# Low angle, 5 or 5 ½ jack plane for a beginner?



## Silly_Billy (15 Feb 2018)

I’m increasingly confused about whether/which jack plane to buy :? 

I’m finding hand planes enjoyable to use but confusing to buy! I’ve been shown how to use hand planes and sharpen them. I’ve a low angle block and a No. 4, but nothing else to remove material, straighten and true the surface. A Neanderthal, I’m only using hand tools for reasons of noise, storage space and enjoyment. I’m making smaller stuff like boxes, small shelves, _etc_ – and read that a jack plane can work as a jointer for small sized work.

Do I need a jack plane ahead of a jointer? If I only buy a jack plane, would 5 ½ or 5 be better? Would a low angle jack be more versatile? I’ve read that a low angle jack's a good idea, because it’s more versatile and easier for beginners to set up. (But is it harder to sharpen, if the blade’s thicker than a 5 or 5 ½?)

Confusion reigns. Can anyone shed some light?


----------



## AndyT (15 Feb 2018)

When I got started, my first plane was a no 4, which could cope with most of my needs. When I wanted to make a 6 foot high bookcase I was lucky enough to get a no 7 for a very reasonable price. It made planing long pieces so much easier that it felt like a real game changer.
Since then, I have bought a 5 1/2 and it's become my default iron jack plane. I rarely need the no 7 and could probably manage without it.
So, in my experience, it would be a good all round useful next plane.

In the spirit of disclosure I should add that I have one or two wooden jacks too, which I do use, and a low angle jack which I rarely use. I don't have a 5.


----------



## MikeG. (15 Feb 2018)

Silly_Billy":3gbmklfp said:


> I’m increasingly confused about whether/which jack plane to buy :?
> 
> I’m finding hand planes enjoyable to use but confusing to buy! I’ve been shown how to use hand planes and sharpen them. I’ve a low angle block and a No. 4,.............



You've got enough planes already, then, particularly if you are only making small stuff. Get a 6 and have everything covered, if you really *want* to.......but you don't *need* to.


----------



## custard (15 Feb 2018)

A good low angle jack is a lovely plane to use, but it has some shortcomings that you should know about,

1. The very thick iron means sharpening can be a long and tedious business without a power grinder to handle the majority of the metal removal.

2. The geometry of the iron makes forming and finessing a camber quite a bit harder. Getting a camber just how you want it, and then keeping it there, is one of the most important aspects of plane work. It's not impossible with a low angle jack, but it is much more of a challenge.

3. You can't use a closely set cap iron to control tear out, and the high angle iron you use with your low angle jack may not be high enough to get the job done.

4. There's not much lateral adjustment possible.

You already have a low angle block plane and a number 04, for the small scale projects you're working on that's pretty much all you need. If you're determined to spend your money then a 5 1/2 might find a role, or indeed a 06, or a wooden jack, but they're by no means essential.


----------



## Silly_Billy (15 Feb 2018)

Thanks everyone - very helpful advice.

I'd rather avoid spending money, but have found it tricky to take out twist with my No. 4 plane. Do I just need more practice?

If a 5 ½ or 6 would be useful, then _some _of the prices on Tooltique and The Old Tool Store aren't too salty. Lie-Nielsen money is out of the question!


----------



## Ttrees (15 Feb 2018)

I would look for a nice oldish Stanley 5 1/2 with a thick sole 
It wont make any difference regarding taking twist out of a board though, other than to achieve a nicer result faster.
If you can find an old fire door to plane on, I wouldn't be without a a suitable bench, and I cant think of a better
start than a fire door for loads of reasons.
The bench will make things clearer quicker, regardless if you decide to use it for reference after you get the hang of things.

Tom


----------



## Derek Cohen (Perth Oz) (15 Feb 2018)

Hi SB

For a beginner to hand planes, the easiest planes to get excellent (not just good) results with are the BU planes. Two stand out: the Veritas LA Jack, and the Veritas BU Smoother. With these two planes plus a couple of extra blades, you will be King (or Queen, if that is your way).

Use the LAJ as a short jointer and shooting plane. The BUS is simply outstanding with a high cutting angle.

Cambering is important and is indeed a more complex issue than with BD planes. However, luckily, there is a simple remedy. Just read this short article for the how to: http://www.inthewoodshop.com/WoodworkTe ... lades.html

Once you are more comfortable with these, and feeling more adventurous, get a couple of Stanley planes, such as a #4 and #7, and practice using the chipbreaker. That will take you up to another level.

Regards from Perth

Derek


----------



## Tasky (15 Feb 2018)

Silly_Billy":2teajjb9 said:


> _some _of the prices on Tooltique and The Old Tool Store aren't too salty.


What? £45 for one vice, or buy two for just £100??
Absolute bargain!!!!! :lol:


----------



## thetyreman (15 Feb 2018)

nout wrong with a regular plane at 45 degrees


----------



## DBT85 (15 Feb 2018)

Silly_Billy":3dkwr15j said:


> Thanks everyone - very helpful advice.
> 
> I'd rather avoid spending money, but have found it tricky to take out twist with my No. 4 plane. Do I just need more practice?
> 
> If a 5 ½ or 6 would be useful, then _some _of the prices on Tooltique and The Old Tool Store aren't too salty. Lie-Nielsen money is out of the question!



