# which LN hand planes?



## sean_in_limerick (29 May 2006)

Hi Guys, 
I am in the market for 2 LN hand planes, which i have managed to convince the wife are necessary for the kitchen we are currently designing. I was wondering what are peoples thoughts? 
I have a bunch of cheap planes which i have tried over the years to tune up - but i want to see what all the fuss is about regarding the LN planes. My own thoughts are; 
1: Lie-Nielsen No.60 1/2 low angle block plane - because a block plane is one of the first tools i reach for and i have yet to try a low-angle version. 
2: Lie-Nielsen No.5 1/2 Jack Plane L-N 5.5 - i like the extra weight in this for use on the shooting board and i would use it primarily for cleaning up edges after p/t. 

Rgds, 

Sean


----------



## MikeW (29 May 2006)

Hi Sean,

I don't think you would go wrong with your choices.

Take care, Mike


----------



## Alf (29 May 2006)

Sounds good to me; I think we might be redundant in this decision making.  

Cheers, Alf


----------



## Mirboo (29 May 2006)

I've got the 60-1/2, it is a great little plane. I don't think you'd be dissappointed with it. I reckon the 5-1/2 is a good choice as well. I think it will probably be the next plane I buy myself. I think the extra weight over a standard 5 or a 62 (low angle jack) would be handy. Particularly, as you've mentioned, for use on a shooting board.


----------



## Waka (29 May 2006)

Sean

As mentioned your choice is sound, but have you considered the Veritas for the Jack?


----------



## sean_in_limerick (29 May 2006)

i just like the aesthetic beauty of the LN - i will only be buying a very small number of these planes and i would hope that they will never need replacing - but if people could suggest a good reason above and beyond aesthetics i'm all ears


----------



## Mirboo (29 May 2006)

sean_in_limerick":1anuoxcy said:


> i will only be buying a very small number of these planes



Famous last words.


----------



## sean_in_limerick (29 May 2006)

i know


----------



## Lord Nibbo (29 May 2006)

sean_in_limerick":3q5jgxie said:


> Ii will only be buying a very small number of these planes


Yes I've heard that one many many times before  time will tell :wink:


----------



## Derek Cohen (Perth Oz) (29 May 2006)

> Lie-Nielsen No.5 1/2 Jack Plane L-N 5.5 - i like the extra weight in this for use on the shooting board and i would use it primarily for cleaning up edges after p/t.



If you are going to be using the jack for shooting as well, then a bevel up jack is a better choice. With their low bed of 12 degrees, you have a plane that will shave end grain with greater ease and produce a cleaner surface. That the #5 1/2 is a capable plane is not in any doubt, but it is not as good in these circumstances. Add a second, high angle blade to the LA Jack, and you have a superb smoother as well.

While the LV LA Jack (#62.5) is a better plane than the LN #62, if you go for the LN out of aesthetics, you will still have a more versatile plane than the #5 1/2.

Regards from Perth

Derek


----------



## deirdre (29 May 2006)

If you're getting a plane primarily for a shooting board, is there a reason not to get the Iron Miter Plane?


----------



## Midnight (29 May 2006)

Sean.. commendable choice in tools Sir  

re the #5 1/2.. buying a high angle frog along with the standard pitch one will greatly enhanse the capabilities of the tool (higher pitched blades are better suited to dealing with difficult grain), adding a spare blade to that will further increase the tool's potential..

re shooting... my tool of choice for this task is the #9 iron mitre plane (honest, I'm not trying to do a sales job on ya).. As you'd expect from a tool designed specifically for the task, it handles the task with consumate ease; watching it take a continuous 27" endgrain shaving that's thin enough to read through is a rush!!
I mention it here simply because of its state of tune; with a bed angle of 20deg and blade honed at 30deg the angle of incidence is 50deg.. I'm sure your #5 1/2 will be more than capable of matching its capabilities when tuned to the task...


----------



## Shady (29 May 2006)

I'd second Derek's observations: I have the L-N 62, and it's an extraordinarily versatile and enjoyable plane to use. The L-V is 'probably' functionally better - the mouth stop is definitely an advantage, FWIW - but both are superb planes, and have converted me - against my expectations - to bevel up bench planes...


----------



## Scott (30 May 2006)

Shady":2v9qnvxt said:


> both are superb planes, and have converted me - against my expectations - to bevel up bench planes...



Indeed!

