# Clifton: why the lack of ductile iron?



## woden (10 Jul 2007)

Anyone have an inkling why Clifton don't use ductile iron in their bench planes? Is it something to do with keeping costs down? I was flicking through the Axminster catalogue and noticed that they do in fact make their convex and concave spokeshaves from ductile iron - or as they more poshly put it 'spheroidal graphite iron' - but the bench planes are still only made from grey cast iron. I suppose Clifton reason that you're more likely to drop a spokeshave than a bench plane.

I have to say this would really raise question marks over a Clifton purchase for me. Maybe it's different for others but now and again I tend to be a bit of a klutz and drop things/knock things off benches and to think that my pricey investment might one day end up multiplied into several not so pricey chucks on the floor doesn't bear thinking about. Lie Nielsen and Veritas definitely seem to have the edge here.

An even more bizarre choice of materials by Clifton is that for there 420 shoulder plane. Part of the selling spiel in the catalogue emphasizes that the lever arm is made of unbreakable malleable iron. But surely this only goes to highlight in a negative way that the rest of the plane is made of ever-so-breakable cast iron. Are they really trying to entice people to buy this plane with the notion that if dropped the handle certainly won't break but, er... you will have to order a new body as it will have snapped in two? It's an extreme analogy but nobody's ever sold a bike by praising the fact that it still has one wheel.

For a bevel up plane in particular I thought that the new makers were all taking advantage of ductile iron to avoid the old problem of the shallow bed chipping as found in Stanley/Record BUs. It would seem that a Clifton 420 will be every bit as prone to damage at the back of the mouth as a Record 073. Why eradicate the problem of a fragile handle with malleable iron only to neglect another important area that the weakness of cast iron causes problems in?


----------



## dunbarhamlin (10 Jul 2007)

Dunno - tradition? Are there other benefits to ductile? How does sole movement compare?

it is one of the factors that was making me look to LN for my next plane - until I picked up on the weight difference. Got hols in September so will need to find somewhere I can compare the two - maybe an LN 5 1/2 instead of a Clico 4 1/2


----------



## Scrit (10 Jul 2007)

Part of the answer may lie in the fact that the lever arm is the bit which breaks. I've seen a few of them with broken and brazed/welded repairs. I've certainly dropped planes a few times, but only ever broken one myself. 

Are these arms ductile (SG) cast iron or malleable cast iron, though? My possibly flawed understanding is that ductile (SG) cast iron is formed by adding magnesium just before the pour and that the main reasons for doing this are to improve machinability and to reduce the length of time required for destressing between casting and machining whereas malleable cast iron is actually heat-treated white cast iron where the castings are destressed (and structurally changed) by heating in a retort or oven to around 900° Centigrade. My understanding is that grey cast iron is the cheapest, followed by malleable and then ductile so perhaps the reason is cost. My experiennce locally is that not all foundries want to handle ductile iron although I've never needed to ask why so far

Scrit


----------



## Alf (11 Jul 2007)

Why don't they have a website? Why do they still make the 405 and yet not take advantage of promoting the sale of the individual cutters for those of us who need replacements? Who knows? Clifton are a tad idiosyncratic as far as I can see. And yes, the grey iron's repeatedly put me off buying one of their planes, despite them ticking so many boxes in other respects. 

Cheers, Alf


----------



## bugbear (11 Jul 2007)

woden":1upq8drt said:


> I have to say this would really raise question marks over a Clifton purchase for me. Maybe it's different for others but now and again I tend to be a bit of a klutz and drop things/knock things off benches



That's what anti-fatigue mats are for.

Nice to walk on, and they save tools from damage when dropped. (*)

Sadly, they also make small dropped components bounce in random directions, but always into obscure corner and/or large piles of shavings. (**)

BugBear

(*) DAMHIKT
(**) DAMHIKT


----------



## Scott (11 Jul 2007)

I can vouch for Veritas planes being fairly drop-proof - here's how my Bevel Up Jointer arrived from CHT hanging out the end of the cardboard box and having obviously been dropped on it's nose!












