# It's hard to believe, but stanley still makes a #7



## D_W (27 Sep 2022)

I feel almost obligated to get one and put it through its paces, especially in regard to whether or not it's flat and twist free and how it adjusts. 

I've found no issues with the more recent stanley irons. There's something a little weird about the steel in them, but it doesn't really affect use of them. 

As i was checking an amazon order, amazon suggested that I should buy a #7 stanley, which apparently comes from the UK for $104 _including shipping _in about two weeks. 

No worries with cites - the handles look like they're probably plastic even though the listing doesn't make it obvious. 

I know from prior experience, you guys will not be able to see amazon listings properly because amazon isn't a fan of that, but the model number is 
1-12-007​
Almost looks like a date. 

From what i've seen of at least four recent stanleys over the last 10 years, the irons are definitely better than the round top irons made in the 70s (i've rehardened those - they just don't have that much upside, even if you reharden and temper them - probably something like 0.6% carbon steel). 

Inflation adjusted, the "new" one is about 40% of the two metal jointers that I have (low use I. Sorby #7 and a low-use earlier Record #8).


----------



## Jameshow (27 Sep 2022)

D_W said:


> I feel almost obligated to get one and put it through its paces, especially in regard to whether or not it's flat and twist free and how it adjusts.
> 
> I've found no issues with the more recent stanley irons. There's something a little weird about the steel in them, but it doesn't really affect use of them.
> 
> ...



Comes up as a 7 here in UK?!


----------



## D_W (27 Sep 2022)

you mean the model number?

it's labeled as a 7 here, too. Just noting that if it doesn't, you can search the stanley model designation and probably get 100 hits there. 

Not sure where it's made - presumably china or mexico. If amazon global will ship it here in about two weeks for $104 total (maybe it comes surface?) It must be retailing for about $60-$75. 

The #4 retails for $43 here at the moment. It's an "OK" plane.


----------



## Just4Fun (27 Sep 2022)

I have seen them in a store here for (I think) 129 euro.


----------



## D_W (27 Sep 2022)

Just4Fun said:


> I have seen them in a store here for (I think) 129 euro.



The reviews for them aren't very good. From being surprised to get plastic handles, to broken handles in the box or shipping that leaves the plane in parts in the box floating around and broken.

I think I will have the sense to resist buying something I don't really need and would just resell tarted up for about what I paid or a little less.

I tarted up a 4 - it's just OK like mentioned above, but it's functional. Giant mouth, which isn't fatal for a double iron plane, but it's not nice on smoothers and jointers where a lazy start can catch the edge of a board and pry it up. Crappy cap iron with weird shape. Other than that, not as bad as expected. I'd rather locate a nice T20 #7, but admit I haven't done that, either.


----------



## G S Haydon (27 Sep 2022)

Don't, David! Or do, it's your call. The hollow plastic handles are an abomination. The casings look like they were finished by dragging them behind a car.

You'll get it to sing, no question. But you've got nice vintage ones from these shores. I don't understand why Stanley won't do it properly!


----------



## D_W (27 Sep 2022)

G S Haydon said:


> Don't, David! Or do, it's your call. The hollow plastic handles are an abomination. The casings look like they were finished by dragging them behind a car.
> 
> You'll get it to sing, no question. But you've got nice vintage ones from these shores. I don't understand why Stanley won't do it properly!



well, wholesaling an entire plane for what is probably $50 has something to do with it. 

I found one of the amazon complaints humorous. At $104 with shipping, it "should have been 1/3rd the cost". 

There'd have to be something very wrong with it for me not to be able to make it "really right". 

I don't mind the plastic handles so much - they aren't a sensory hallelujah, but the shape is decent and they could be remade out of just about anything. 

The only reason I'd pick it up, I guess is just out of curiosity, and maybe as a ruse - but a ruse just doesn't go as far for me as it used to with kids getting older and many strings pulling from different directions. 

You're right about the castings, too - they're actually pretty good quality in terms of hardness, but the grinding wheel that they use must be something unbelievably coarse. like 12 grit or a super heavy cut with 24. you could drag things across the casting perpendicularly to do rough sanding.


----------



## raffo (28 Sep 2022)

There's one listing for a #3 plane, part number 1-12-003. 

At $136 not that attractive. I'm curious if it could be made to work like the #4 offering. $40 wasn't too bad to cough up for the #4 to check it out.