A year ago I'd have said that, without a shadow of a doubt, the 60 1/2 and 5 1/2 combo was a superb choice... it still is but I've gone all "bevel up" as well! 

IMHO the 60 1/2 is a certainty, no question you need/want that one, but the bench plane is another story. I have a LN 62 but [personally] i always feel it lacks "area" on the side plates. It's fairly low profile on the sides and feels a little like it might not have enough flat surface area on the side for shooting ... not that that's a problem, it's a tactile feely thing (and I'm probably talking nonsense but that's how I feel about it!). The 5 1/2 feels like it's more "planted" ('scuse the motorcycle magazine terms!) on my shooting board but Derek's comments about cutting angles are obviously spot on.

I'm afraid I have (unfortunately) never tried a No9 for shooting so I'm not able to comment on that. 

For everything else I seem to be using BU these days (2 blades for the LN 62, + LV BUS and BUJ)

I suppose the practical option is 60 1/2 and 62 ... but then if you could stretch to a 5 1/2 as well!!!!! ... but then if you have the 62 you might get the BU bug and the 5 1/2 might be going to waste... 

I'm probably not helping now. Sorry :lol: :wink:


----------



## Mirboo (30 May 2006)

Derek Cohen (Perth said:


> While the LV LA Jack (#62.5) is a better plane than the LN #62,....



Whether or not you state that the LN low angle jack is better than the LV low angle jack or vice versa depends on the benchmarks you are using and the relative importance to you of the different characteristics of the two planes. I weighed up the two of them and I decided that for me the Lie-Nielsen was a better plane. For one thing, I didn't want to have to fabricate a new tote, which I would have felt the need to do should I have gone with the LV. 

I am very happy with my Lie-Nielsen low angle jack. It is a fantastic plane.


----------



## Alf (30 May 2006)

Here I was being really, really good and not setting out on a bevel-up crusade and look what happens... :roll: 

I think, if one desires the heft and width of the #5 1/2 (and it's a fine size of plane - arguably the early size with the 2 1/4" blade is better still, but I won't lapse back into my occasional what-a-pity-TLN-chose-to-make-the-later-wider-model-and-not-the-early-marginally-narrower-one moan 'cos he didn't and they're not easy to find so for the majority of readers it'll just be a case of huh-like-an-1/8"-makes-any-difference 'cos you won't have had the opportunity to try it. Anyway, where was I...? Oh yes.) So if you want that heft and width, choosing the narrower and shorter of the available low angle jacks on the market could be considered, well, an odd choice. The LN LAJ is a fine plane, but a BU equivalent to a #5 1/2 it is not.

Cheers, Alf


----------



## Shady (30 May 2006)

See how quickly this has degenerated into the 'plane fetishist's pornography' thread???

Having just re-read the original post, 2 more observations for you:

a) For a low angle block plane, do not discount the Lee Valley offering. I have both the Lee Valley block planes (low and standard angle), and they are a cheaper but in some ways better alternative to the L-N offerings. Not as pretty, but just as functional, and with set screws for the blade...

b) I'm not sure I'd want a 5 and 1/2 for jointing after the p/t. Probably not its forte... I'd either look for a second hand no 7/8, and refurb with a new blade if necessary, or I'd look at the Veritas number 6 - not too long for other panel working stuff, but a proper length for edge jointing.

Hell - you better just take out a mortgage and buy everything that's been mentioned here - and don't forget the vital necessity of some sort of shoulder/rabbet plane, whatever you do... :wink:


----------



## sean_in_limerick (30 May 2006)

Thanks to everyone for there opinions - i did consider the iron-mitre-plane but realistically i couldn't justify a plane with only one function (yet) - in saying that i certainly intend buying a shoulder plane - but they are cheaper... 
some great advice on the bevel-up option which i will give some thought to - thanks and regards to all


----------



## Mirboo (30 May 2006)

Sean,

I still reckon your original idea of a 60-1/2 and a 5-1/2 is the way to go. In my opinion the heft of the 5-1/2 would be good for use on a shooting board.

I only mentioned the LN low angle jack because of other comments stating that the LV version was better. All I wanted to point out was that it comes down to personal preference. Some prefer the LV and some prefer the LN. In the end, they are both good planes.