It wasn't worth sending it back from France so I just flattened the bump with a diamond stone and you'd hardly know it had been there

Cheers


----------



## Woody Alan (11 Jul 2007)

Hi

I have some direct quotes/precised from Clifton/Clico follows

When iron is cast there is a tendency for thin sections to cool faster then thicker, creating stresses within the csting making it weak and brittle.. To avoid this Clifton planes are cast with up to 10mm additional shaping to beef up thinner areas like sidewall and mouth. This is only there to aid even cooling and will be machined away later.
Castings are normalised/annealed for 50 hours heating and cooling. This 2 day process fully liquifies the internal crystalline structure and reforms itso the finished plane is dimensionally stable and incredinbly strong.
The factory manager took a no7 and dropped it 18 feet onto the factory floor nose downaside from scratching the paint slightly the casting was completly undamaged and remained true. 

I am not sure if this is the case with the smaller tools.


----------



## CHJ (11 Jul 2007)

Scrit":2row8ci5 said:


> ...snip... My understanding is that grey cast iron is the cheapest, followed by malleable and then ductile so perhaps the reason is cost. My experiennce locally is that not all foundries want to handle ductile iron although I've never needed to ask why so far
> Scrit



That is my understanding of the materials also, other factors in the 'melting pot' (sorry :lol: ) are the alternate production methods of achieving the differing grades in each category and in this respect ductile iron is I believe the more costly to hold to a given specification, (there are at least 5 common grades and an endless number of task specific variants) requiring high grade melting stock which has already been through one of the previous processes and close process control, one of the reasons why a good chuck cost is high.

I once had the experience of having a crankshaft fail on a motorbike, the cause was the poor production control (or specification) of the ductile iron used, I was not alone and the company had to replace several hundred if not thousands of crankshafts with alternate material construction.

As usual Scrits synopsis of the production methods appears to be as good as 'the book' and better than some.


----------



## CHJ (11 Jul 2007)

Woody Alan":2qd2lwgf said:


> Castings are normalised/annealed for 50 hours heating and cooling. This 2 day process fully liquifies the internal crystalline structure and reforms itso the finished plane is dimensionally stable and incredinbly strong. The factory manager took a no7 and dropped it 18 feet onto the factory floor nose downaside from scratching the paint slightly the casting was completly undamaged and remained true.



The drop test is the final proof of suitability it would seem, be interesting to know what spec. material is used in the casting.
Malleable iron usually takes 100 hrs + to treat. (50hrs ramping up to ~920C and a further 50-60hrs controlled cooling.)

Edit: But if malleable iron is what Clifton are achieving they are not doing themselves any favours not stating so.


----------



## woden (11 Jul 2007)

Scrit":ys4j5888 said:


> Part of the answer may lie in the fact that the lever arm is the bit which breaks. I've seen a few of them with broken and brazed/welded repairs. I've certainly dropped planes a few times, but only ever broken one myself.


The bodies are vulnerable to breaking too. I know as I picked up a cheap Record 073 which had had both the lever arm _and_ the body broken and brazed back together again. The body had snapped where the two thin walls passed by the lever arm to the front of the plane.



> Are these arms ductile (SG) cast iron or malleable cast iron, though?


Malleable, according to the blurb in the Axminster catalogue. Apparently, from having done a bit of looking into to this some time ago, although malleable iron isn't used as much nowadays it's still preferred for thin and otherwise fragile castings. I guess the lever arm fits this description.



> My possibly flawed understanding is that ductile (SG) cast iron is formed...


And as usual your understanding is most likely as good as fact. Thanks for the insight. Although I did do a little check on wikipedia - if it can be relied upon - and the entries for malleable and ductile iron seem to confirm what you've stated here.





Alf":ys4j5888 said:


> Why do they still make the 405 and yet not take advantage of promoting the sale of the individual cutters for those of us who need replacements?


Is the 405 the multiplane that they do - a renaming of Stanley's 45? C'est tres pricey! You can get 16 additional cutters separately for the grand sum of £146 from Axminster. But yes the brand does seem to have its limitations when it comes to customer service.

I wonder will they go into producing bevel up bench planes like Veritas and Lie Nielsen but with still using the grey cast iron?





Woody Alan":ys4j5888 said:


> The factory manager took a no7 and dropped it 18 feet onto the factory floor nose downaside from scratching the paint slightly the casting was completly undamaged and remained true.


That sounds impressive but the nose of the no7 is fairly thick and chunky. I wonder would the thin end of the bed on a bevel up shoulder plane withstand a similar knock?


----------



## Woody Alan (11 Jul 2007)

> That sounds impressive but the nose of the no7 is fairly thick and chunky. I wonder would the thin end of the bed on a bevel up shoulder plane withstand a similar knock?