Have you made yourself some serviceable winding sticks and have you looked at any of the many videos on youtube about removing twist?


----------



## G S Haydon (15 Feb 2018)

For the tasks you want to tackle, I would search for the best condition #5 #51/2 or #6 that fits your budget. They are really very forgiving planes and as Custard has described, are easy to set up and maintain.

I'd then add to that a wooden jack with a cambered iron and have it reserved for quick stock removal. They are very affordable and I'm sure you'd find it useful.

If you enjoy the wooden jack you might also decide to purchase a wooden try plane. It can take some time to make sure shavings don't clog and the iron is in good shape, but when those issues are sorted they are superb.


----------



## Silly_Billy (15 Feb 2018)

Thanks for the advice about YouTube and winding sticks. I don't have any, but perhaps I can just use a couple of rulers. 



G S Haydon":3kvv3rlu said:


> For the tasks you want to tackle, I would search for the best condition #5 #51/2 or #6 that fits your budget.


How much difference does it make between a 5, 5 ½ or 6? Would a 6 be better because I've already got a smoother? Would a 5 be more versatile? A lot of posts seem to recommend a 5 ½, so is this the best compromise? 



Tasky":3kvv3rlu said:


> What? £45 for one vice, or buy two for just £100??


I agree. Hence I said *some* of the prices were OK (not all!)


----------



## MikeG. (15 Feb 2018)

Silly_Billy":1afm9ax3 said:


> Thanks for the advice about YouTube and winding sticks. I don't have any, but perhaps I can just use a couple of rulers........



No, rulers won't balance on edge. But any old straight off-cuts will do. They don't have to be the same. The only thing they need to be is straight.


----------



## Ttrees (15 Feb 2018)

I wouldn't say the 5 1/2 is a compromise between the 6 and the 5, even though
I don't own a no.6, nor have I ever seen one.
I like the no.5 1/2 because of its length and width, so much so that I bought two of them  
For me, if it were any longer, it would be too long and too heavy for a jack, as I sometimes end up holding it down by my side
while checking progress.
It may hit off something, the end of the bench or possibly the floor, if I bend down to sight something, if it were longer.

I got a no.5 because I wanted a narrow plane for narrow stock, it was only a tenner, and the fact that I find a no.4 too scoopy for my tastes.
I found in the brief amount of time I used it, to be too narrow for what I have in store for the next while, so I have allocated it to 
the metal shed for plywood edges and rough work.


----------



## DBT85 (15 Feb 2018)

Silly_Billy":1h2ybqdt said:


> Thanks for the advice about YouTube and winding sticks. I don't have any, but perhaps I can just use a couple of rulers.


No problem. Try Paul Sellers or maybe Woodwork with Wright on YouTube. Both cover it and the making of some sticks with inlays. Toma of good content for hand tool folk too. 

I'm making some winding sticks out of a bit of 25mm square wood that was part of the packing for my tumble dryer. Just plane it up and cut it down its length. If you aren't going to make sure that your "top" is parallel to your "bottom" before your cut, then just make sure you mark which way around the sticks need to go to match. 

ie, if your bit of wood is 25mm tall at one end and 23mm tall at the other, if you just cut it and flip one around, everything will looked twisted! So either make sure it's the same all along, or mark which way around it should go.


----------



## G S Haydon (15 Feb 2018)

There is a difference between them and more experienced users would have a favorite. However, when faced with wanting a longer plane for truing up, any of the three mentioned would work, especially if the projects are small. 

Andy's experience sounds like a likely experience you'll encounter. Just find the best condition you can of those sizes. If you don't like it, moving it on should be no issue.


----------



## thetyreman (16 Feb 2018)

if you do make winding sticks, make sure you use quarter sawn air dried wood that's bone dry, or it's going to warp, regardless of how nice it looks, I use aluminium winding sticks by veritas for that reason.


----------



## DBT85 (16 Feb 2018)

Another very cheap option if you want Ally sticks then you can get some bar from ebay dirt cheap. 25x12x600 is like £8 delivered. Put a bit of black electrical tape around the top ends of one and there's your contrast. Could go 25x6x600 for £5.24 posted each!

Just bought some 25x6x600 mm for £10.48 posted. Saves me a little time trying to make mine when I need to crack on making my bench! When I've more time I can make something wooden if I want to and I'm sure I can find a use for ally bar.


----------



## AndyT (16 Feb 2018)

+1 for ali strips. These are mine, from an old shower curtain rail. They are dead straight against each other or any other straight edge.


----------



## mr edd (16 Feb 2018)

Another vote for the 5 1/2.

I own quite a lot of planes, they all work well but i keep coming back to the 5 1/2.


