to the end (or close to it), so it's not just rubbing the surface. They come with a handle here for 8 bucks and I haven't worn one out yet. They are also great for draw filing elsewhere because the broken tooth pattern is fast for rough work, but will still draw file. 
* stop from time to time and lap the plane again. Lap until the filed area disappears. The high spots should be less high, but still should be discernible from spots that are either not yet lapped or that have been filed and are not being contacted by the lap. 
* continue the filing process, filing in the center (inside the perimeter of the plane on the high spots if they are somewhere other than the center) and lapping to bring down the edges to the place where you filed being careful not to over file the center. As you get close to flat, the filing done each iteration should be less and less so that you don't run the risk of leaving a large amount to lap out. that is, if you think you're taking a thousandth off with the file or two thousandths, as you get to the end of the process, you should only remove a fraction of that and then lap the work out, remove a fraction, then lap the work out, etc. As you approach getting a lap that covers the whole bottom, the entire plane should be flat. If it is not, continue iterations until it is. 

There are two points of care that have to be taken:
* If the file pins, you have to stop right away and card it (for the newbies - that means if it clogs, you have to use a special stiff wire brush, a "card", and get the pinning out) . Pinning will leave a deep scratch that you have to work out. If you are only working on a high spot, it's not a huge deal but:
* care must also be taken to make sure that you don't run a pinned file over the mouth of a plane. The pinning that is deep in an expanse of metal will be large dents at the edges going over the side of the mouth at the back and into the wear at the front. They'll never come out unless you still have some mouth that you need to file away (if making an infill, this should be done before the mouth is filed to finished size). Even then, the damage may be deep enough at the drop offs that you don't get it all out. 
* I guess there is a third. The file should work inside the perimeter of the plane only and the lap finish the work to consolidate it all. If the file is allowed to overrun the ends, a low spot will almost certainly be created somewhere. 

I don't know if that's clear or not. The file and the back and forth are the nuance. I am sure that the average person can do better than 1 1/2 thousandths with this, because I can. It's also something that on a pretty horrible smoother sole made of mild steel, you can do all of the work in about an hour. A machinist won't approve, but machinists can take a flying leap through a rolling donut if they think they are experts about what makes a good woodworking tool. 

I never lap with anything higher in grit than 80 grit. It's a waste of time. I intentionally finish the process with worn paper that is cutting slightly slow, and if it's not cutting slow enough, I find another plane and lap it for a little bit to take the initial snot out of the aggressive paper. The file is doing the work, and the lap is only doing a little. If I think I need a better surface finish than worn 80 grit paper, then I lay a piece of 220 wet and dry on top of my 80 grit lap and use it only enough to make the surface a little more refined, and then after that, a wisp of scotch brite and a careful cleaning of the metal with vigorous brushing. 

Include a file card in the cost of this if it's not had. I don't do this for all cast iron planes because they lap quickly and you can get very good functional flatness, unless they are already a banana to start. I may start doing this on long planes if I buy any in the future, because they are hard to lap unless they start with their ends low (mouth proud of the surface). 

Nobody needs the feelers, I was just curious about what I was attaining. I wouldn't use cheap feelers, either. They're not reliable, and good ones are not expensive. I also wouldn't use a cheap straight edge if you are talking about a couple of thousandths - starrett is it, and they're not cheap, but a 24" starrett 380 won't be the most expensive thing in the shop, either. 

This is actually a very easy process, the only thing that you end up doing is sweating a little bit. I'll still make a video of it. Other people should know how to do it, it's cheap, and knowledge is free.

The ability to square is pretty much the same thing, mark the high spots after the sole is flat and file them off until everything is close enough to finish (cosmetically) with a lap on the 80 grit. the work after that for cosmetics on the sides can be done carefully with a small block and sandpaper, being careful not to do more than just improve the cosmetics - no need to overdo it and sand a bunch of additional material off.


----------



## D_W (9 Aug 2017)

by the way, if someone tries my method above, I'd like to hear how you find the results. I take some of this a bit beyond what the average woodworker would, but for two reasons:
* lapping a mild steel infill will get you not very far and not very fast
* if you're making infills, they don't need to be flatter than lapping (that's a boutique tool and modern user want, but not a practical need). However, it just seems like a nice thing to do to make the thing dead flat if you spend 50+ (possibly three times that much if you make something really nice with a lot of hand work) hours making it. 