----------



## sean_in_limerick (30 May 2006)

i have 'weighed all' and opted for my original idea - thanks Ian (makes me feel better now) - i will post some piccies so we can collectively admire them - thanks everyone :lol:


----------



## Anonymous (30 May 2006)

sean_in_limerick":2dhlp6cp said:


> Hi Guys,
> I am in the market for 2 LN hand planes, which i have managed to convince the wife are necessary for the kitchen we are currently designing. I was wondering what are peoples thoughts?
> I have a bunch of cheap planes which i have tried over the years to tune up - but i want to see what all the fuss is about regarding the LN planes. My own thoughts are;
> 1: Lie-Nielsen No.60 1/2 low angle block plane - because a block plane is one of the first tools i reach for and i have yet to try a low-angle version.
> ...



Yep 60 1/2 and 5.5 are good choices

I have quite a few LNs (including 60 1/2 and 5.5) and you will not be dissapointed


----------



## dchenard (30 May 2006)

sean_in_limerick":2cl6k91i said:


> but realistically i couldn't justify a plane with only one function (yet)



What you're saying here just screams Veritas Low Angle Jack...

You cannot find a more versatile plane on the market, and it masters all the tasks thrown at it. The balance is near perfect. I actually prefer it over a dedicated smoother for smoothing...

Aesthetics is a personal thing, and in my case I don't make it an issue (it's a tool after all...). But price, I do make it an issue, and the Veritas wins hands down in this area...

As for the tote issue, my personal experience has been that over time I don't notice the Veritas tote anymore. In fact, I now get a "funny feeling" in my hand when I grab other plane brands. These totes grow on you, at least they do for me...

Just my 2d,

DC


----------



## Derek Cohen (Perth Oz) (30 May 2006)

Ian wrote:


> In my opinion the heft of the 5-1/2 would be good for use on a shooting board.



Listen carefully, I will say this only twice ... eh?

I intimated it, Alf stated it ... The LV LA Jack is the same size and heft as a #5 1/2. The LN version is the same size as a #5. It is lighter and lacks the authority of the LV.

Incidentally, those inbedded "rings" on the sides of the LV are not decoration - they are finger grips ... and they WORK! All-in-all, the LV LA Jack is a superb shooting plane. It is in a different class in this regard to the LN. 

You owe it to yourself to try both out and make up your own mind. 

Regards from Perth

Derek


----------



## Scott (30 May 2006)

I s'pose your next plane after these two will be a bevel-up then Sean? :wink: 

In the meantime you definitely won't be disappointed with your choice. They are both superb planes!

Happy planing!


----------



## sean_in_limerick (30 May 2006)

maybe a nice long jointer - but if my wife hears about it i will deny all knowledge...


----------



## Mirboo (30 May 2006)

Derek Cohen (Perth said:


> The LV LA Jack is the same size and heft as a #5 1/2. The LN version is the same size as a #5. It is lighter and lacks the authority of the LV.


 
Sorry Derek, I have great respect for your opinion and I don't want this to sound like I'm nit picking but your statement above comparing the LN and LV planes contains some errors. 

The LV LA Jack weighs in at just under 6lb, has a blade that is 2-1/4" wide and is 15" long (refer LV website). 

The LN No. 5-1/2 weighs in at 7lb, has a blade that is 2-3/8" wide and is 14-3/4" long (refer LN website). 

The LN No. 5 weighs in at 5-1/2lb, has a blade that is 2" wide and is 14" long (refer LN website). 

All of the planes we have discussed in this thread, both LN and LV, are great planes. I think that the question of which one you buy comes down to the functions you want the plane to perform and your personal preferences. As Derek stated above, you need to try the planes out and make up your own mind.


----------



## builderchad (31 May 2006)

I have the LV LA Jack, Smoother and Block. I also have the 25, 38 and 50 degree blades - the first two came with the Jack and Smoother respectively and I bought the 50 seperately. What is so wonderful is that these blades are interchangeble between the Jack and Smoother. For the bit of panel flattening and edging I do the Jack shines through and it runs like a dream on the shooting board. But I find that I end up using the smoother more day-to-day because I just love the feel and balance of it - it's a beast. I remember someone saying somewhere that is was a great 'dedicated' smoother but for me it excels at all sorts of jobs.


----------



## Paul Kierstead (31 May 2006)

Ok, that's it, I am gonna start making plane weights. I'll make a killing at it I am sure.


----------



## Derek Cohen (Perth Oz) (31 May 2006)

> Sorry Derek, I have great respect for your opinion and I don't want this to sound like I'm nit picking but your statement above comparing the LN and LV planes contains some errors.