----------



## Silly_Billy (16 Feb 2018)

Thanks again everyone. I'm a bit less confused now! Winding sticks look like the next step. Depending on that, a second hand 5 ½ doesn't look like it will break the bank.



Derek Cohen (Perth said:


> Hi SB
> For a beginner to hand planes, the easiest planes to get excellent (not just good) results with are the BU planes. Two stand out: the Veritas LA Jack, and the Veritas BU Smoother. With these two planes plus a couple of extra blades, you will be King (or Queen, if that is your way).


I'd love Derek's Veritas BU solution. But two Veritas planes would break the bank! One Quangsheng BU plane might be a possible request for Santa, but only if that's useful.


----------



## David C (17 Feb 2018)

No contest, 5 1/2 is a great plane.
Ignore Paul Sellers advice to go for a flimsy no 4!!

David Charlesworth


----------



## Jacob (17 Feb 2018)

Yep 5 1/2 perfection!

Winding sticks have to be straight obviously but also parallel top and bottom and both exactly same height. In other words identical. Otherwise you could get some misleading results depending on how you set them out, 
e.g. on a flat surface - if different heights but not parallel to each other, the top edges won't be in the same plane.


----------



## Racers (17 Feb 2018)

Jacob

Why the same height? parallel yes.

Can't see the problem, your bench could be on a slope or your board could be thicker at one end, it will make no difference.

I have one beech one walnut with centre marks.

If you put them together plane them flat then turn one around to see if there is any difference in height, plane it off and repeat.

Pete


----------



## Jacob (17 Feb 2018)

Racers":2w9ihx2j said:


> Jacob
> 
> Why the same height? parallel yes.


Same height from the workpiece e.g. two 25mm laths, not one at 25 and another at 20, as suggested somewhere earlier.


----------



## Racers (17 Feb 2018)

Why?

Pete


----------



## patrickjchase (17 Feb 2018)

Racers":1vmrki9l said:


> Why?
> 
> Pete



Because if the sticks are different heights and you don't line up exactly parallel then you'll get a "false positive" reading for twist. That doesn't happen (in theory) if they're the same height.


----------



## John15 (17 Feb 2018)

I find a 5 1/2 a tad heavy for general use and so prefer a No.5. I do use the 5 1/2 for shooting.

John


----------



## Steve Maskery (17 Feb 2018)

Silly_Billy":1i8sokok said:


> Thanks for the advice about YouTube and winding sticks. I don't have any, but perhaps I can just use a couple of rulers.



You might find this useful:
post1013804.html#p1013804


----------



## mr edd (17 Feb 2018)

Also forgot to add if you camber your blade having a couple of sets of irons is useful. 

I have my 5. 1/2 with one blade cambered for perfecting machine planed wood, a blade with much more camber for wood that i have have prepared with a jack plane and one straight blade for match planing and a cap iron to go with each blade.

They all fit in my No 7 as well for when i'm working on much longer bits.

Cheers 

Edd


----------



## Racers (18 Feb 2018)

I still don’t understand why the sticks need to be the same height. 
You crouch down and check the top edges line up it doesn’t matter if one is higher you just adjust your position. 

Pete


----------



## AndyT (18 Feb 2018)

I think you are right, Pete. 
But as there's no advantage in having them different heights, most people would make them match.


----------



## Jacob (18 Feb 2018)

Racers":2v7ttlja said:


> I still don’t understand why the sticks need to be the same height.
> You crouch down and check the top edges line up it doesn’t matter if one is higher you just adjust your position.
> 
> Pete


Try it. Two winding sticks different sizes:
If they are on a flat surface and parallel, they will align. If you turn one out of parallel they won't.


----------



## Racers (18 Feb 2018)

I have said they are parallel just different heights, you said they had to be the same height. 

Pete


----------



## Jacob (18 Feb 2018)

Racers":1yn6am4t said:


> I have said they are parallel just different heights, you said they had to be the same height.
> 
> Pete


Er, what? :roll:


----------



## Racers (18 Feb 2018)

Jacob":2k3pq8ke said:


> Yep 5 1/2 perfection!
> 
> Winding sticks have to be straight obviously but also parallel top and bottom and both exactly same height. In other words identical. Otherwise you could get some misleading results depending on how you set them out,
> e.g. on a flat surface - if different heights but not parallel to each other, the top edges won't be in the same plane.



Forgotten already?

Pete


----------



## Jacob (18 Feb 2018)

Racers":23h0ald8 said:


> Jacob":23h0ald8 said:
> 
> 
> > Yep 5 1/2 perfection!
> ...


Keep working on it Pete I'm sure you will get it eventually. :lol: 
Winding sticks have to be the same height when sitting on the workpiece, e.g. two 25 mm laths is good, one at 25 and another at 20 is bad.


----------



## Racers (18 Feb 2018)

Why?

Pete


----------



## AndyT (18 Feb 2018)

Now then Pete, you seem to be applying logical thought when there's no reason to. Everybody knows that a pair of winding sticks have to be the same size, else they wouldn't be a pair, would they? 
And it's in all the books - you don't want to go questioning the experts, that could lead to all sorts of trouble! :wink:


----------



## Jacob (18 Feb 2018)

Racers":eehxvmsc said:


> Why?
> 
> Pete


Because they won't work if they aren't the same size (unless they also happen to be precisely parallel). 
Try it.