Then there's also that bit about wanting to be able to make a plane square for a lot less than it costs (and in no more time than it takes to mail, arrange details and receive back) to have someone with a surface grinder do it. 

I don't want to spend a lot of money, too much time, or have to buy a machine to do any of this, either. 

Still going to make a video. I asked my good friend George what he did to make his "elephant plane" flat and square (picture below - the elephant is hidden in the cheek line), and he responded "flake and scrape" , or whatever machinists call that. George can do about anything. I can't (george also uses a biax and has experience reconditioning very high dollar high precision machines - I don't and wouldn't be able to on those two things). I couldn't make hand scraping work fast enough and you can still wreck edges and mouths very easily. The attached plane sold for about what Holtey would've charged for a similar sized plane - I'm lucky if I can get the cost of materials and tools back out of the planes that I sell, but I'm OK with all of that if I can make something work within reasonable constraints and time. 

https://s2.postimg.org/6ct2knvcp/PICT0011_copy_1.jpg

I think the fact that I'm working with low skill means that anything that I can work out will be something that will be easy for other people to do, and it will generally be cheap, too.


----------



## ED65 (9 Aug 2017)

D_W":1aihaaxu said:


> Hollows behind the mouth like that of any considerable distance can cause trouble on the edges of boards or if you're smoothing any piece that's not wider than the hollow (thus the question that I had about just jacking, or smoothing and jointing. Even if you're using a smoother, eventually you will joint something with it).
> 
> It's best for a plane to have that stuff removed even though it's not vital.


I realise you didn't over-sell the problem here but I think it's worth saying anyway that those are at least as much theoretical disadvantages as practical issues. 

Japanese planes argue strongly that our Western notions of flat soles being as important as we tend to think are a little, ah, two dimensional


----------



## ED65 (9 Aug 2017)

bugbear":3137rgei said:


> Speaking as someone who has used scraping on a plane, I recommend against it.


I am surprised to hear you say that! 



bugbear":3137rgei said:


> Mind you, I also recommend against lapping.


 :mrgreen:


----------



## D_W (9 Aug 2017)

ED65":3631t9hg said:


> D_W":3631t9hg said:
> 
> 
> > Hollows behind the mouth like that of any considerable distance can cause trouble on the edges of boards or if you're smoothing any piece that's not wider than the hollow (thus the question that I had about just jacking, or smoothing and jointing. Even if you're using a smoother, eventually you will joint something with it).
> ...



if you use a japanese plane on a surface for a while, you'll generally end up with out of flat characteristics. At the american kzerou-kai, the attendees can request to have the subject piece of yellow cedar run over by a western jointer to make sure it's true. 

(I used japanese planes for a while, and still have a few. The hollow is created on the plane instead of just using it flat because it's a bias in favor of the user, and from a time when someone would've been on site and unable to find a perfectly flat surface. They work exceptionally well if you have one of those chinese reference granite plates and lap a sole entirely flat - at least as well as they work with the traditional setup).

In general, though I don't lap all of the planes that I have, despite the ability to do them all one way or another, I recognize that there are some minor nits that occur when I try to use the planes that I didn't work. Not deal breakers, but no reason to put up with them in the days when a $15 roll of PSA paper and a $20 piece of glass will take care of the problem for a dozen planes. 

There is a user on SMC who is fanatical about japanese tools (Stan Covington) and if you get into a discussion with him (I consider him a friend, and don't mind discussions that are disagreements), he will tell you ten ways til sunday why japanese planes are better than western and why most of our irons are barely fit to make a burn barrel, but he uses a metal jointer because the typical japanese plane setup is really intended for someone who is using the plane every single day and who is willing to tune the plane daily if needed.


----------



## Jacob (9 Aug 2017)

Yep 80 grit wet n dry. Flooded wet with white spirit. Cheapest paper backed wet n dry will lie very flat in a pool of white spirit (or water) on a suitable base (I use my planer bed) and not need sticking down or anything. 
When you have nearly finished do it to and fro against a bit of a fence (lath clamped on ) so you get straight lines parallel to sides 
No need for feeler gauges etc you can see where you've been very easily.
No need to go further (it'll polish up quickly with use) but if you want you can move to a finer grit for a quick 10 seconds few passes (round and round any direction), which is all you need as this will take off the sharpness of the ridges and reduce friction. No need to remove the ridges, or polish, it won't make any difference once they've been topped off.
Then candle wax - quick scribble.