Hi Ian

No problem - always important to get the facts right.... you won't mind if I use yours as well?

While I did mention the #5 1/2 - my error for confusing the issue (I probably was thinking of my Stanley #5 1/2) - the comparison was really about the LV verses the LN LA Jacks (and not the #5 1/2).



> The LV LA Jack weighs in at just under 6lb, has a blade that is 2-1/4" wide and is 15" long (refer LV website).
> 
> The LN No. 5 weighs in at 5-1/2lb, has a blade that is 2" wide and is 14" long (refer LN website).



I would say that the LV LA Jack is both heavier and wider than the LN LA Jack - yes? Still, not all tool purchases are about the absolute best item performance-wise, but also about aesthetics and emotion. And that is why we end up with such interesting discussions!

Regards from Perth

Derek


----------



## gcpt (3 Jun 2006)

Sean:
I have several LN planes as well as having owned three LV products. The performance of all planes was very comparable. 

The key difference for me was one of ergonomics.The tote on the LV was uncomfortable to use and by the end of ten minutes of planing maple with the LV BUS the tendons in my wrists were screaming. Although, outside the return period Rob Lee was gracious enough to allow me to return the planes for a full refund. He is truly a prince!

I am in the LN camp when it comes to bench planes. I have small hands and find the LN totes to be more comfortable to use for exended work - say fifteen minutes or more. Someone with average size hands may not experience my problems. I also prefer the forward angle of the LN totes. 

It was suggested that one solution would be to file down the tote on the LV. My answer is that I barely have time to spend woodworking let alone having to adapt a new tool. 

One final observation: the LN irons went longer between sharpenings.

I am definitely a home hobbyist woodworker and so my comments should be viewed with that in mind.

cheers,

gordon


----------



## Sgian Dubh (4 Jun 2006)

If I wasn't a reasonably experienced furniture maker that has muddled along with a pretty basic collection of planes since the early 1970's I think, if I were a relatively inexperienced amateur woodworker looking for help on plane selection, I'd find these discussions on hand planes that go round and round in ever decreasing circles of technical minuteae daunting-- perhaps to the point that I'd give up and walk away from what is seemingly a subject too difficult and complex for a person of average intelligence to comprehend.

Sean, if you've got the cash to spare then it seems to me that you can quite safely go ahead and buy your two Lie-Nielsen planes. If you want to save a bit of cash then you could buy a Clifton 5-1/2 instead of the Lie-Nielsen. Both generally are makers of reliably good planes.

Perhaps where you're having the greatest difficulty has nothing to do with the planes you have already. They might just need to be tuned up properly and sharpened correctly. If you have no-one to show you how to do both these jobs that might be where it's all going pear shaped. How you could resolve that problem I'm not sure.

Going back to the title of my response, most of my planes are Stanley Bailey patterns that I bought new as I needed them. I also have a Clifton and a Lie-Nielsen I use, along with a very small selection of other brands, mostly old or antique. I use these common or garden and much derided Stanley Bailey planes without problems on a daily basis.

They took a bit of fiddling with to get them set up but they're fine. Over the years I've shown scores of new woodworkers how to set up, sharpen, and use their planes properly. Mostly those new users bought cheap'ish Stanley Baileys with the rather unpleasant plastic handles but, essentially, they work, and work well.

Hopefully you can find someone in your area that can show you the basics of plane fettling, blade sharpening and plane use to get you going in the right direction. Slainte.


----------



## Shady (4 Jun 2006)

> Going back to the title of my response, most of my planes are Stanley Bailey patterns that I bought new as I needed them. I also have a Clifton and a Lie-Nielsen I use, along with a very small selection of other brands, mostly old or antique. I use these common or garden and much derided Stanley Bailey planes without problems on a daily basis.
> 
> They took a bit of fiddling with to get them set up but they're fine. Over the years I've shown scores of new woodworkers how to set up, sharpen, and use their planes properly. Mostly those new users bought cheap'ish Stanley Baileys with the rather unpleasant plastic handles but, essentially, they work, and work well.



At the end of the day, couldn't agree more... Until I learned to sharpen properly, my relationship with planes was one of hatred. My favourite plane remains my 'bog standard' 80s manufactured Stanley Bailey pattern (not bedrock) number 7. I replaced the plastic handles with rosewood purely out of a sense of amusement, and did go for a Hock blade. Interestingly, given the role of a jointer, and the size of the blade, this is the thinnest blade in my current collection. Despite this, and a non-adjustable, not very fine mouth, this 15 year old plane consistently gives me an excellent finish on anything I chuck at it. Admittedly it's fettled and personalised, but it remains a favourite. 