----------



## Racers (18 Feb 2018)

Can you read jacob? I have already said that you said they had to be the same height. 

Pete


----------



## Jacob (18 Feb 2018)

What is it you don't understand Pete?


----------



## custard (18 Feb 2018)

I agree with Pete, there's no need for two winding sticks to be the same height. As long as each _individual_ stick is straight and parallel you don't need them to be matched in any other way.


----------



## G S Haydon (18 Feb 2018)

Dead right Pete. As Andy said, it's more than likely they would be. But, the two winding sticks need only be parallel and close in width, not sure I'd want a 20mm tall and a 150mm tall


----------



## AndyT (18 Feb 2018)

Jacob, Pete,

In an attempt to bring this discussion to a conclusion... It's easy to describe something as parallel to something else and overlook the fact that there are three different planes (X, Y and Z) to think about. If you don't draw a diagram or write very carefully, you can be thinking of one relationship in which a surface or edge is parallel to another but your audience can be thinking of different surfaces or edges which are not parallel.

In use, the sticks are placed parallel to the ends of the board when viewed from above. 

They are then looked at horizontally.

Provided that both sticks are parallel to each other when viewed from above, they could be different heights. In this case, their upper surfaces would not be parallel with the top surface of the board. That wouldn't matter, as you would actually be looking at their top front edges, which would lie on a plane, if the board was flat. This plane would be sloping, relative to the board surface.

If the sticks are the same height, it still works, and the imagined plane on which the top front edges lie is parallel to the board. The upper surfaces of the sticks are also on this plane.

Having them the same height means that if you place them slightly out of parallel to each other when seen from above, it doesn't matter. They will still look parallel. They aren't, but the effect of one end being nearer and the other end being further away is trivial on the scale of a normal workpiece.

So, mismatched sticks could work but would be harder to use.

I hope that helps. It took a long time to type and I want to go and do some woodwork now.


----------



## Jacob (18 Feb 2018)

custard":3np8ydmi said:


> I agree with Pete, there's no need for two winding sticks to be the same height. As long as each _individual_ stick is straight and parallel you don't need them to be matched in any other way.


I'm afraid you are wrong. Try it with two different height sticks. They will align if parallel but not otherwise.


----------



## custard (18 Feb 2018)

I've used winding sticks of different heights and they work just fine, so for me the matter's closed as practical experience trumps recreational wittering!


----------



## Jacob (18 Feb 2018)

custard":2yd6tc20 said:


> I've used winding sticks of different heights and they work just fine, so for me the matter's closed as practical experience trumps recreational wittering!


That means you are working with an acceptable degree of error for you. The bigger the difference between the sticks and the more they are out of parallel, the greater the error.
Might as well make them identical to start with!


----------



## Sgian Dubh (18 Feb 2018)

custard":2kturafr said:


> I've used winding sticks of different heights and they work just fine, so for me the matter's closed as practical experience trumps recreational wittering!


Here's a situation where I agree with ... er ... both you and Jacob. Andy seemed to do a good job of describing various issues. From a practical point of view winding sticks of different heights are fine assuming they're set up parallel to each other, or at least pretty close to parallel. If they're set up on the tested surface out of parallel to each other, then the greater the difference in thickness between them, the greater the error.

But Jacob makes a fair point in that winding sticks are best if they're the same thickness so that setting them up parallel on a surface under inspection isn't required. I think the phenomenon Jacob's alluding to is parallax causing displacement of an object depending on the sight line, or at least a variation of parallax. A tip for avoiding potential parallax error I give to learners is to hold a rule on its edge when measuring between two points rather than holding it on one of the wide flat sides. In the latter case the thickness of the rule can lead to misreading the measurement through the effect of parallax. Slainte.


----------



## MattRoberts (18 Feb 2018)

Jacob":1r279hh2 said:


> custard":1r279hh2 said:
> 
> 
> > I've used winding sticks of different heights and they work just fine, so for me the matter's closed as practical experience trumps recreational wittering!
> ...


Jacob, have you been on the sauce? Talk us through it then.

The height of a stick simply determines how far your winding stick edge is from the actual surface it's representing, nothing else. Assuming that all four edges of a stick are parallel to each other, it makes zero difference how high either stick is*

*Unless you're taking into account the curvature of the earth in your calculations, in which case I defer to your obviously superior standards of accuracy and would suggest you compare sticks at a distance of less than a few miles.


----------



## AndyT (18 Feb 2018)

I'm back, I hope this will do:

When the surface under test is flat, and the sticks (viewed from above) are parallel, the edges line up ok, even if the sticks are of different heights.

Starting from that case, imagine twisting one of the sticks a little bit so it is not quite parallel to the other. Think about the edges which you are sighting - they won't lie on a plane any more. 