Not sure what 'lapping' is exactly but I guess it's an engineer's thing and will take a long time. Don't do it! Don't scrape, don't file!
Don't use Honerite (most single malt whisky is a lot cheaper and would work just as well) or any other proprietary product -
they are all a rip off, especially Honerite - one of the most expensive liquids you can buy (not counting Chanel No5 etc). Just white spirit or water.

NB I only use my planes for woodwork. :lol:


----------



## D_W (9 Aug 2017)

If you make an infill, you'll find you wish you had a file. The mild steel just doesn't yield much to the paper. 

If you get an old infill that's horribly out of flat, the same. They'll be steel and hand lapping won't do much. Common wisdom would suspect either the old ones aren't very flat, or they're all very flat. I found most of them to be very flat, but I did get one norris that was for some reason horribly out of flat. Fortunately, it was a smoother, so I lapped it, anyway, but it took a while and ate paper. If I'd have figured out the filing ahead of time, it would've taken a lot less work. 

Why is this flatness important? At some point in the future, I'd like to sell a few infills (way in the future), but I'm not going to sell an infill that is less flat than a lie nielsen plane. It doesn't really have much to do with function, but the video I put up a couple of weeks ago continuing to joint an edge without putting a hump in it does rely on a plane bottom to be flat or reasonably close to it (lapping by hand has always been good enough for me). 

What we're left with, though, that the above method would be useful for is spot removal with a file (the file type is important, you have to be able to use the end and flex the file a little bit) and lapping, as an iterative process. I have a lot of old planes and not a single one of them is square. I do have planes that are square, but none of them are old bench planes. My perception from actual use is that if they're reasonably close, you can still use them to shoot without any issue, but I'm sure there are some folks who won't believe that. 

There are a lot of things that we do that we don't *have* to. I'm not going to build infills to sell for $300, so this is something that I'm going to have to take care of, and I have zero interest in buying metalworking machinery and then having subsequent plane designs that look like they were made to fit my metalworking machinery. 

Not at all advocating any of this for someone who wants to buy a bailey pattern smoother of some brand and use it. Lapping the plane sole is just fine for that, and a given plane may not even need anything at all, even for smoothing (and very finely).

there was also a rash here of people sending off their old planes to be surface ground by a guy and paying at least one way shipping, so they were out of the use of their planes and out of something like $100, and putting that into a plane where they'll never get their money back. If they got their plane back and the machinist doing the work left the toe and heel two thousandths proud of the mouth, they'll never be able to do what I did in the video that I showed, and it will materialize in facing lumber, too - that's a real pain.


----------



## Jacob (9 Aug 2017)

OK making them is another problem. Most of us (and the OP) are just talking about remedies for a supposedly finished plane.


----------



## Phil Pascoe (9 Aug 2017)

If you have a perfectly square sided plane and you remove the iron for honing and replace it slightly out of square it doesn't matter that the actual plane is perfect - conversely you can allow for a slight deviation from a right angled side by skewing the iron very slightly. I was taught at school (50 years ago) when shooting to always check the work and not presume the plane was perfect. I think people put too much importance on dead 90 degree sides.


----------



## Jacob (9 Aug 2017)

phil.p":1uss89jt said:


> If you have a perfectly square sided plane and you remove the iron for honing and replace it slightly out of square it doesn't matter that the actual plane is perfect - conversely you can allow for a slight deviation from a right angled side by skewing the iron very slightly. I was taught at school (50 years ago) when shooting to always check the work and not presume the plane was perfect. I think people put too much importance on dead 90 degree sides.


Yep. The forgotten art of looking at stuff rather than relying on tools and gadgets.


----------



## bugbear (9 Aug 2017)

Jacob":2rg0lcin said:


> Yep 80 grit wet n dry. Flooded wet with white spirit. Cheapest paper backed wet n dry will lie very flat in a pool of white spirit (or water) on a suitable base (I use my planer bed) and not need sticking down or anything.
> When you have nearly finished do it to and fro against a bit of a fence (lath clamped on ) so you get straight lines parallel to sides
> ...
> 
> Not sure what 'lapping' is exactly


As woodworkers use the term, it's exactly what you just described. You're lapping. Well done.