----------



## clogs (28 Sep 2022)

the number 7 is €132 delivered here.......Greek stock.....
how can they make em that cheap.....
"cheese Gromit"
I have a really old one in store somewhere......lol....


----------



## Jarno (28 Sep 2022)

I think the correct spelling is "Stanley" between quotes, because there is a world of difference between those and even the not great late UK ones. 
I have a #4 from the last UK made series and one from China, and the UK one is not great, but the China made one is pretty bad, the castings are very very rough, hardly ground flat at all.
So yeah, they can make it for little money, because casting iron is not that expensive (shipping heavy parts is). Maybe 12GBP of material cost, another 15 or so labour and processing? They'll probably need some margin because of the machinery (and you better hope for humanity these castings aren't made in some fareaway shop under bad labour conditions, because simple processes like that sometimes are).


----------



## D_W (28 Sep 2022)

Oh, what the he'll. I'll buy it and find out anyway, and then take the challenge to make $5 profit on it as a ruse.


----------



## Lefley (28 Sep 2022)

This is what you want to try out not s plane with a plastic handle !!!!!!


----------



## Jarno (28 Sep 2022)

I think Veritas is the gold standard when it comes to companies doing proper engineering to come up with innovative new products at reasonable cost.
Lie-Nielsen makes nice stuff and Clifton too, but come on, break free from the mould and do something new for a change. Modern manufacturing can be so precise without added cost, we have so much better process control and control over material properties, obviously engineering tradeoffs still need to be made, but even then.

With that in mind, it really should be feasible for a factory in China to make excellent handplanes, but somehow, it seems that 300 years of engineering knowledge has been forgotten, they drop the ball so often (also on the other cheap #4's on Amazon and elsewhere). It shouldn't be necessary, making a handplane is not rocket science.


----------



## Ttrees (28 Sep 2022)

Jarno said:


> I think Veritas is the gold standard when it comes to companies doing proper engineering to come up with innovative new products at reasonable cost.
> Lie-Nielsen makes nice stuff and Clifton too, but come on, break free from the mould and do something new for a change. Modern manufacturing can be so precise without added cost, we have so much better process control and control over material properties, obviously engineering tradeoffs still need to be made, but even then.
> 
> With that in mind, it really should be feasible for a factory in China to make excellent handplanes, but somehow, it seems that 300 years of engineering knowledge has been forgotten, they drop the ball so often (also on the other cheap #4's on Amazon and elsewhere). It shouldn't be necessary, making a handplane is not rocket science.


I would have thought they'd be having a crack at this by now








Goldenberg Smoother.


A few years ago I purchased a traditional smoothing plane made by Goldenberg. A well respected French tool making company that started as far back to 1835. Its model number 44 is stamped on the front end of the plane. Also stamped is the type of wood the hand plane is made from. Cormier. A tree...




www.ukworkshop.co.uk


----------



## D_W (28 Sep 2022)

Lefley said:


> This is what you want to try out not s plane with a plastic handle !!!!!!



I tried out one of the pre-production LV custom planes (it was after the design was finalized). I appreciated the opportunity to try it at the time, but would prefer any stanley type to it. 

If you asked me about the MIC china smoother vs. an LV custom plane, I would say "I'll find a later USA made stanley somewhere and take neither of those". 

The one I tried out was fore plane size. I don't remember if the mouth is physically back further in the plane, but remember that it didn't have the same "on the end of the hand" feel as a stanley does, and that's what I didn't like about it. Didn't care for the cap iron design, either - as received, mine "climbed toward the edge" when tightened and the need for the hex wrench was a liability. 

It was a solidly made plane, just not for me. I wished they'd have just made a high quality copy of a stanley bailey plane - I think they'd sell a lot more of those.


----------



## Lefley (28 Sep 2022)

Lefley said:


> This is what you want to try out not s plane with a plastic handle !!!!!!


Or extreme engineering . I just received the small plane they make. I love it . Fits in my pocket at work.


----------



## Lefley (28 Sep 2022)

Lefley said:


> Or extreme engineering . I just received the small plane they make. I love it . Fits in my pocket at work.


----------



## D_W (28 Sep 2022)

Lefley said:


> Or extreme engineering . I just received the small plane they make. I love it . Fits in my pocket at work.



whatever love people may have for the various newly introduced designs, I have like...fundamental attachment to the English try plane, jack plane and the stanley bailey design. 