That said, I also have LNs, LVs, HNT Gordons, antique woodies, and a Clifton smoother. I enjoy using them all, and wouldn't 'disrespect' any of them. But, in essence, for anything other than the most extreme of woods at the most extreme end of price range, and where, for whatever reason, sanding is regarded as inappropriate, non of them are significantly 'better' than my number 7 and my clifton bladed number 5 Stanley jack... 

Doesn't stop me enjoying buying the better finished tools, and where the Stanleys are unavailable for particular tasks (eg side rebate planes), I'm sometimes forced to. But, in the end, I agree: get any respectable tool, and learn how to use it. On the other hand, if you're a 'collector', why not enjoy some beautiful examples of the planemaker's art?


----------



## Ed451 (5 Jun 2006)

Sean,

I own those very two planes, and I'm very happy with them. This choice is Cosman-approved, too (he sold me mine).

Ed


----------



## engineer one (5 Jun 2006)

i've stayed away from this thread, because more experienced hands than mine have contributer mightily, but at this end i thought a couple of thoughts would be relevant.

i it still seems to come back to sharpening, and the amount of work you have to do. realistically a brand new stanley or record/irwin will need
a large amount of time/ work on the sole of the plane, and the chip breaker, whilst it is almost certain you should replace the plastic handles, and put in a new blade, be it clifton or japanese. so to the cost of buying one new, you need to add your time to get it flat, plus another 30 or so quid for the handles and the blades.

if you buy the LN or LV or Clifton, then in principal, you will have items that really only need the blade fettling to get good performance.
all three will have blades delivered that with a little honing can be
made to cut well and provide the proverbial "fresh air" shavings
and you do not often have to spend any time flattening the soles
nor changing the handles. 

you will need different planes for different things you do, so although you are stumbling down the rocky path, you should also take account of the
view that for some jobs a fettled stanley or record may well be the right
tool for the job. 

what i would say is that if you have a couple of LN's you have something to judge both your planes and your work standards against, and that makes them really valuable.

here endeth the lesson from a man who has only one clifton, but
four LV and the same number of LN, plus six rather nice new 
Nooitgedagt wooden bodies that really amaze me. Dave how does that one
work????

paul :wink:


----------



## DaveL (5 Jun 2006)

Paul, 

How did you know that I had wandered out to the shop with the camera to take a picture of the plane you sent? 8-[ 


 
Well this is the wooden delight, I was looking to buy a shoulder plane, I had been using an old #78 to clean up rebates. I need look no more, Paul kindly sent this along absolutely ready to use straight from the Jiffy bag! 8) I only set the blade height by resting the plane on a sheet of paper and then gently tapping the wedge. 
I have used it to clean rebates on oak strips I made to join the two sections of laminate floor that is now down in the shop. 


 
This is an end from one of the bits I made to span the 18' width of my shop. I could have used the dado head but though better of converting all of the 'waste' in to sawdust, so I did two passes on the table saw and saved the nice oak battens for another day. I then cleaned the rebates with the Nooitgedagt, it made light work of cutting the oak. Paul had sharpened the iron and it showed. 
It has even drawn admiring comments from #2 son and he is not in to tools or woodwork, but he thought the plane looked interesting, maybe there is hope for him yet. :wink: 

I have a small but growing collection of hand planes, this is the first new woodie I have used. I spent some time searching for them on the net and Paul then told me the company had been bought out and the name dropped. If I see any more tool made by then I will give them serious thought, because this feels just right in the hand and works like a dream. \/ 

Many thanks to Paul for his kind gift. 8)


----------



## engineer one (6 Jun 2006)

oh dave now i am in trouble, a working plane, and reasonably 
sharpened too. looks good news.  

i hope to travel a bit over the small pond soon, so will look out for
any redundant stock.

what did you think of the chisel???

paul :wink:


----------



## sean_in_limerick (8 Jun 2006)

the planes arrived and they look wonderful but i i have been too busy shifting top-soil to enjoy them! [-(


----------



## Shady (8 Jun 2006)

Look at it this way - that should give you the muscles you need for lots and lots of planing... :wink:


----------