BUT, if the surface of the board is twisted, it could compensate for that effect, by tilting one or both sticks end to end, and make the edges line up ok. It would look as if everything was ok when it wasn't. 

To avoid the necessity of always getting the sticks parallel, it's common to use matched pairs.


----------



## Jacob (18 Feb 2018)

Two (nicely made etc) winding sticks of different sizes on a flat surface will have their top edges in the same plane only when they are parallel to each other. If you turn one of the sticks away from parallel (still on the flat surface) the top edges won't be in the same plane. It's just simple geometry - nothing to do with parallax, curvature of the earth, or effects of alcohol. :roll: 
If the difference isn't great then neither will be the error, so you can get away with it within reason.


----------



## AndyT (18 Feb 2018)

A quick note to the original poster - I hope you are still reading this stuff. We often go wildly off-piste on a topic like this. Sometimes the discussion will throw up interesting nuggets of information, sometimes not. It's nothing personal - we just like to carry on chatting long after your question has been answered, even if nobody else is listening!


----------



## Jacob (18 Feb 2018)

AndyT":1610hp02 said:


> I'm back, I hope this will do:
> 
> When the surface under test is flat, and the sticks (viewed from above) are parallel, the edges line up ok, even if the sticks are of different heights.
> 
> ...


Exactly! Congratulations!
(hammer)

PS or if the board is flat it will look as though it isn't.


----------



## AndyT (18 Feb 2018)

Well, it took a while, but I think we have collectively got from

_Winding sticks have to be straight obviously but also parallel top and bottom and both exactly same height. _

to

_Winding sticks have to be straight, with top and bottom edges parallel. They are better if they are the same height, so are generally made that way. 
_

Phew!


----------



## Jacob (18 Feb 2018)

AndyT":1507vbzl said:


> Well, it took a while, but I think we have collectively got from
> 
> _Winding sticks have to be straight obviously but also parallel top and bottom and both exactly same height. _
> 
> ...


We got from _"any old straight off-cuts will do. They don't have to be the same. The only thing they need to be is straight." _
via Pete's doubtful wibbling, 
finally to 
_Winding sticks have to be straight obviously but also parallel top and bottom and both exactly same height. _
:lol:


----------



## Racers (18 Feb 2018)

Never wrong are you jacob 

Pete


----------



## Jacob (18 Feb 2018)

Racers":3rfqnl7w said:


> Never wrong are you jacob
> 
> Pete


Dunno, you tell me Pete. I wouldn't worry about it if I was you.

PS just wondering - on the one hand you have people going on about 'reference planes' and high precision, on the other being very casual about a simple but very precise trad technique actually involving a reference plane. Is there a connection?


----------



## Phil Pascoe (18 Feb 2018)

So I assume that if the two strips are exactly the same width they won't work if the bench isn't dead horizontal, or if you're testing the side of a tapered workpiece for flatness?


----------



## Racers (18 Feb 2018)

You are only checking the surface that the stick are on nothing else, so the position of your bench or the underside of the wood doesn’t matter. 

Pete


----------



## Phil Pascoe (18 Feb 2018)

I think you missed my point, Pete. If the top of the bench sloped an eighth it would have exactly the same effect as the sticks being an eighth different. None.


----------



## MikeG. (18 Feb 2018)

patrickjchase":1g5ucj4t said:


> Racers":1g5ucj4t said:
> 
> 
> > Why?
> ...



No, Pete, that will happen anyway if the sticks aren't parallel. 

This really is overthinking a very simple sighting aid. The only two things you need to make winding sticks work are that they are straight (one of them...the near one....... also needs to be parallel top-and-bottom. The far one doesn't even need to be that) and that they are both laid out at right angles to the board. Anything more than that is a bonus, and an unnecessary complication for a beginner.


----------



## MikeG. (18 Feb 2018)

phil.p":3pi9ask9 said:


> I think you missed my point, Pete. If the top of the bench sloped an eighth it would have exactly the same effect as the sticks being an eighth different. None.



Only if you were planing a board so soggy and floppy that it followed the contour of your bench. I tend to avoid wood like that.


----------



## Jacob (18 Feb 2018)

Racers":2oj4vype said:


> You are only checking the surface that the stick are on nothing else, so the position of your bench or the underside of the wood doesn’t matter.
> 
> Pete


Yep.


----------



## Jacob (18 Feb 2018)

MikeG.":fxz7km6o said:


> patrickjchase":fxz7km6o said:
> 
> 
> > Racers":fxz7km6o said:
> ...


Not if they are parallel and same height


> This really is overthinking a very simple sighting aid. The only two things you need to make winding sticks work are that they are straight (one of them...the near one....... also needs to be parallel top-and-bottom. The far one doesn't even need to be that) and that they are both laid out at right angles to the board. Anything more than that is a bonus, and an unnecessary complication for a beginner.


Nope. 
They have to be identical, which isn't difficult even for a beginner. 
They don't even have to be at right angles to the board, though that's how you'd do it (approximately) without giving it a thought.
As I said earlier - it's slightly odd in this world of mega precision and engineering techniques imported into woodwork, 'reference surfaces' and other bollo.sk,
that this simple, cheap, and very accurate technique causes so much confusion.