BugBear


----------



## Paddy Roxburgh (9 Aug 2017)

D_W":3k5yprkd said:


> there was also a rash here of people sending off their old planes to be surface ground by a guy and paying at least one way shipping, so they were out of the use of their planes and out of something like $100, and putting that into a plane where they'll never get their money back. If they got their plane back and the machinist doing the work left the toe and heel two thousandths proud of the mouth, they'll never be able to do what I did in the video that I showed, and it will materialize in facing lumber, too - that's a real pain.



I got my local tool works/saw doctors, North London Saws (5 minutes walk from my house) to grind my plane soles and square one side, £25 to set up the machine and do one, £5 each for the others (I think they did 5, can't remember it was a few years ago). It's not a service they normally provide but I know them quite well and thought I'd ask and they obliged. My thinnest feeler is 0.05mm (roughly 2 thou) and I can't fit it under my engineers straight edge on any of the planes and a couple were totally bananas. I agree that squareness is not necessary, but for £5 why not? I agree that $100 a plane would not be worth it.


----------



## D_W (9 Aug 2017)

I think at that price, I'd have them do all of mine.


----------



## Jacob (10 Aug 2017)

Paddy Roxburgh":3erthm4z said:


> ..... I agree that squareness is not necessary, but for £5 why not? .....


Because the Stanley Bailey design has a very efficient lateral adjuster to square the blade for a shooting board. Having a square side makes no difference - you still have to square the blade.


----------



## bugbear (10 Aug 2017)

Jacob":164q54wt said:


> Paddy Roxburgh":164q54wt said:
> 
> 
> > ..... I agree that squareness is not necessary, but for £5 why not? .....
> ...


Interesting idea.
If the side isn't square to the sole, you can EITHER have the blade parallel to the sole, giving a cut of uniform thickness, OR you can have the blade square to the side, but you obviously can't have both.

Tapered shavings are not helpful to good shooting. Better to set the blade parallel to the sole in the normal way, using the lateral adjuster, and bung a shim (bit of cardboard!) under the workpiece to correct squareness.

BugBear


----------



## Phil Pascoe (10 Aug 2017)

But unless the plane is absolutely dire - which is unlikely - the taper will be minute.


----------



## Sawyer (10 Aug 2017)

Jacob":7ed846yr said:


> phil.p":7ed846yr said:
> 
> 
> > If you have a perfectly square sided plane and you remove the iron for honing and replace it slightly out of square it doesn't matter that the actual plane is perfect - conversely you can allow for a slight deviation from a right angled side by skewing the iron very slightly. I was taught at school (50 years ago) when shooting to always check the work and not presume the plane was perfect. I think people put too much importance on dead 90 degree sides.
> ...



That's why I don't get too hung up about having planes and such like prepared to spaceflight engineering standards. The tool, however perfect, will be in the hands of a human being, who will then need to correct his own user-imparted imperfections by the time honoured methods.


----------



## Cheshirechappie (10 Aug 2017)

Sawyer":341lssbk said:


> Jacob":341lssbk said:
> 
> 
> > phil.p":341lssbk said:
> ...



I'd agree that it's rather pointless taking things too far, but many of us have found ourselves with planes having warped castings, rendering them somewhat less than effective at what they're supposed to do. We then have the choice of either replacing the plane altogether, or rectifying the fault to the point where the plane will actually do what it's supposed to. (Sides square to sole is nice, but not essential, within reason; sole flat enough to work properly is essential, though.)


----------



## D_W (10 Aug 2017)

Jacob":2enyw8g8 said:


> Paddy Roxburgh":2enyw8g8 said:
> 
> 
> > ..... I agree that squareness is not necessary, but for £5 why not? .....
> ...



That's true, but it works a little better if the blade is projected evenly from left to right. It's not "dire", to use the word above, it just works a little easier if it's dead on.


----------



## David C (10 Aug 2017)

The worst kind of sides are the ones that curved in their height.

These will not sit stable on a surface.

I suspect that many of these were reasonably flat in the beginning, but dressing on abrasive paper makes them round.

The best policy for a flat side is to use a small block , aiming for even coverage.

David Charlesworth


----------



## Jacob (10 Aug 2017)

David C":3gq1djd9 said:


> ...
> ... dressing on abrasive paper makes them round.....