But that love comes from working wood from rough to finished by hand. It's hard to explain. I get why people like the newer designs, especially if planes are more of a fitting and finishing tool. 

The same kind of love for the fundamental designs, or attachment to them - I don't pet them instead of the kitty in the evening or anything like that - but that same thing sent me back to realizing that the small grain lower-wear life irons are better for an experienced user than the V11s, etc. 

I am such a perv that I don't make that statement just out of use, but I've gone so far as to make a whole bunch of different irons, too. Just out of curiosity - all the way to buying XHP stock (V11's commercial open market equivalent) and testing them out. In the end, I just find the stuff that was made for pros before cost cuts started works for people who are on par with a pro. A little better. And for some reason, Stanley's bailey design is so good that it's pretty much unbeatable until they went really far with the cost cuts.


----------



## D_W (28 Sep 2022)

I have ordered the plane. This dippy exercise may be documented. We shall see. But it won't be documented on youtube in one of those "I open a stanley jointer from England and show you how to set it up, so you can buy one, too and I can get a commission or more viewers". 

The chance is almost below zero that the plastic handled plane could unseat my record or sorby jointers or any T10-T20 stanley jointer, for that matter.


----------



## Ttrees (28 Sep 2022)

I don't mind the plastic handles that much, at least they're likely the right shape.
Two near or identical planes, but one is nicer as the tote is more forward leaning,
which is most noticeable when held single handed, as it seems lighter being ever so much closer to the toe.


----------



## Jarno (28 Sep 2022)

Don't agree on the extreme engineering statement regarding Bridge City, that's not proper engineering. That plane and smaller one is usable, but has a lot of features that are not supporting the basic functionality of a plane. Too many screws which tend to loosen. Anodised aluminium which is certainly not a plus for woodworking. 
Even though it looks fancy, there are choices in the design which are not based on proper engineering, and some are just clumsy. There is some niftiness in there, but also some things which are just stupid. It's optimised for production in China, not for extreme quality.


----------



## D_W (28 Sep 2022)

Jarno said:


> Don't agree on the extreme engineering statement regarding Bridge City, that's not proper engineering. That plane and smaller one is usable, but has a lot of features that are not supporting the basic functionality of a plane. Too many screws which tend to loosen. Anodised aluminium which is certainly not a plus for woodworking.
> Even though it looks fancy, there are choices in the design which are not based on proper engineering, and some are just clumsy. There is some niftiness in there, but also some things which are just stupid. It's optimised for production in China, not for extreme quality.



There probably has not been anything invented for hand tool woodworking in the last 100 years that really makes woodworking easier. There are some things that look more usable to beginners or easier to understand, but they're limiting if they the stopping point - which isn't a huge deal if most people migrate toward power tools, anyway.

Sandpaper has improved some - but I'm not sure if it's really improved for woodworking so much as it has probably improved as it replaces the silicon carbide wet wheels for rough work.

Engineering used to be a term for refinement, process, implementation, efficiency improvement. 

For some reason, it's been translated into a marketing term now. "this guy over here can just think of something better than what came out of millions or billions of man hours in a competitive market".


----------



## Lefley (29 Sep 2022)

When I say small I say small . Thiss plane is awesome to take the edge off s door or quick fit a small piece. Hope I find loss if! Lol.


----------



## Jarno (29 Sep 2022)

Do you leave the side skates on all the time? Seems they are in the way of properly holding it, and are useful only in a few very specific cases?
I believe this plane was also in the chopstick making and pencil making kits (and can imagine it is useful when making kumiko, about to butcher a recent record 60 1/2 plane to add thickness planing cabability, for this purpose).


----------



## Lefley (29 Sep 2022)

Jarno said:


> Do you leave the side skates on all the time? Seems they are in the way of properly holding it, and are useful only in a few very specific cases?
> I believe this plane was also in the chopstick making and pencil making kits (and can imagine it is useful when making kumiko, about to butcher a recent record 60 1/2 plane to add thickness planing cabability, for this purpose).


No I take the side skates off. I purchased 2 as where on sale. The one in the picture is a gift. Mines at work with no sides!


