# Philly's New Plane - with a difference...



## Philly (20 Apr 2007)

Hi Folks
I may of hinted about this previously but it has finally arrived - a hand plane from world famous cabinetmaker James Krenov!! \/ 
Sadly, Jim's eyesight is failing him and he has had to give up making his wonderful cabinets. But he is still making the odd hand plane.
Here it is....






It is an interesting beast! The plane body is left rough from the bandsaw (if you have read his books you will know this is his favoured method) but is wonderfully tactile. The body is cleverly contoured and very comfortable - it can also be gripped in various ways.
The iron is a huge Ron Hock cryo treated A2 iron with chipbreaker.
I have put some more pictures here on my website.
Cheers
Philly


----------



## Bean (20 Apr 2007)

Very nice Philly  
The plane looks tactile, what is it made from?


----------



## woodbloke (20 Apr 2007)

Phill - ultimate gloat, *impossible* to beat, give me that anyday rather than that 25th LN thingie :mrgreen: :mrgreen: :mrgreen: :lol: - Rob


----------



## paulm (20 Apr 2007)

woodbloke":2b6pgg2w said:


> Phill - ultimate gloat, *impossible* to beat, give me that anyday rather than that 25th LN thingie :mrgreen: :mrgreen: :mrgreen: :lol: - Rob



Why choose, I want them both :shock: :lol: 

Cheers, "collector" Paul


----------



## Paul Chapman (20 Apr 2007)

Very nice, Phil 8) 8) Lucky you were able to get one while he's still able to make them.

Cheers :wink: 

Paul


----------



## dunbarhamlin (20 Apr 2007)

:shock: Ah, heck. This really isn't on. I haven't got close to the bottom of the metal slope yet and my Woodie resistance is already almost weakened to the point of collapse after seeing your own latest creation.

Fabulous. Yours have an elegant sylvan chic, and this exemplary rude refinement.

Dammit. My feet are slipping.  

Steve


----------



## Anonymous (20 Apr 2007)

am I missing something, it looks like a load of old rubbish made in someones shed. Can't even be bothered to put a bit of paper over it.

Its the equivalent of Tracy Emein of the art world.


----------



## dunbarhamlin (20 Apr 2007)

Obeone - I think that _is_ the point - it is basely practical, refined only as function dictates. This is a pure tool, factored without aesthetic artifice and deriving beauty simply and honestly from the raw material of which it is fashioned. Is that sufficiently art criticy for you?


----------



## Philly (20 Apr 2007)

Obeone
Ahhh..... good call!
My first reaction when opening the box was "Aaaaah...what the heck is this :? " It looks rather coarsely made, is unfinished and needed a little fettling to make it sing.
But as I used it I realised how highly evolved this little plane is. The maker has obviously made a large amount of these over the years and it incorporates some very subtle but clever features.
It is very comfortable to hold and, as mentioned, you are not forced into a "standard" grip like, for instance, a Bailey style plane. The wedge needs minimal pressure to firmly hold the iron - almost finger pressure. And it cuts well. That is the basic purpose!
Please remember Jim is in his late eighties and his eyesight is failing - he is making planes mainly by feel! I am honoured to own one of his planes. As an amateur plane maker myself, I have read his writings on making planes and was very eager to see how his plane would perform in the flesh. For me this was very enlightening.
I hope this explains my excitement for this strange looking little block of wood :wink: 
regards
Philly


----------



## Frank D. (20 Apr 2007)

Nice score there Philly,
A little piece of woodworking history that you can actually touch and use, although if it were mine I probably wouldn't be using it very often. Thanks for sharing it with us.


----------



## Anonymous (20 Apr 2007)

Phil, he forgot to finish it for you. Send it over to me and i'll post it back to him for finishing. Honest :wink:


----------



## dchenard (20 Apr 2007)

Philly, how long did you have to wait between placing the order and receiving the plane, if I may ask?