Not if you use thin paper backed wet n dry in a pool of white spirit on a flat surface. I use a planer bed. Once well soaked the paper stays stuck down very flat under capillary action alone. You can put two A4 size pieces end to end - with a gap if you wanted to just do the ends of a long one. Helps if you store the paper flat between boards when not in use.
Cloth backed wet n dry no good for flattening, nor stuck-down paper-backed, neither will be as flat as the method described above.
NB wet cuts loads faster and lasts much longer than dry, so its win, win!


----------



## D_W (10 Aug 2017)

stuck down paper backed is superb for flattening. PSA roll, it's hard, and I personally like the heavier paper weight a little better, but lately it costs 3 times as much here. 

A PSA porter cable roll (80 grit) of 4 inches by 10 yards is about $12 right now. My favorite Mirka gold is up closer to $30 with shipping. I don't know what the weight is in rolls, but if it's comparable to papers, the porter cable roll is like b weight and the mirka is like F. Either one yields about the same flatness with the same user (I measure - I don't need to, but I am putting away skills to make planes by hand at some point in the future). 

The user pretty much determines how much damage the lap will do to a plane that should've been close to flat. A good user will have toe proud of the mouth by half a hundredth maybe on a plane that needed heavy work. A bad one, much worse (I have received planes that have been overcooked). A good user will also avoid lapping more off the top of a plane cheek than near the sole, but a bad user will not and will not notice that depth is removed fastest at the top of the cheek. A bad user will make a rocker like david describes, but it's not dependent on paper - only the very ends of the plane will show evidence of loose abrasives that dub - the center majority of a plane will be unharmed by a poor choice of paper and affixing methods.


----------



## Jacob (10 Aug 2017)

D_W":1ub5xanu said:


> stuck down paper backed is superb for flattening. PSA roll, it's hard, and I personally like the heavier paper weight a little better, but lately it costs 3 times as much here. ....


But it's never going to be as flat as thin paper wetted on a flat surface, which is also cheapest. Wet also cuts faster and is easier to keep clear of swarf (rare earth magnet) which means it lasts longer.
Summary; it's flattest, fastest, cheapest and last longest. :lol:


----------



## bugbear (11 Aug 2017)

The standards people are aiming at also vary; I saw a plane sold on eBay a while back, where the seller claimed to have flattened the sole. There were helpful photographs.





 

BugBear


----------



## G S Haydon (11 Aug 2017)

If I was in the process of flattening that sole I'd think I was very close. Just a touch more to get the front of the mouth right and I'd leave it at that.


----------



## bugbear (11 Aug 2017)

G S Haydon":j8yv4b4b said:


> If I was in the process of flattening that sole I'd think I was very close. Just a touch more to get the front of the mouth right and I'd leave it at that.


The nasty thing about lapping is that as the flat area grows, the process slows.

When you start, you think "GREAT; this is going really well; the little flat spots are growing really fast, I should have done this ages ago"

An hour later, the sole is mainly flat, with (probably) a dip in front of the mouth. And that little dip just refuses to come out. Because you don't get to raise the dip, you have to lower the whole sole (obviously). And you think "that's near enough ..."

It's frustrating.

BugBear

N.B. - the dip in front of mouth in the photo is fairly small, but we don't know how deep it is...


----------



## Phil Pascoe (11 Aug 2017)

I must admit it might not be absolutely essential for a plane to dead flat and have right angled sides, but if they are, great. I have a Stanley No.6, a Marples No.7 and a Stanley No.8 all of which are as flat as makes no difference, but I have a Record No.5 1/2 (my oldest plane) which I owned for about fifteen years before I had it flattened by an engineering firm that did cylinder heads, and it feels slightly different to the others. I have a Marples No.5 1/2 that was winding so badly I took a flapwheel to it to start with - it is now flat.


----------



## D_W (11 Aug 2017)

Jacob":3ddjvsu7 said:


> D_W":3ddjvsu7 said:
> 
> 
> > stuck down paper backed is superb for flattening. PSA roll, it's hard, and I personally like the heavier paper weight a little better, but lately it costs 3 times as much here. ....
> ...



Speed wise, that's not my experience. Coarse al ox paper dry is faster, and you remove the swarf with a shop brush. I started flattening planes with regular 60 grit wet and dry, but moved on to what I use now because it works better and is faster.