As you asked, No clearly not, from any manufacturer. I think you have to be a little realistic about what you can expect from a plane, it is meant to be treated with some respect and used in an environment where the likely hood of being dropped 3 feet onto rubber or wood floor should be the norm. If you want tools to survive lobbing out of the upstairs window onto a concrete drive you're probably doing the wrong things with them 

Cheers Alan


----------



## Rob Lee (11 Jul 2007)

Scott":ni21on45 said:


> (snip)
> 
> It wasn't worth sending it back from France so I just flattened the bump with a diamond stone and you'd hardly know it had been there
> 
> Cheers



Hi Scott - 

Please send me your address, and I'll have something sent to compensate for the "bruise"...

Cheers - 

Rob


----------



## woden (11 Jul 2007)

Woody Alan":3al0vjby said:


> If you want tools to survive lobbing out of the upstairs window onto a concrete drive you're probably doing the wrong things with them


Aw, schucks... that explains why they kept breaking when I chucked them at next door neighbour's cat. So just woodworking then and no pest control? Well, we all have our limitations.

On a serious note I have seen enough chipped, cracked or broken grey cast iron tools to suggest that at least some must have broken in the course of regular work without any exceptionally rough handling. I just don't think that both LN and LV are being that cynical that they're producing their stuff in ductile for no other good reason than a marketing ploy. And if Clifton are so confident about the strength of their grey cast iron why make their spokeshaves from ductile? Doesn't that acknowledge, at the very least, that thinner castings - like the a shallow bed - need a more robust type of iron?


----------



## woden (11 Jul 2007)

Rob Lee":2ejbry6a said:


> Please sent me your address, and I'll have something sent to compensate for the "bruise"...


On reading such an amazingly kind offer of genorosity I collapsed and bruised my shoulder. So can I have something sent to me as well? ...oh look, there's a second bruise. So that'll be two planes then. Hang on, is that another... I fancy a spokeshave... :wink:


But seriously, once again, top marks for customer service, Mr Lee.


----------



## Lord Nibbo (11 Jul 2007)

Rob Lee":2yx1rumy said:


> Scott":2yx1rumy said:
> 
> 
> > (snip)
> ...


 Hey Rob all my LA planes got delivered with bruises :^o :^o :^o :lol: :wink:


----------



## Rob Lee (11 Jul 2007)

woden":11sqkvqs said:


> (snip)
> 
> So can I have something sent to me as well? ...oh look, there's a second bruise. So that'll be two planes then. Hang on, is that another... I fancy a spokeshave... :wink:
> 
> (snip)



No piccy - no parcel.... :lol: 

If I had a plane, and it got dinged like that - I'd remember it every time I picked it up and used it.... 

We'd just rather have an association with a better memory....

Cheers - 

Rob


----------



## CHJ (11 Jul 2007)

A generous offer *Rob*, I can confirm that *Scott** is a gentleman deserving of the consideration.

As long as it's not a "Boat Anchor" if you should have any in the pipeline as he has sufficient of those to hand.

(*Master of M.V. Highland Pioneer)


----------



## Woody Alan (11 Jul 2007)

> Aw, schucks... that explains why they kept breaking when I chucked them at next door neighbour's cat. So just woodworking then and no pest control? Well, we all have our limitations.



Well if you were a good shot it wouldn't be a problem


----------



## CHJ (11 Jul 2007)

Woody Alan":2k0cr1j0 said:


> Well if you were a good shot it wouldn't be a problem



Certainly not quite so CAT-Astrophic.


----------



## Paul Chapman (11 Jul 2007)

woden":1vwpbv6i said:


> But yes the brand does seem to have its limitations when it comes to customer service.



While I think Alf's description of Clico as rather idiosyncratic is probably quite accurate in that they don't have a website, they don't answer emails and they haven't put some of their excellent prototype planes, which their excellent, enthusiastic but very small workforce have developed, into production, I have always found the firm very helpful over the telephone and at shows. Like Lee Valley and Lie Nielsen, I have always found that Clico will provide excellent customer service if you have any problem with one of their products. They have even sent me stuff at no cost when they had no need to.