DC

Tempted... =P~


----------



## Max Power (21 Apr 2007)

Well Im afraid Im with Obeone on this one .I wonder how many people would have been oohing and aahing if the plane had been posted anonymously with no reference to the venerable Mr. Krenov. Reminds me of wine experts extolling the virtues of wine vinigar when sampled from a bottle with a fancy label. But then I never got Picasso either, as they say, beauty is in the eye of the beholder :wink:


----------



## sparky (21 Apr 2007)

Obeone":3tuq1ol6 said:


> am I missing something, it looks like a load of old rubbish made in someones shed. Can't even be bothered to put a bit of paper over it.



i think i agree...to a point. this strikes me as nothing to look at however my basic thought about looks is "WHO CARES!" :!: 

does it work well? coming from James Krenov i would think that it would work just as well as any fancy-finished tool out there.

to me there is a REAL difference between a tool and a museum piece (or dare i say... 'a collectors item') :shock: and that is the reason that i never understood the whole LN plane looks better than LV plane thing. #-o but that is a whole different can of worms  

nice plane philly.

sparky (causing trouble :twisted: )

ps. at what point did philly end up with more lumber in the tool cabinet :tool: than on the lumber storage rack


----------



## Alf (21 Apr 2007)

'Fraid I'm not a JK fan and I just don't see it at all. Phil, you make much nicer-looking planes that work well - I'd sooner have my PE shoulder plane any day. But I wish you joy of your insanity. :wink:

Cheers, Alf


----------



## woodbloke (21 Apr 2007)

Obeone":1kcdp9zt said:


> am I missing something, it looks like a load of old rubbish made in someones shed. Can't even be bothered to put a bit of paper over it.
> 
> Its the equivalent of Tracy Emein of the art world.



The whole point here is that this little plane was made *by* Jim Krenov. Wether or not you like his style of furniture (and I do) he is without doubt one of *the* most influential furniture makers of the last quarter century and to own a small piece fashioned by him would be something that I could only hope to aspire to. As to looking like a load of old rubbish, there may be something in that...it is fairly rustic in appearance and doesn't have the polish or finish of a Holtey for example. That though, at the end of the jour, doesn't matter a toss...it's the provenance which is everything - Rob


----------



## Anonymous (21 Apr 2007)

woodbloke":3dvb90m5 said:


> Obeone":3dvb90m5 said:
> 
> 
> > am I missing something, it looks like a load of old rubbish made in someones shed. Can't even be bothered to put a bit of paper over it.
> ...



So that makes it the equivelent of tracy Emein's bed, doesn't matter a toss whether its any good its a Jim Krenov.


----------



## woodbloke (21 Apr 2007)

As Philly has said previously, it required a small amount of fettling to make it 'sing', so there's no question that it isn't fit for purpose and as Phill has said its been made by a man now in his mid eighties who is losing his sight so IMO some allowances ought to be made. I can see your point tho' (bit like the notorious Tate 'brick' sculpture a few years ago ...who made it, by the way?) My point is that I happen to like it. Last word on the subject - Rob


----------



## CHJ (21 Apr 2007)

Obeone":2fd6re90 said:


> So that makes it the equivelent of tracy Emein's bed, doesn't matter a toss whether its any good its a Jim Krenov.



Not quite, although I do think that it is a pity that such a great craftsman may be remembered by many who do not know his work in detail for his rustic tools rather than his quality carpentry, like his style or not, and I am not very smitten, there are relatively few people in the world today who can produce cabinet work to the standard of James Krenov.

I do not think that the Tracy Emein's or the like in our warped art world have or could ever produce such fine workmanship.

I, like Philly, would love to have in my possession a small article made by Mr Krenov, however basic in construction, just to show my respect of a great craftsman.


----------



## Paul Chapman (21 Apr 2007)

CHJ":sl4e36f7 said:


> I, like Philly, would love to have in my possession a small article made by Mr Krenov, however basic in construction, just to show my respect of a great craftsman.