I guess it's because nobody can sell any gadgets on the back of it, though no doubt winding sticks are on sale somewhere, probably made of ebony, with brass knobs on.

PS oh yes here they are but only a wealthy beginner (or silly person) would buy these!


----------



## MikeG. (18 Feb 2018)

Jacob":29wdl01d said:


> .........Nope.
> They have to be identical, which isn't difficult even for a beginner.



No, they absolutely do not. Unless of course perspective doesn't exist in your workshop. I accept that making them identical is easy, but there is no cost whatever in their efficacy if they aren't.



> They don't even have to be at right angles to the board, though that's how you'd do it (approximately) without giving it a thought.........



Again, there it is again: that perspective-free anomaly in your workshop.


----------



## Jacob (18 Feb 2018)

MikeG.":uo6f07x7 said:


> Jacob":uo6f07x7 said:
> 
> 
> > .........Nope.
> ...


Perspective doesn't come into it.
Have a go with some bits of wood Mike.

I could do some photos but people obviously need to work it out for themselves!


----------



## patrickjchase (19 Feb 2018)

Jacob":tbu9cl5j said:


> MikeG.":tbu9cl5j said:
> 
> 
> > Perspective doesn't come into it.
> ...



Obviously people are simply confusing "perspective" and "parallax" 

Here's a thought experiment for everybody who thinks that different-height winding sticks are OK: Consider a perfectly flat surface, on which rest two different height winding sticks. Imagine that they are so far out of parallel that they touch. Is there any angle or "perspective" from which you can view them such that you could correctly determine that the surface is flat? (hint: No).


----------



## DBT85 (19 Feb 2018)




----------



## MikeG. (19 Feb 2018)

Jacob, I am well aware of the difference between perspective and parallax. I chose the former word carefully. You don't have to tell me to go and "have a go with some bits of wood", because I have probably been using winding sticks as long and as often as you have, and I know full well how they work. I don't need to "work it out for myself" (thanks very much for the suggestion), because I've been working it out for myself for 35 years or more. Remember, I made a living making high-end one off furniture, and did all my stock preparation my hand. I might just have a clue about winding sticks.

I gave a big clue when I said previously that only one of the sticks, the nearest one, need to have a top edge parallel to the bottom edge. The other one can have a waney edge, a fan-tail carving or be any shape you like to its top. It could be a long wedge.* I don't use the top edge of the far stick to sight.* I use the bottom edge. I look at the gap between the top of the near one and the under-edge of the far one, as this is far easier to see clearly than trying to line up two top edges. It's a sliver of light, after all...........the same thing you look at when placing the edge of a plane across a board to check flatness. Obviously, this works only if the sticks are at right angles to the board, so, believe it or not, I put them at right angles to the board.

So, my winding sticks currently are different lengths and different widths (heights). I'll carry on using them until I find myself needing an off-cut of precisely the dimensions of one of them and it gets built into a piece of furniture. I'll then reach into my off-cuts stock and plane up another one, which will be any old width, any old length, and utterly unreferenced to its partner. 

I am quite a supporter of yours on this board. I like the fact that you cut through the rubbish about reference faces,"must have another specialist tool", "need 17 planes at least", and all that. I like the fact that you speak from experience, and have a lifelong stock of simple robust techniques to impart here. I am a fellow traveller. A pragmatic hand-tool user. A joiner, using traditional joints, well made. I don't see the need for all sorts of flash tools sold to hobbyists as necessities. But all that being said, you have a fault: you don't consider any way other than your way to be worthwhile, and this winding stick nonsense is a good example. I'll turn the tables around, now, and ask you to go and find a couple of reasonable off-cuts of different sectional and length dimensions (hell, you can use a piece of 4x2 for one of them), and go try sighting a board my way. You won't like it as much as your way, because you've been doing it your way for donkey's years. But at least you'll see that my way works too, and maybe you won't be quite so quick to dismiss simple, robust, tried-and-tested alternatives hereafter.


----------



## galleywood (19 Feb 2018)

MikeG

Thanks for describing the way you use winding sticks - it never occured to me to line up with the bottom of the far stick.
I will make some and use with confidence.


----------



## Jacob (19 Feb 2018)

Bottom edge will work of course, but only when they are parallel. 
It's just simple geometry. 
For all intents and purposes it won't matter much if they just placed by eye, but in fact the further away from parallel the greater the error. Using _the top edge of two identical sticks_ removed this error. 
It's just simple geometry.
I'm not being dogmatic, it's not _my_ way, it's just simple geometry and is the reason why winding sticks are assumed to be identical.

PS easy to prove: set up your sticks on a flat surface with top edge and the further stick bottom edge in line. Turn the further one a bit skewed across, and they won't be in line.
I'm doing it now on the kitchen table with two books - easy to set up the top/bottom edges in line, turn one slightly and they are out.
I can see that you can get away with doing it with a little error, but there is no need.