Cheers :wink: 

Paul (an enthusiastic user of Clifton planes :wink: )


----------



## Alf (11 Jul 2007)

At least you spotted it, Scott. I had a tiny dink in the toe of mine and couldn't work out where that scratch was coming from. :-k Re-honed the iron and everything before I realised. #-o :lol: 

Cheers, Alf


----------



## Scrit (11 Jul 2007)

woden":3f1gr2uc said:


> ......the entries for malleable and ductile iron seem to confirm what you've stated here.


That's what having a brother who's a ferrous metallurgist does for you! I recall him explaining that SG was introduced sometime during WWII and was initially used as a way to speed-up production of castings used in things like tanks and guns the big advantage being that "green" castings could be machined within days of production rather than having to weather for 3 to 12 months before machining. The improved machining properties were a bonus, it seems.

It is interesting that he (the bro) has a particular bias against certain types of tool steel, preferring oil-hardening steels over air-hardening ones for the ultimate in sharpness but telling me that this requires somewhat greater skill on the part of the heat treatment plant to achieve a consistent result. Perhaps this is the case with Clico - they may feel they don't need to go to SG on the grounds that their more traditional approach of producing a malleable iron is potentially superior to the SG method, because they possess the requisite traditional metallurgical skills. Whatever else Clico certainly have an excellent reputation for quality specialist tooling in the aerospace industry, surely one of the fields they major in.

Scrit


----------



## Scott (11 Jul 2007)

Rob Lee":3u9eu00n said:


> Hi Scott -
> 
> Please send me your address, and I'll have something sent to compensate for the "bruise"...
> 
> ...



Rob, you're a gentleman sir! I have to admit I didn't use the plane for a good while after I got it because it just seemed spoiled somehow. Crazy I know but I had been waiting for it to arrive for months so I was a bit disappointed when it arrived with a bent nose. Not to worry though, it's getting full use now and I'm very impressed with it thankyouverymuch!  



Alf":3u9eu00n said:


> At least you spotted it, Scott



mmm, couldn't really have missed it. It seemed bigger than it looks on the photos. Maybe that was just cos it looked bigger through the tears!! :wink:

Cheers


----------



## bugbear (11 Jul 2007)

Alf":308jbl4b said:


> At least you spotted it, Scott. I had a tiny dink in the toe of mine and couldn't work out where that scratch was coming from. :-k Re-honed the iron and everything before I realised. #-o :lol:



A chippy doing some work for me had a similar problem.

The fact that he stored his #5 and #4 in his canvas tool roll along with everything else may have been a factor...

BugBear


----------



## Alf (11 Jul 2007)

Ooo, I never dun nuffink, guv. It came that way!* Heck, you know how careful I am with my planes, aside from a small drilling and tapping issue... 

Magnified by the tears; ooo, that's good, that is. Subtle. :wink:

Cheers, Alf

* You've got my address I think, Rob...? _Kidding, just kidding!_ :lol:


----------



## matthewwh (15 Jul 2007)

I don't know if this will add anything, but I was being shown around the Clifton factory on the day when they did the drop test that woody mentioned and actually got to watch it. 

The test was repeated several times and the sole was re-tested for flatness against a granite bed and then against a 'grade A' straight edge in the same way as the plane bodies are checked before they leave the factory. In total the two foot long, 11lb plane was dropped five times from 18 feet and was still within 2 thou of absolutely flat (their normal working standard is 1.5 thou.)

It is for this reason that Clico use fully annealed grey iron - it takes them two days to treat the castings but by the time they have finished with it, the grey has almost as much impact resistance as ductile, but it won't bend or deform on impact. So if the unthinkable does happen, you can pick the plane up and carry on using it, with no loss of flatness or squareness.

In order to preserve the iron in this state, all of the machining operations, including the removal of the extra shaping, are performed at one fifth of the normal speed, thereby minimising the chance of heat building up and altering the microcrystalline structure of the iron. Despite the difference in basic material costs it would actually be cheaper for them to use ductile because it is much more forgiving to machine. To the guys in the factory though, that would have been an easy option rather than a test of their skills as some of Sheffield's most experienced metalworkers to produce something better.


----------



## Paul Chapman (15 Jul 2007)

That's very helpful to know, Matthew. Always knew my Cliftons were good, but having read your post I now know that they are even better than I thought they were 8) 8) :wink: 

Cheers :wink: 

Paul


----------



## Philly (16 Jul 2007)

Makes a lot of sense, Matthew!
Thanks
Philly


----------



## Paul Kierstead (16 Jul 2007)

Clifton _really_ needs to bring their marketing up a notch. That is fantastic stuff for a web page, a pictorial, etc. (hell, the drop test would probably make a good YouTube video). Those kind of details are what sell higher prices stuff.