Me too - one of the all-time greats  

Cheers :wink: 

Paul


----------



## Anonymous (21 Apr 2007)

CHJ":2upc9qdw said:


> Obeone":2upc9qdw said:
> 
> 
> > So that makes it the equivelent of tracy Emein's bed, doesn't matter a toss whether its any good its a Jim Krenov.
> ...



Send $250 and you can have one, its only a case of putting your money where your mouth is, or is that too much!


----------



## MrJay (21 Apr 2007)

I'm not sure exactly what you mean with your comparison. You seem to imply a lack of effort or production values, neither of which apply to Emin or Philly's new plane. You might not appreciate said values or the end result, but they are there.

Yes, the name is the most significant thing about the plane, I'm sure Philly could knock something vaguely similar together after a couple of tries. If nothing else a Krenov plane is a sound investment. Given that Krenov is a craftsman of legendary renown, not too far off dead and that there's some considerable scarcity involved I could imagine Philly's new plane doing very well at auction in 10-20 of years or so.

And of course there's no doubt a bit of hero worship. It's probably more akin to owning a football signed by Kevin Keegan than an art installation.


----------



## MIGNAL (21 Apr 2007)

There's no doubt that the plane that philly made or indeed the one that I made is finished to a much higher standard of craftsmanship. I also seriously doubt that anyone is going to pay that amount for either of these planes. The fact is your paying for the 'name' but that happens pretty much in many aspects of trade and commerce. Krenov probably deserves his success and there are countless numbers of people who also deserve some form of recognition and never receive it. It may not be 'fair' but that's the way the world is, you've just got to accept it.


----------



## tiler99 (21 Apr 2007)

My thoughts is a waste of money but then its not my money.
It looks like something a kid in their 1st year of high school knocked up in the lunch break.
Krenovs eyesight may be failing but he sure saw you coming :lol: 

Chill


----------



## Mike.C (21 Apr 2007)

> Obeone,
> 
> So that makes it the equivelent of tracy Emein's bed, doesn't matter a toss whether its any good its a Jim Krenov.



Read Phillys post,



> Philly,
> 
> But as I used it I realised how highly evolved this little plane is. The maker has obviously made a large amount of these over the years and it incorporates some very subtle but clever features.
> It is very comfortable to hold and, as mentioned, you are not forced into a "standard" grip like, for instance, a Bailey style plane. The wedge needs minimal pressure to firmly hold the iron - almost finger pressure. And it cuts well. That is the basic purpose!



"It is comfortable to hold and works well". What bit of that do you not understand? 
Surely if it does the job it was made for, and does it well, that is all that matters?
Now if you have and plane that works well and as Mr Jay says because of the man who made it could be worth something in the future, then I would say Philly is on to a winner.



> MrJay
> If nothing else a Krenov plane is a sound investment. Given that Krenov is a craftsman of legendary renown, not too far off dead and that there's some considerable scarcity involved I could imagine Philly's new plane doing very well at auction in 10-20 of years or so.



He has got a piece of work from a man he holds in high esteem and I for one think he is a lucky man.

Cheers

Mike


----------



## DomValente (21 Apr 2007)

Hmm, sfunny but I can appreciate it's worth and yes I too would like to own one. 
But I wouldn't like a Tracey Emin, so I guess in my mind the two don't equate.

Dom


----------



## MrJay (21 Apr 2007)

tiler99":t8kfy5et said:


> It looks like...



No it doesn't. The asymmetric front and rounded rump ought to tell you that this is a tool that's evolved over time for using. That the plane is roughly finished where one holds it, but more accurately finished on the sole and bed ought to tell you that Krenov knows where to apply different production values for best effect. Not everything in wood needs to be the product of a planer/thicknesser. Frankly, I'm rather inspired.


----------



## Anonymous (21 Apr 2007)

MrJay":3il7poep said:


> tiler99":3il7poep said:
> 
> 
> > It looks like...
> ...