----------



## Lefley (29 Sep 2022)

Jarno said:


> Do you leave the side skates on all the time? Seems they are in the way of properly holding it, and are useful only in a few very specific cases?
> I believe this plane was also in the chopstick making and pencil making kits (and can imagine it is useful when making kumiko, about to butcher a recent record 60 1/2 plane to add thickness planing cabability, for this purpose).


Yes it would not be two hard to add side skates to any planes. Drill 4 holes and tap.


----------



## D_W (29 Sep 2022)

Ttrees said:


> I don't mind the plastic handles that much, at least they're likely the right shape.
> Two near or identical planes, but one is nicer as the tote is more forward leaning,
> which is most noticeable when held single handed, as it seems lighter being ever so much closer to the toe.
> View attachment 144394



Orientation and location of the handle (orientation being the angle and the shape) are huge. if a handle is good, the pressure will be biased in the web of the thumb with a hump in the middle of the palm so that you can use the plane without fatiguing your wrist or gripping tightly. 

All of the early/mid 1800s plane handles were made that way and so are almost all stanley handles until they get to be super late. 

it's interesting that you can notice even small differences on the same brand and type of plane (but you can, of course). 

Early 1800s tall handles sometimes seem to be lacking some of the hump, and the cutout for the web of the thumb is "tucked high" near the top of the handle (less comfortable). I think it's fair to say that handles weren't mature yet for double iron types vs. the older style of planes with short offset handles more intended to be used two handed.


----------



## D_W (29 Sep 2022)

This listing is coming from the UK (the plane I ordered). I don't have a prime membership, but my wife does. It wouldn't have made any difference in this case, except she can contest when the box comes instead of complaining twice. 

that said, the free shipping was "until October 14-17", but I could've paid $40 or something more to get expedited shipping that would have the plane here october 4. I won't have time really to faff with the plane until late october, anyway - I guess I will record everything from box open, to terminal fault if there is one. 

Anyway, I got a ship notice this morning from DHL - arriving october 4. This happens often in the US - it starts to make it less and less clear what the benefit of Prime is, which goes up in price every year. that is, prime used to be 2 day everything. quite often it's 1 for us in the burbs, but we're never on the edge of the seat for small items like that. If they came in 5 days, it would be fine. Also common is a prime item that no longer comes in 2 but comes in 4. AS in, it seems like if amazon has it local, you get it quickly - if they don't, they're not longer in any kind of hurry at all, despite the price increase. 

When I order non-prime, they threaten slow shipping instead and after I buy something and opt not to pay for it, I get the item in two days, or in this case, on the pace of the expedited international shipping option that would've cost extra if I chose it. 

nice.


----------



## D_W (29 Sep 2022)

That aside DHL beats up packages like nobody else as far as my local deliverers. I've gotten guitars with forklift holes in the sides of boxes, crushed on the sides, whatever it may be. They also have trick customer service. As in, if you put in an enquiry for something that's arriving late, you get an automated message instead of a CS response, and so far, I've only gotten human follow up that's promised within a day five days or a week later _after_ the item finally arrives. A handy way of avoiding doing anything in the interim. 

It'll be interesting to see if the plane arrives as some of the reviewers mention - broken bits or parts loose flying around in the box.


----------



## Jarno (29 Sep 2022)

Out of curiosity, what is the monthly cost of Prime in the US? Over here (NL) it is 3 euros a month, which is a no brainer (IMHO) for Prime Video and free shipping. We also have Disney+ from when the kids where a bit smaller, but that's 8 euros a month, and the kids have seen everything already (kids stuff, marvel), so yeah.


----------



## Jameshow (29 Sep 2022)

D_W said:


> This listing is coming from the UK (the plane I ordered). I don't have a prime membership, but my wife does. It wouldn't have made any difference in this case, except she can contest when the box comes instead of complaining twice.
> 
> that said, the free shipping was "until October 14-17", but I could've paid $40 or something more to get expedited shipping that would have the plane here october 4. I won't have time really to faff with the plane until late october, anyway - I guess I will record everything from box open, to terminal fault if there is one.
> 
> ...


We need an unboxing video!!


----------



## D_W (29 Sep 2022)

Jameshow said:


> We need an unboxing video!!


'
well, that's enough encouragement for me, I guess! i'll open it when it arrives just to make sure that it's not completely broken into pieces, but record it and then late in the month, I'll see if it's defective and what it needs to work at an obscenely precise level. If nothing is totally defective on it, it probably won't be much other than prep of the iron and cap and flattening the sole.