----------



## G S Haydon (11 Aug 2017)

bugbear":2le4v977 said:


> G S Haydon":2le4v977 said:
> 
> 
> > If I was in the process of flattening that sole I'd think I was very close. Just a touch more to get the front of the mouth right and I'd leave it at that.
> ...



Agreed! Thankfully I've not had to spend an hour yet, but getting old tools into shape does have its hurdles.


----------



## ED65 (11 Aug 2017)

bugbear":70g6tdo6 said:


> The standards people are aiming at also vary; I saw a plane sold on eBay a while back, where the seller claimed to have flattened the sole. There were helpful photographs.


Egads. I'll accept some out-of-flat conditions that others won't but that looks like it could have done with just a smidge more work!


----------



## ED65 (11 Aug 2017)

D_W":2692gcj5 said:


> Jacob":2692gcj5 said:
> 
> 
> > D_W":2692gcj5 said:
> ...


Mine also. 

Not just a little faster but IME an order of magnitude faster. And the abrasive lasts as much as ten times as long. Now obviously the quality of whatever each of us is buying plays a huge part in this but for me even with better quality W&D paper compared to a cheap-as-chips resin-bonded roll paper the latter wins by a country mile.


----------



## D_W (11 Aug 2017)

ED65":3bb7ceu8 said:


> Mine also.
> 
> Not just a little faster but IME an order of magnitude faster. And the abrasive lasts as much as ten times as long. Now obviously the quality of whatever each of us is buying plays a huge part in this but for me even with better quality W&D paper compared to a cheap-as-chips resin-bonded roll paper the latter wins by a country mile.



It's the nature of the abrasive. Silicon carbide breaks very quickly under pressure, and it remains sharp with the breakage, but tiny sharp particles aren't that useful. The material isn't that hard to abrade, and the alox is much tougher and maintains its size longer and doesn't break down. Cheaper Silicon carbide paper for me seemed to last a little longer (better breaks faster, which would be useful for tough material like high speed steel - to keep that sharpness). 

None of these papers are engineered for what we're doing - really high pressure at really low speed, but al-ox does the best with it per cost. The trick is to be able to get the 4" wide PSA roll with some price stability. For a long time, i could get Mirka Gold for $18 a roll, which is spectacular, but it is much more than that now. The Porter Cable paper here (who knows who makes it, I think it might be eastern european) is less than half the cost, and probably about 70% as good, but even that has strange prices for different grits (the 80 grit is cheap on amazon, but then the 120 might be twice the cost). 

I expect to lap a good shape smoother in about 3 minutes or less. One in bad shape in 10 minutes, maybe. Considerably longer for longer planes that are in bad shape, but now that I've got a filing process, that'll be the end of that (I used to use cheap alox belt material on a 2x3 wood block to spot remove on long planes, anyway, it's much faster for heavy metal removal). The last straw for me with loose silicon carbide wet on my glass lap was when lapping a long plane, the paper eventually tears under pressure (3 sheets fit on my lap with room to spare).


----------



## bugbear (11 Aug 2017)

D_W":1jbase4f said:


> I expect to lap a good shape smoother in about 3 minutes or less. One in bad shape in 10 minutes, maybe. Considerably longer for longer planes that are in bad shape...


Since you've claimed/admitted to a plane problem, how may planes do you think you (at least partially) flattened?

I've only ever done 5. (#3, 2 x #4, 2 x #5). Learnt something each time.

EDIT; I've done 6. Forgot the broken #4 1/2 I did purely for my website.  

BugBear


----------



## Jacob (11 Aug 2017)

D_W":a81j0uky said:


> ..... The last straw for me with loose silicon carbide wet on my glass lap was when lapping a long plane, the paper eventually tears under pressure (3 sheets fit on my lap with room to spare).


 I've never had that problem with cheap 80 grit wet n dry used wet on a flat surface. Try a different paper. It needs to be thin, paper backed, not cloth, not thick. I use the normal (A4?) sized single sheet stuff you buy in packs, not rolls.
NB by wet I mean very wet - drop the paper on to a pool of fluid, pour more over the top. After it's settled in and had a pass or two over it with the plane it stays there very flat and can be difficult to peel off! Helps if you store the paper between boards as curly edges take time to flatten down.