OK i get it now, the next table I buy needs to be flat on the top, and the rest of it made with an axe then I will know it was made by a man who knows the production values for best effects.


----------



## Mike.C (21 Apr 2007)

Obeone just like the rest of us you have only seen the photo, but Philly has used the plane and in this instance knows best, so as I have said in my post above re-read Phillys post.

Cheers

Mike


----------



## Paul Chapman (21 Apr 2007)

I really do think those who are knocking James Krenov and the plane Philly bought, are missing the point. In years to come, I reckon woodworking historians will judge the period we are living in as one of the most exciting ever, both in terms of cabinet making and tool making. We, as woodworkers, are fortunate to be a part of all that. Philly is an enthusiast (in case you hadn't noticed  ) and for an enthusiast to be able to buy something made by one of the leading influences in woodworking today is great. Whether the plane is any good as a plane doesn't matter. It's part of what's happening in woodworking now - that's what matters in my view.

Cheers :wink: 

Paul


----------



## MrJay (21 Apr 2007)

Curse you Page 3.



Obeone":18q9mtnv said:


> MrJay":18q9mtnv said:
> 
> 
> > tiler99":18q9mtnv said:
> ...



You're suffering from a nasty case of association fallacy in your arguments. It's not a piece of production furniture (though I'm open to the idea of axe hewn furniture), it's a tool for use in a workshop. In some respects you may as well accuse Tom Lie-Nielson for not finishing the sides of his plane frogs in the same fashion as the polished working surfaces. However, that would still be missing half the point. The roughly finished surfaces of Philly's Krenov plane are the surfaces you use to hold the thing. I'd imagine the plane would work less well if the surfaces were smooth. That's what I mean by knowing when to use different production values for best effect.

For comparison; the steel working surfaces of my rather poncy secateurs are highly finished which makes them cut well, the same steel in the handles is left roughly finished which makes them nice to hold. It's simple, elegant and efficient.


----------



## woodbloke (21 Apr 2007)

FWIW the type of planes made by JK are quite easy to make. The big problem is finding a suitable cutter. I've used a parallel iron from a 50mm woodie which really too wide as by the time the side laminations are in place the total width becomes about 75mm or so which is too wide for a small plane.......however I've just come back from town after having visited my _most_ favourite shop (those in the know will realize which one that is :wink with enough plane making materials to do a couple of Krenovian style planes and a couple of Derek of Oz style planes and enough to make a smaller shoulder plane and a bit more to do a modified Record No4 :lol:, so I'm going to be quite busy this summer :lol:

Paul - well said, agree entirely - Rob


----------



## Anonymous (21 Apr 2007)

MrJay":2v3kyiqf said:


> Curse you Page 3.
> 
> You're suffering from a nasty case of association fallacy in your arguments. It's not a piece of production furniture (though I'm open to the idea of axe hewn furniture), it's a tool for use in a workshop. In some respects you may as well accuse Tom Lie-Nielson for not finishing the sides of his plane frogs in the same fashion as the polished working surfaces. However, that would still be missing half the point. The roughly finished surfaces of Philly's Krenov plane are the surfaces you use to hold the thing. I'd imagine the plane would work less well if the surfaces were smooth. That's what I mean by knowing when to use different production values for best effect.
> 
> For comparison; the steel working surfaces of my rather poncy secateurs are highly finished which makes them cut well, the same steel in the handles is left roughly finished which makes them nice to hold. It's simple, elegant and efficient.



What a load of rubbish, people don't buy wooden handle chisels and rough them up on the bandsaw.
If you use the plane a lot your more likely to get blisters from rough surfaces. Although I suspect these chisels are more collectors items, rarely used, thats the real shame.

Use any arguements you want, this is a plane made by someone past their prime. I know this statement will upset people but answer honestly do you really know anyone who can do something better at 80 than they could at the age of 40,50, or 60.