----------



## Lefley (29 Sep 2022)

Jarno said:


> Out of curiosity, what is the monthly cost of Prime in the US? Over here (NL) it is 3 euros a month, which is a no brainer (IMHO) for Prime Video and free shipping. We also have Disney+ from when the kids where a bit smaller, but that's 8 euros a month, and the kids have seen everything already (kids stuff, marvel), so yeah.


$10 per l month canada


----------



## D_W (29 Sep 2022)

Jarno said:


> Out of curiosity, what is the monthly cost of Prime in the US? Over here (NL) it is 3 euros a month, which is a no brainer (IMHO) for Prime Video and free shipping. We also have Disney+ from when the kids where a bit smaller, but that's 8 euros a month, and the kids have seen everything already (kids stuff, marvel), so yeah.


I think it's either $119 or $139. 

They have the super customer friendly rule that if you try to cancel it before the renewal date, you lose the rest of your term (no automatic shutoff). If you wait a smidge too long, it re-renews on you. There may be terms that you can call and cancel it within a set number of hours, but I haven't checked. Long story short, I don't know for sure what it is currently because it always surprises me with an email that it renewed and I always think "damn...I would've thought about not letting it renew if it gave me a heads up a week before". 

I don't watch TV, the Mrs. uses netflix and I think the kids do, too. When the two together were <$20 a month, it was nice because neither has great coverage of past movies, but sometimes one did and the other didn't. Now, I think we're just wasting money on prime. 

I could do without netflix, too.


----------



## D_W (29 Sep 2022)

Lefley said:


> $10 per l month canada



not sure if this link works, but it looks like even harvey industries (bridge city) isn't immune from having tools copied:

BC block plane copy


----------



## mikej460 (29 Sep 2022)

£95 pa (£7.91 pm) in the UK. When I first joined up it was £72 pa


----------



## D_W (29 Sep 2022)

i checked - it's $139 a year here now. As mentioned, it seems to be the case that there's lots of "this is prime, but it's 4 day shipping instead of two" that started and got much worse during covid. "we have reprioritized your shipping so that we can get essential items delivered". 

I figured that they'd realize they could ride that forever - people will complain, but they have no other real online peers here to compete. 

Was $79 the first year we got prime. 

There are far more warehouses now, too, though, so the number of 1 day items is greatly increased - and I can't think of any of them that I needed right away. If I have needed something quickly, it's not a 1 day item.


----------



## Jarno (30 Sep 2022)

10$ a month certainly is something to think about, so I'll certainly reconsider when it comes to that in NL, but at 3 EUR, I am not complaining.

Saw that chinese Bridge City clone as well, I think it still is very expensive, but that is what you get from designing and producing a product in China (and exactly the reason why Philips shaverheads are ONLY produced in the Netherlands), it will get copied, because there is margin there.
The original is expensive, and cheap to reproduce, lots of margin. Bailey pattern planes are a cheaper, are also not very expensive to make (even properly), but have a higher associated logistics cost (heavier), less margin.

Maybe that is the reason why (the logistics aspect), the Woodriver planes are pretty expensive, even through aliexpress (might also be pricing agreements). 240USD for a bedrock style 5, which similar to what that same plane would cost at a dutch shop. (but OK, that certainly does not look like it is made cheaply, looks to be really high quality, all the ground surfaces look really good)


----------



## D_W (30 Sep 2022)

Jarno said:


> 10$ a month certainly is something to think about, so I'll certainly reconsider when it comes to that in NL, but at 3 EUR, I am not complaining.
> 
> Saw that chinese Bridge City clone as well, I think it still is very expensive, but that is what you get from designing and producing a product in China (and exactly the reason why Philips shaverheads are ONLY produced in the Netherlands), it will get copied, because there is margin there.
> The original is expensive, and cheap to reproduce, lots of margin. Bailey pattern planes are a cheaper, are also not very expensive to make (even properly), but have a higher associated logistics cost (heavier), less margin.
> ...



I think something like a shaver head is so dependent on quality - the correct hardening of the blades - accurately, and the correct finishing of them, that if you're going to sell an expensive model, it will become immediately apparent if it doesn't last. 