----------



## MrJay (17 Jul 2007)

They also need to practice getting the stamp on their cutting irons a bit nearer the middle.


----------



## Scrit (17 Jul 2007)

MrJay":24nw8xm3 said:


> They also need to practice getting the stamp on their cutting irons a bit nearer the middle.


Does that make the cutting action any better or improve the accuracy of the plane? No. So why bother........


----------



## MrJay (17 Jul 2007)

Does getting the maker's stamp off centre improve the cutting action or accuracy of the plane?


----------



## MooreToolsPlease (17 Jul 2007)

I very rarely plane with the plane directly under my eyes, usually it is to the side, perhaps it being off centre is actually to compensate for this so that when you look at it, it is centred :lol: 
Either way, the stamp isn't at the business end so i dont see what difference it could or couldn't make


----------



## ydb1md (21 Jul 2007)

Does anyone from Clifton read the wood forums?

If they did I'm sure they'd have a lot more followers. They seem so out of touch w/ woodworkers today.


----------



## matthewwh (25 Jul 2007)

Paul Kierstead":2rl7bt57 said:


> Clifton _really_ needs to bring their marketing up a notch. That is fantastic stuff for a web page, a pictorial, etc.


A valid point and I understand that they are already working on one, as usual though they don't want to go at it half-heartedly, so it may take some time. 

Also, although the recent flooding didn't affect the machine shop, the foundry did suffer a drenching and many of the employees homes were also hit, so it will be a week or two yet before they are back to full production, let alone marketing. 

In the meantime I have added some more information to our Clifton pages for anyone interested in the design and manufacturing processes.


----------



## AHoman (25 Jul 2007)

matthewwh":3jgjp218 said:


> In the meantime I have added some more information to our Clifton pages for anyone interested in the design and manufacturing processes.



Could you please post a link to these pages?
Thanks,
Andy


----------



## matthewwh (25 Jul 2007)

Sure. 

There's one for the
Clifton Planes

and another one for the 
Blades & Chipbreakers.

Clearly there is a limit to how much info I can squeeze into the space available, but if you have a question you can always drop me a PM and 'll be happy to help.


----------



## AHoman (25 Jul 2007)

Thanks for the links Matthew.


----------



## MrJay (25 Jul 2007)

matthewwh":2el88bxl said:


> Sure.
> 
> There's one for the
> Clifton Planes
> ...



How the hell did you find irons with the stamp neatly positioned near the middle? Or did you resort to photoshop?


----------



## matthewwh (26 Jul 2007)

Hi MrJay



MrJay":8fnf94j1 said:


> Or did you resort to photoshop?



In the interests of accuracy and originality all of our photos are taken specifically for the site, we don't use stock images. For the vast majority of them, the only editing we do is to add the black backgrounds and occasionally tweak the exposure slightly to give a true representation of colours. 



MrJay":8fnf94j1 said:


> How the hell did you find irons with the stamp neatly positioned near the middle?



I believe the stamps are applied with a spring hammer to the forged blank. Picture an anvil suspended between two car suspension springs, and a bloke with a big pair of tongs trying to get a 50p sized stamp in exactly the right spot on a slightly less than A4 sized sheet of metal, with uneven edges, at 1000 degrees.

The blades are cut out afterwards with a laser, which is a much more precise operation. However, the blade is lined up with reference to the grain of the steel, not the position of the stamp. 

If you look at old forged plane irons from turn of the century infill planes you'll find similarly slightly-off centre stamps, as the production process, with the exception of laser cutting, was very similar. 

Having said all of that, I have pulled some samples from stock and couldn't find one that was more than 1/8" off centre, so the bloke with the tongs must be getting very good at it.


----------



## woodbloke (26 Jul 2007)

At the end of the day, does the position of the stamp _really_ matter? I'd rather be using the iron in the 'shop rather than the bloke doing the stamping :lol: - Rob


----------



## Paul Chapman (26 Jul 2007)

I have about 9 Clifton blades. I quite like the fact that the stamp isn't identically positioned on all of them - gives them a bit of individuality 8) 8) Seriously, they all perform superbly - isn't that what matters :wink: 

Cheers :wink: 

Paul


----------



## Jake (26 Jul 2007)

I think Mr Jay's location says it all!