----------



## woodbloke (21 Apr 2007)

Whilst not wishing to employ the sort of provocative language expressed previously, the following pic of a couple of JK's planes is taken from my hardback edition of 'The Fine Art of Cabinetmaking' published in 1977, *thirty* years ago, when JK was in his mid 50's and probably at his best (IMHO):






Obeone - if you look really, *really* closely at the pics and then compare with Philly's plane, you will see a close resemblance...or is just me ](*,) - Rob


----------



## Philly (21 Apr 2007)

Obe
As I said in my original post (yes, pages ago.... :lol: ) Jims eyesight is failing him. He has had to give up making cabinets - he is in his late eighties!!!
I certainly took that into consideration when buying the plane AND in my attitude towards it. Yes, it is rather coarse looking and it is probably not the finest plane Jim has made. But in all the important places the tool is spot on.
As a fan of Jims work and his books I was well aware of what the plane would look like - he evens walks you though making one in his book!
So your opinion is indeed a valid one and I am not upset at your comment on Jim being past his prime. You're right. I posted the pictures to share this plane with you - I expected there to be varying opinions (as has been demonstrated :lol: ). James Krenov is a craftsman whose work elicits this kind of response and this plane is a perfect example of this.
Now let's get back to the workshop and make something  
Philly


----------



## MrJay (21 Apr 2007)

There are plenty of proficient people making their own chisels who prefer rough handles. Not sure where chisels came into it, but there you go.






Similarly my beetle is rough as you like, but it's that tool, not a shop bought mallet that I prefer; it's more 'pickupable'






Krenov may well be past his prime, but I wouldn't mind picking his brain about a few things, I reckon he still knows what he's doing.


----------



## DomValente (21 Apr 2007)

Obeone wrote

"Use any arguements you want, this is a plane made by someone past their prime. I know this statement will upset people but answer honestly do you really know anyone who can do something better at 80 than they could at the age of 40,50, or 60."

Er, use their experience to teach us how to make a practical working plane.

_Use the force my son_.


----------



## Anonymous (21 Apr 2007)

well I seem to have annoyed a few people.
Philly enjoy your purchase, your last post makes a lot of valid points.
By the way ](*,) this is offensive and putting stuff in *bold* implies i'm deaf, where as its jim K who's probably deaf.


----------



## woodbloke (21 Apr 2007)

Obeone wrote:


> By the way this is offensive and putting stuff in bold implies i'm deaf, where as its jim K who's probably deaf.



Sorry, disagree.....when I want to be offensive you'll know all about it. Putting stuff in bold etc with a suitable emoticons serves to highlight and emphasize a point of view.

'Nuff said on this topic - Rob


----------



## Paul Kierstead (21 Apr 2007)

Obeone":1po1vxnd said:


> ... where as its jim K who's probably deaf.



Is that sort of thing really called for? Actually, several of your statements about him are aggressive and rude.

Are you offended or something that he can get $250 for such a thing and you could not?


----------



## Anonymous (21 Apr 2007)

Paul Kierstead":1rqm2cz2 said:


> Obeone":1rqm2cz2 said:
> 
> 
> > ... where as its jim K who's probably deaf.
> ...



No not at all, they are only $250 so if they are so good why not buy one, they are fairly cheap really, I think it would take him quite a while to make one, maybe a day, so lets say thats £125/day less costs. Don't you earn more than that in MacDonalds these days.


----------



## paulm (21 Apr 2007)

Obeone,

Why not wait until you are not spoiling for an argument and come back when you have something interesting or helpful to contribute to the forum.

:roll:


----------



## Anonymous (21 Apr 2007)

No problem, have noticed this quite a lot on the forum, argue against the majority and your deemed to be a trouble maker, anyone who has a different point of view or says anything against the sacried ones are never heard of again, so I had better get back in line or i'm likely to be exterminated like some others.