----------



## Silly_Billy (19 Feb 2018)

Jacob":2p1dzydy said:


> oh yes here they are



£55 for winding sticks! :roll: 
I'm sure they're lovely sticks, but £55 would get me either of the smaller Quangsheng bronze planes with change to spare!


----------



## MikeG. (19 Feb 2018)

Jacob":x7dgnr09 said:


> Bottom edge will work of course........



So do you accept that when you said:


Jacob":x7dgnr09 said:


> ......................Nope. They have to be identical........



that you were wrong? (Hint: yes, you were).


----------



## MikeG. (19 Feb 2018)

Jacob":lma83quc said:


> ........PS easy to prove: set up your sticks on a flat surface with top edge and the further stick bottom edge in line. Turn the further one a bit skewed across, and they won't be in line.



Go back and re-read my post, Jacob. You obviously missed this bit:



MikeG.":lma83quc said:


> ........Obviously, this works only if the sticks are at right angles to the board, so, believe it or not, I put them at right angles to the board...........



If they are both at right angles to the board, would you describe them as being parallel? You being so keen on your "simple geometry" and all......


----------



## Jacob (19 Feb 2018)

If not identical, or if using top/bottom edge - they have to be parallel or there will be an error.
It's just simple geometry. 
Top to top identical edge means no error and you don't have to set them parallel or at right angles to the workpiece, you can just drop them on, any old flat surface, even if it has a wany edge or is a disc!
So yes you right Mike - it'll work but only if they are parallel, but I'm right too - it'll work even if they aren't parallel but are identical! Might as well make them identical and keep it simple!

Are we nearly there yet? :lol:


----------



## galleywood (19 Feb 2018)

I think care needs to be taken when saying that sticks need to be parralel.
There is a need for the sides of one (or both, depending on your point of view) to be made parralel.
There is a separate need for the sticks to be placed parralel when sighting them on a board.
Without clarification it is easy to misinterpret.


----------



## Woody2Shoes (19 Feb 2018)

Having (speed) read this thread, I will now always think of "winding sticks" as "wind-up sticks".... :!:


----------



## MikeG. (19 Feb 2018)

Jacob":143dnw6o said:


> If not identical, or if using top/bottom edge - they have to be parallel or there will be an error.
> It's just simple geometry.
> Top to top identical edge means no error and you don't have to set them parallel or at right angles to the workpiece, you can just drop them on, any old flat surface, even if it has a wany edge or is a disc!



Please tell me why you keep "correcting" me, by repeating stuff I agree with. By repeating stuff I've already posted. It's almost as though the argument is more important than the content.


----------



## MikeG. (19 Feb 2018)

galleywood":1q9o52it said:


> I think care needs to be taken when saying that sticks need to be parralel.
> There is a need for the sides of one (or both, depending on your point of view) to be made parralel.
> There is a separate need for the sticks to be placed parralel when sighting them on a board.
> Without clarification it is easy to misinterpret.



Indeed. 

For clarification. With my method, the near stick needs to have a parallel top and bottom edge (the far one doesn't). They need to be placed at right angles to the board (which means they are parallel with each other).


----------



## Jacob (19 Feb 2018)

I just edited post above. It now reads; _So yes you are right Mike - it'll work *but* only if they are parallel, but I'm right too - it'll work even if they aren't parallel but are identical! Might as well make them identical and keep it simple!_ 
Which is all I'm saying really.

PS Mike I hadn't twigged that you were using the bottom edge of the further stick - I always use the top edges as it eliminates the possibility of an error due to them being not parallel!

Phew!
Hope nobody is nodding off at the back!


----------



## Sgian Dubh (19 Feb 2018)

Jacob":208xozw5 said:


> It's just simple geometry - nothing to do with parallax ... :roll:


On reflection, you're right, it's geometry, not parallax. The situation was incorrectly thought through on my part - idleness I suspect, ha, ha. Slainte.


----------



## Bodgers (19 Feb 2018)

Wasn't this originally a fairly innocent question about a plane choice...?

Sent from my MI 3W using Tapatalk


----------



## Geordie Joe (19 Feb 2018)

Silly_Billy":2q7vbm1f said:


> Jacob":2q7vbm1f said:
> 
> 
> > oh yes here they are
> ...



That's nothing, take a look at this

https://www.amazon.co.uk/Advanced-A...&qid=1519039259&sr=8-1&keywords=winding+stick

I wonder what happened to the other one?


----------



## Silly_Billy (19 Feb 2018)

Joe, I think you've stumbled on a brilliant business idea: sell one winding stick for £70, then you're virtually guaranteed a repeat sale when the customer realises the need for a second stick. It's genius (hammer)


----------



## Phil Pascoe (19 Feb 2018)

And ensure the second is a different width.


----------



## Jacob (19 Feb 2018)

phil.p":1edvszra said:


> And ensure the second is a different width.


Never give a sucker an even break!