----------



## Nick Gibbs (8 Aug 2007)

I visited Clico's workshop in Sheffield the other day, and discussed the manufacture of their Clifton planes and some of the topics raised in this thread. They explained some of the reasons for their choice of iron for various parts, as outlined by Matthew Platt of Workshop Heaven earlier in this thread. And they sent me away with a No.6 to test! Lucky me.

Watch out for the next issue of British Woodworking (out at the end of September) for some more detailed answers to some of the points in this topic. We also hope to put similar questions to Tom Lie-Nielsen, Rob Lee, Karl Holtey and any other plane manufacturer to answer our call. We'd like to speak to metallurgists about the subject as well. 

Cheers

Nick


----------



## Paul Chapman (8 Aug 2007)

Nick Gibbs":2y9cevwv said:


> Watch out for the next issue of British Woodworking (out at the end of September) for some more detailed answers to some of the points in this topic. We also hope to put similar questions to Tom Lie-Nielsen, Rob Lee, Karl Holtey and any other plane manufacturer to answer our call. We'd like to speak to metallurgists about the subject as well.



That will be interesting, Nick. There are always plenty of opinions about these things, but seldom any facts..... :wink: 

Cheers :wink: 

Paul


----------



## woodbloke (8 Aug 2007)

What about the 'Y' lever material? - Rob


----------



## matthewwh (14 Aug 2007)

Hi Rob,

Paul mentioned to me the problems you had experienced trying to retro-fit a Clifton Y lever to soup-up a Record (yours is a real peach by the way!) 

The current Y levers are designed to work with Cliffie's and as far as I am aware they do the job they were designed for quite adequately. Paul has explained that a longer Y lever would have made your adaption for the Clifton blade easier, and suggested that Clico might offer a kit of parts, including the longer cap iron screw, lever cap screw and Y lever, to assist with fitting their thicker irons and chipbreakers to planes that would originally have had the thin ones.

I think this is a great idea and I'm sure the guys up at Clico will be keen too. Once they have had chance to get back to normal after the floods I will see if we can get something arranged and start stocking them.


----------



## Paul Chapman (14 Aug 2007)

matthewwh":aw3eama5 said:


> Paul mentioned to me the problems you had experienced trying to retro-fit a Clifton Y lever to soup-up a Record (yours is a real peach by the way!)



Hi Matthew,

I'll post some pictures later showing a Clifton and a couple of Records fitted with Clifton blades and cap irons and Y levers which Rob kindly modified for me, which will explain it all more clearly.

Cheers :wink: 

Paul


----------



## Paul Chapman (14 Aug 2007)

Hi Matthew,

Here are some photos, as promised. The problem when fitting thick blades to Records and Stanleys is that the Y lever is too short to engage with the slot in the cap iron. When Rob modified his Record #04 he silver soldered a piece of steel to the end of the Y lever to lengthen it. He did the same to the Y lever on my old Record #05 Stay Set which dates from the 1960s.

On my Record #04, which I bought in 1970, I had fitted a Clifton blade and cap iron and a Clifton Y lever which Mike Hudson had kindly sent me. While the Clifton Y levers work OK in Clifton planes, they are still a bit short when fitted to Records and Stanleys (which since the 1970s come fitted with two-part Y levers which are hard to lengthen). Rob tried to silver solder a piece onto the Clifton Y lever but it melted :shock: Not to be deterred, he then drilled the end of the Y lever and piece of steel and glued it on with industrial super glue and a piece of spring steel rod running through the holes he had drilled. It worked very successfully  

Here's a picture of two Clifton Y levers lengthened in this way. I've also included a modern two-piece Y lever of the type Record fit these days





[/url][/img]

Here's a close-up of my Record #04 with the lengthened Y lever and Clifton blade and cap iron fitted. You will see that the Y lever now engages fully with the slot (sorry it's a bit fuzzy  )




[/url]

The plane now works really well. The 3.1mm Clifton blades and cap irons make a significant improvement in performance. Not as good as my Clifton planes, with their additional weight, greater precision and Bedrock frogs, but significantly better than they worked before.

Cheers :wink: 

Paul


----------



## ivan (14 Aug 2007)

I know modifying Y levers works, but adapting the cap iron to engage a standard Y lever is best, as it does not reduce the sensitivity of the screw adjustment. Personally I recon the DIY is much easier too.