----------



## Javier (21 Apr 2007)

Congrats Philly, here's a pic of mine from JK received a couple months ago. Feels great when using ,
takes nice thin shavings. Browsing at books a couple of years back I bumped into his Art of Fine Cabinet
Making and that got me hooked on woodworking. Jk never pretends that only his planes can make the finest
shavings, or that they're the only option. I'm delighted to own one though. Sentimental purchase, but that's
no sin.hehehe


----------



## Philly (22 Apr 2007)

Javier
That's a familiar looking plane!  
Does yours have a finish applied?
Cheers
Phil


----------



## Javier (22 Apr 2007)

Philly":6u2tfwbo said:


> Javier
> That's a familiar looking plane!
> Does yours have a finish applied?
> Cheers
> Phil



Nope, no finish applied.


----------



## Paul Kierstead (22 Apr 2007)

Obeone":3nnwvb54 said:


> No not at all, they are only $250 so if they are so good why not buy one, they are fairly cheap really, I think it would take him quite a while to make one, maybe a day, so lets say thats £125/day less costs. Don't you earn more than that in MacDonalds these days.



I am not making claims that they are good, I am asking why you have to be rude about the maker. Just about every time. What makes you so mean about it?


----------



## Alf (22 Apr 2007)

Obeone":2yall1p7 said:


> No problem, have noticed this quite a lot on the forum, argue against the majority and your deemed to be a trouble maker, anyone who has a different point of view or says anything against the sacried ones are never heard of again, so I had better get back in line or i'm likely to be exterminated like some others.


I have a different point of view to the majority and feel in no imminent danger of oblivion. The difference may be that I merely stated it and left it at that, rather than try to change minds which, quite simply, aren't available to be changed. This whole thing is a matter of personal choice, so any argument against is automatically personal and likely to upset folks. Not my personal choice to spend that much on that end result, but that doesn't make me, or you, "right". Might make us sane, but that's another matter...* :wink:

Cheers, Alf

*It's a *joke*, folks. Please don't throw things! [-o<


----------



## Anonymous (22 Apr 2007)

dchenard":fki0j98x said:


> Philly, how long did you have to wait between placing the order and receiving the plane, if I may ask?
> 
> DC
> 
> Tempted... =P~



Hi DC

I don't think this was answered for you, but I can tell you it was a long, long, long time :wink: 

And in my opinion, worth the wait - but then I by tools to use, not to look at :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :twisted:


----------



## Anonymous (22 Apr 2007)

Obeone":4kj9a7cq said:


> No problem, have noticed this quite a lot on the forum, argue against the majority and your deemed to be a trouble maker, anyone who has a different point of view or says anything against the sacried ones are never heard of again, so I had better get back in line or i'm likely to be exterminated like some others.



This is patently not true, but you have decided to rub people up the wrong way whilst trying to change their minds on a point of taste and preference, something you cannot change.
In my opinion, your approach was not designed to endear people to your point of view, but was somewhat confrontational

I personally have argued against the majority on here on subjects such as LA planes and I am still around


----------



## Max Power (22 Apr 2007)

Obeone,
I agreed early in the debate with some of your opinions regarding the aesthetics of the plane, but have been very dissapointed since then with your attitude towards Mr Krenov. Mr krenovs designs are not to my taste,but the level of his craftsmanship is without reproach and as such he should be accorded the level of respect this deserves.I can assure you that Mr Krenov would never be slighted in such a way by fellow professionals who would be more appreciative of his contribution to woodworking.The worst part however is your attitude to his age ,I was taught from an early age to show respect towards elderly people and I find your comments highly offensive I dare bet that Mr Krenov,even at his great age would have fare more to say of worth than yourself.


----------



## MIGNAL (22 Apr 2007)

Well said.


----------



## Alf (22 Apr 2007)

And behold, personal comments begat more personal comments and thus the thread will probably go to a fifth page and a nasty little padlock symbol. Time to go and bend our great intellects to some other topic, ladies and gents?

Cheers, Alf


----------