As far as the clone router plane, I am fairly sure - just my opinion - but a fairly sure one - that when a product is made to clone a known western product and then sold for a relatively high cost here (wood river, luban in other countries, hongdui knockoffs of LV bench top holddown gadgets..) the alibaba listings are set so that you won't find the actual price without contacting the maker and confirming you'd be selling in a non-competing territory.

Here's an example of where things don't make sense - the alibaba listing for a hongdui holdfast knocking off an LV product is something like $50 per, but on the aliexpress side (where you can buy one individually) the same thing is actually cheaper. This is backwards from the typical thing where the aliexpress item my be double or quadruple the cost of something bought in groups of 500. 

In the case of the router plane being listed on aliexpress for $215, higher than the price of a canada-made LV, same thing - if you'll buy it, they'll let you, but I don't think - especially on the english language listings - that they're about to let you immediately go find the K-M plane for cheaper than K-M and it's probably part of the agreement. 

The whole thing is still in exceptionally poor taste to me - I didn't think there was much genuine about K-M's background other than fast clear speech, test joints and high quality video production, but he's just a copying crook in my opinion, now.


----------



## Tony Zaffuto (1 Oct 2022)

K-M will have his fanbois. He’ll do a couple of woodworking shows, then be able to sell common card scrapers with long sides ground in a curve for $24.99 USD. 

LV is an innovator and their tools are still fairly competitive in price. Woodpecker also produces a few unique and interesting tools (not all, though). 

I will not condemn the off shore manufacturing, as we are a global economy (I manufacture and ship to China). I will condemn those companies that only copy without improving.


----------



## D_W (1 Oct 2022)

Tony Zaffuto said:


> I will not condemn the off shore manufacturing, as we are a global economy (I manufacture and ship to China). I will condemn those companies that only copy without improving.



Ditto on that. I think overseas manufacturing improves our standard of living. The evidence points to that. It's the copying that I don't care for. 

I think there is a lack of heckling about copying something, or pushing the pitch man in this case to come out with it about whether or not he just robbed the design from...well, Rob.


----------



## Jameshow (1 Oct 2022)

D_W said:


> Ditto on that. I think overseas manufacturing improves our standard of living. The evidence points to that. It's the copying that I don't care for.
> 
> I think there is a lack of heckling about copying something, or pushing the pitch man in this case to come out with it about whether or not he just robbed the design from...well, Rob.


Robs the working class of thier jobs though?!
International Harvester tractors are a Morrisons supermarket, Parkinson machine tools a nursing home.... Dean Smith and grace a pound toyshop supplier......








Cheap Toys & Kids Toys For A Pound | Cheap Kids Toys


PoundToy™‎ is one of the UK's fastest growing toy websites where you can purchase high quality, branded character cheap toys & games for children of all ages, at prices that cannot be beaten online or the high street! Founded in 2016, PoundToy™‎ is a family operated business, located in West...




www.poundtoy.com


----------



## D_W (1 Oct 2022)

Jameshow said:


> Robs the working class of thier jobs though?!
> International Harvester tractors are a Morrisons supermarket, Parkinson machine tools a nursing home.... Dean Smith and grace a pound toyshop supplier......
> 
> 
> ...



The owner, of course - as far as I know, it's a privately owned company that's gone out of their way to do things for their employees. 

Which makes it stink a little more. 

The extreme laziness to take something kind of basic - a flat casting with two handles coming off of it, and fail to make a couple of prototypes that don't just completely thieve someone else's casting, that's the turn off part here. My opinion in this case is that someone can spend so much time combing their hair and making test joints and worrying about video quality can't bother to not just rip off designs. 

But we've all seen this so much - lifting visually associated designs or copying just to avoid doing the work of actually designing something - that I guess there's a kind of indifference now where there wasn't one 10 years ago.


----------



## D_W (1 Oct 2022)

Humorously, my stanley 7 was held aside in customs for some time at DHL this morning. I guess they wanted to make sure my plastic handles weren't Brazilian Faux-wood.


----------



## Phil Pascoe (1 Oct 2022)

Common sense would tell anyone there isn't a huge financial benefit in rehandling planes, so why the hassle? It's easy to ascertain when manufacturers stopped using rosewood.


----------



## D_W (1 Oct 2022)

Phil Pascoe said:


> Common sense would tell anyone there isn't a huge financial benefit in rehandling planes, so why the hassle? It's easy to ascertain when manufacturers stopped using rosewood.



I'm not sure what you're aiming for here. 