PS it's very suited to long planes - if you want to remove from the ends of a concave sole you just drop another piece on the bed and leave a gap between them.


----------



## D_W (11 Aug 2017)

bugbear":fg42qbx4 said:


> D_W":fg42qbx4 said:
> 
> 
> > I expect to lap a good shape smoother in about 3 minutes or less. One in bad shape in 10 minutes, maybe. Considerably longer for longer planes that are in bad shape...
> ...



Somewhere around 75, maybe. Maybe more. Metal that is. 20 of those have been infills, 4 that I've made.

Those four have been the worst, but old dovetail panel planes can be a bear.


----------



## bugbear (12 Aug 2017)

D_W":1vrysmy2 said:


> bugbear":1vrysmy2 said:
> 
> 
> > Since you've claimed/admitted to a plane problem, how may planes do you think you (at least partially) flattened?
> ...


 :shock: 

BugBear


----------



## Jacob (12 Aug 2017)

I haven't done many about 20 I suppose. I went through an experimental phase with some dodgy old planes - the challenge being to get them usable after having been rescued from a pond or whatever.
Did my own collection too, as necessary, which is not that often.
Regretfully sold on my first no.7 as it was slightly hollow and I hadn't discovered the fast wet process (see above) and hadn't learned that polishing and fine grits are not necessary.
Removed a deep scratch from the bottom of a Clifton 4 - discovering that 'ductile' steel is soft and scratchable was a surprise, but then it's very easy to remedy. Wasn't functionally necessary but I was going to sell it. Decided to keep it as a collectors piece.


----------



## Sam_Jack (13 Aug 2017)

Probably not worth mentioning and slightly esoteric; but, I have noted that the ‘different’ vintage planes in my small, though regularly used collection respond better to different treatments – even down to some of the chisels. For example, I have a ½” ‘Titan’ firmer chisel which likes it ‘rough’. There is a temperamental # 5 plane who’s blade requires, nay demands, only the gentlest of treatment – if I am to have a long lasting, fine edge. Routine maintenance on working tools IMO precludes any ‘fixed’ system. I use diamond ‘plates’ for ‘touch up’ and running maintenance; but, there are those in my stable which demand varying ‘abrasive’ persuasion to perform – at their best. All have suffered from my learning of this. Try sharpening one of my #4 Stanley’s on the ‘wrong’ stuff and it’s trouble all day long. Seriously; starting ‘flattening’ on 240 grit, when 280 is the preferred medium will eventually lead to more work and cursing. Just saying – it takes time to get to know your tools; particularly the older Duchesses. My two bob, spent as best pleased me.


----------



## D_W (13 Aug 2017)

Jacob":40hou5xs said:


> I haven't done many about 20 I suppose. I went through an experimental phase with some dodgy old planes - the challenge being to get them usable after having been rescued from a pond or whatever.
> Did my own collection too, as necessary, which is not that often.
> Regretfully sold on my first no.7 as it was slightly hollow and I hadn't discovered the fast wet process (see above) and hadn't learned that polishing and fine grits are not necessary.
> Removed a deep scratch from the bottom of a Clifton 4 - discovering that 'ductile' steel is soft and scratchable was a surprise, but then it's very easy to remedy. Wasn't functionally necessary but I was going to sell it. Decided to keep it as a collectors piece.



I like that, got one from a pond. 

There are obviously a lot of stanley planes around here, but what we don't have is the superb woody supply that you guys have. I went through a short phase where I got basket case planes, but they just have no residual value here in the states (so when I went to sell them, they were almost the price I paid for them), and I got too many that were hiding damage because they tend to come from dopey sellers here. One guy sent me four #7s in a box, the box was larger than the four planes by quite a lot and there was no packing material in it - you can imagine what they looked like when I got them (one of them had broken completely in half at the mouth and was in two pieces, I can only guess how much of the damage the others had that they had already). 

Ebay has sucked a lot of the good tools off the ground, so you can still find basket planes on the ground for the price that good tools used to be (that doesn't make much sense, either). 

I hope to do another couple of hundred planes in my lifetime, but work is getting in the way (and it's what I'll be done all of today, despite having two infills and a cabinet that I'd like to be working on). 

If I didn't have kids and a wife, I'd quit working a traditional job and make planes (entirely by hand) and live a pauper's lifestyle. Time is what's keeping me from becoming good at it.


----------