----------



## Paul Chapman (14 Aug 2007)

That's a fair point, Ivan. But sometimes I want to switch blades and cap irons between planes and it's far simpler in that situation to have a longer Y lever.

Cheers :wink: 

Paul


----------



## Javier (15 Aug 2007)

Chris Schwartz of Popular Woodworking and Woodworking Magazine did a review of a few
Clifton Planes. 

http://www.wkfinetools.com/contrib/cSchwarz/z_art/cliftonP/clifton1.asp


----------



## Vann (5 Nov 2008)

Hi Paul. I have a new Clifton iron and cap iron en-route to me and I've been reading as many old posts as I can find regarding potential problems with fitting the irons to my Record 04.



Paul Chapman":15xmudqc said:


> Hi Matthew,
> 
> Here are some photos, as promised.



I realise this post is now very old. I cannot get the photos (I assume the links have been changed or deleted) and I hope you might post them again for me.



Paul Chapman":15xmudqc said:


> ... when fitted to Records and Stanleys (which since the 1970s come fitted with two-part Y levers which are hard to lengthen).



I had hoped to lengthen and fit a spare fabricated (two-piece) Y lever to my Record. I assume they are made of sheet mild steel. If so, I should be able to braze a lump of brazing rod onto the end, or gas weld a piece of mild steel (which sounds easier than risking the original cast yoke, to me). Did you try brazing or welding a two piece yoke? i.e. What makes them harder to lengthen?

Looking forward learning more from your experiences.

Vann.


----------



## Paul Chapman (5 Nov 2008)

Hi Vann,

When I fitted Clifton blades and cap irons to my Records, I found that the Y levers were not long enough to engage properly with the cap iron. I had a word with Mike Hudson of Clifton who sent me some Clifton Y levers. These were longer but not much. They were also made of quite soft metal so the end of the Y levers became a bit mangled. I made do with them but they were not entirely satisfactory.

Rob (Woodbloke) was renovating a Record #04 and wanted to fit a thicker, Clifton blade and he came up against the same problem. His Record was quite an old one with a one-piece Y lever and he was able to silver solder a piece of metal to the end of it. This worked well and he kindly offered to lengthen mine. Here's him soldering a piece to the Y lever of my Record #05 SS






This is the finished result, after cleaning up with a file






This has been very successful and I have been regularly using the plane with the extended Y lever for about 18 months.

He tried the same with my Record #04 fitted with a Clifton Y lever but the silver solder didn't take on it. Not to be out-done, he drilled the Y lever and the piece of metal and glued it together with some steel wire and industrial super glue
















Here's the plane fitted with the extended Y lever and the Clifton blade and cap iron






That plane has also been in regular use with the modified Y lever for about 18 months with no problems.

The other thing I had to do was file out the mouths of the planes a little. I filed the front edge of the mouth (some people say file the rear of the mouth but I always do the front). Just take it slowly and check frequently and you shouldn't have any problems. File a slight slope on the mouth so that the shavings tend to curl away from you as they work their way through the plane.

I've not tried to modify the newer, two-part Record Y levers, so can't help you with that.

Fitting the Clifton blades and cap irons has made a significant improvement to the planes and was well worth doing.

Hope this helps.

Cheers :wink: 

Paul


----------



## bugbear (6 Nov 2008)

Vann":30rkly0l said:


> Hi Paul. I have a new Clifton iron and cap iron en-route to me and I've been reading as many old posts as I can find regarding potential problems with fitting the irons to my Record 04.



On the yoke engagement front I suggest these two approaches:

http://www.jarviser.co.uk/jarviser/tools1.html

http://www.jarviser.co.uk/jarviser/backlash1.html

BugBear


----------



## Vann (6 Nov 2008)

Many thanks Paul and BugBear for the photos and the tutorials. I prefer the extended yoke, to the modified cap iron approach, as I will also be fitting a new Clifton stay-set cap iron (which I'm not keen to tamper with in case I stuff it).

I may try the cap iron mod on an older cap iron, just to enable me to try the new blade in other planes in my col.. err, arsenal.

Now I've just got to patiently wait until 4 December when my neighbour gets back from the UK with my little packet from Clifton (via CHT).

Cheers (and thanks again for your help), 

Vann


----------