----------



## Tasky (19 Feb 2018)

Jacob"Hope nobody is nodding off at the back!
[img:26bws9nv said:


> http://owdman.co.uk/winding.jpg[/img]



A-HAH..... so everyone who calls them winding _sticks_ is wrong in the first place.....!!


----------



## Woody2Shoes (19 Feb 2018)

I suspect that rather than Winding Strips they perhaps actually ought to be called Unwinding Strips ? :idea:


----------



## David C (19 Feb 2018)

Has the chap using the sticks nodded off?

The illustrator makes the same mistake as the photographer usually does. There is a wonderful Hayward photo.

One has to view the sticks from about three timed the distance apart, to give the eye a chance to focus on both sticks.

Best wishes
David

PS Parallel and same height is best!


----------



## Tasky (19 Feb 2018)

David C":1clnrmpb said:


> Has the chap using the sticks nodded off?



Nah, murdered by his wife. Stabbed in the back with a chisel. 
Seems he was spending too much time ignoring her needs and arguing about bloody woodworking nonsense on the internet, again... !!


----------



## DBT85 (19 Feb 2018)

David C":1cpa0uo3 said:


> One has to view the sticks from about three timed the distance apart, to give the eye a chance to focus on both sticks.



Wait. So if I'm checking an 8ft board I'm supposed to be stood 24 feet away from the nearest?


----------



## MikeG. (19 Feb 2018)

....with your binoculars.


----------



## DBT85 (19 Feb 2018)

MikeG.":68pj7y2j said:


> ....with your binoculars.


By the time I've got that far away the cat will have jumped up and moved one of them!


----------



## Tasky (20 Feb 2018)

MikeG.":3n53xgr4 said:


> ....with your binoculars.


Lucky for me, I have an old pair of artillery binos with a right-angled scale reticle - Don't even need winding sticks with that!!


----------



## El Barto (20 Feb 2018)

Late to the party here but as a fellow beginner I thought I may as well throw my two pence in. I didn't read every page so apologies if I'm repeating earlier posts.

As you're probably aware there are multiple arguments for every kind of plane. I started out with a knackered old No.4 smoother and learnt how to tune it up and get it working well. If I was to do it again I'd get a 5 1/2 but that's beside the point. Learning to get the most out of an old "traditional" plane was really enlightening and the effort paid off, although it did take a while and there things still to learn. The feeling of turning an old plane into something that's yours and then producing a beautiful finish with it is wonderful and it doesn't get old (at least for me). I'm really glad that that's the route I took BUT ...

Further down the road I got a bevel up jack plane and I love it. And I can see why people who get one as their first plane also love it, it's easy to use and produces excellent results. I also didn't notice any difference in sharpening difficulty compared to a 45° bevel down plane, if there is any it's negligible. Although I generally add a small camber to my blades, I haven't yet to my bevel up and so far I have no need to.

The Quangsheng BU jack from Workshop Heaven is brilliant: https://www.workshopheaven.com/quangshe ... plane.html


----------



## Silly_Billy (20 Feb 2018)

Thanks El Barto - great to read a fellow beginner’s experience.


----------



## DBT85 (22 Feb 2018)

For what it worth. My 600mm bits of ally to use as winding sticks arrived. Not bad for a tenner. Perfectly aligned and everything.

Now I ahead to put them on at 70ish degrees to the board, stand on one leg 53 feet away to use them, right? 

How do I sharpen them?


----------



## patrickjchase (22 Feb 2018)

DBT85":29e02v1i said:


> For what it worth. My 600mm bits of ally to use as winding sticks arrived. Not bad for a tenner. Perfectly aligned and everything.



But are they identical height?


----------



## DBT85 (22 Feb 2018)

patrickjchase":1y4uwotp said:


> DBT85":1y4uwotp said:
> 
> 
> > For what it worth. My 600mm bits of ally to use as winding sticks arrived. Not bad for a tenner. Perfectly aligned and everything.
> ...


Only when I stand them both up.


----------



## Silly_Billy (18 Apr 2018)

It turns out the answer to the original question is personal preference, based on having actually used the planes. Also, I'd forgotten the obvious: muscular endurance has got to impact personal preference for size of jack plane.

I've now managed to beg, borrow or steal a 5, 5 ½, 6 and low angle jack to try out. With a sharp blade, they were all good. Also, I was surprised to find that the No 6 was nothing like as cumbersome as I'd imagined. In my (not small!) hands I liked a Quangsheng No 6 the best, but I'm probably unusual in liking the No 6.

If I could only have one jack plane, however, I'd probably pick a low angle jack. I liked it almost as much as the No 6, but the low angle jack's speed of mouth adjustment and versatility/ease of changing blades were brilliant. None of my beginner's worries about the low angle jack (e.g. sharpening the thick blade) materialised.

If any other beginners read this thread, then I'd recommend trying out as many planes as you can. If that's not possible, then I think any of these planes will work well provided the sole's flat and the blade's kept sharp.


----------



## AndyT (18 Apr 2018)

That's great.
And pretty much what was said on page 1. I can't remember much about the other six pages. :wink:


----------