I actually would like to have a type 20 #7, which has beech handles. I'm fine with those, but this is more of a curiosity adventure. I couldn't say whether or not I'll replace the plastic. 

My comment was more about the humorous delays in customs - what I find with DHL is they try desperately to find some import tax that can be assessed so that they can charge a service fee on top of it.


----------



## Jarno (3 Oct 2022)

You probably know this, but I think those chinese Stanleys are all metric, so not sure how easy or hard it is to replace anything but a plane iron.


----------



## D_W (3 Oct 2022)

Jarno said:


> You probably know this, but I think those chinese Stanleys are all metric, so not sure how easy or hard it is to replace anything but a plane iron.



I think the only things I'd replace on it would be the iron and the handles, but I'd make those. 

If it's defective, I'll just return it to amazon. The cap irons on these are OK. They're a funny shape, but functionally OK. 

Of course, it's probably a different gamble with each new year so all of the above could be incorrect. 

Listing said it was 9 1/4 pounds, about a pound heavier than a vintage 7. I hope that's wrong, but if it's not....well, I'll just resell it. 

Your point is a good one, though. you can't really assume anything. With a prior plane that was still sheffield made, the adjuster pawl was not ever cut down to size. The iron sat on top of it going only halfway down. I did something to adjust it but eventually kept the iron, cap, lever cap and screws out of the plane and threw the casting away. That one was $20, though, and one of those maroon ones with rough casting and maybe thin paint? whatever it was, the casting was rough. 

Even assuming the plane will be coarsely made but functional is too much sometimes.


----------



## D_W (3 Oct 2022)

said plane is in the city at the moment - arrived in cincinnati late friday night, and "express" apparently means takes three days to go five hours. but I don't have the time right now to do it up, so no big deal.


----------



## Jameshow (3 Oct 2022)

Jarno said:


> You probably know this, but I think those chinese Stanleys are all metric, so not sure how easy or hard it is to replace anything but a plane iron.


Probably made by soba so Indian tbh.


----------



## D_W (3 Oct 2022)

Jameshow said:


> Probably made by soba so Indian tbh.



The smoother was made in china - I've long ago tossed the box, but it is china origin. It's possible that the iron itself was still sheffield as these are blanked irons with fairly coarse rotary milling to finish them, so they are being fed through something automatic. It would be difficult to see them costing more than a few dollars each to make, even in sheffield. 

The blanking steels made for irons allow for pretty sloppy heat treatment, too - they're relatively fine grained and have enough chromium and vanadium to have good toughness both by composition and by grain pinning for hardening. 

Stanley has a large presence in china. I'll know in another day for sure that the jointer is also china - the listing on amazon doesn't disclose like the smoother box and smoother listing do. I looked at the casting to see if they replaced "England" on the casting with "China", and of course, they didn't. it's only a boast when it's favorable. The model number is cast into the bed ("G12-XXX" or something) and that's it. 

I put the iron aside as I have made a stack of maybe 50 irons and I like mine a little better. But the iron was by no means unusable and it wasn't soft like the round top 70s stuff.


----------



## D_W (3 Oct 2022)

correction - I'll know that today. whee!


----------



## D_W (3 Oct 2022)

hencho en mexico according to the box.


----------



## D_W (4 Oct 2022)

So, this plane's not that bad. Can't say anything about quality as far as consistency, but this particular plane will probably have about 1 hour of total setup time to deadly flat and sharp. 

the fatal flaw, to me - maybe not to someone who doesn't do much with planes- is that it's a bit overweight at right around 9 pounds actual weight (8lb 15.4oz for the particular types). 

the iron is some kind of carbon steel, but it lets go of the wire edge strangely easy and I expect when I get some edge wear, maybe it will tell a secret under the microscope? large grain? we'll see. It'll be some time before then. 

Casting is hard, heavy and thick. The cap iron is fine, the iron is fine, it's flat, it's reasonably hard, and the surface finish is pretty coarse. 

I wonder how much an I.Sorby 7 sells for these days - maybe I'll dump mine as they seem to have gone from "a little more than a stanley" to stupid price levels. 

Lateral adjustment and depth adjustment are both smooth and easy. 

so, how the iron wears is one thing yet to find out, and i'm curious enough I may have it XRFed to see what the composition is. The other recent new smoother that I bought is just like it. It's a decent iron, but I like how something more common like O1 or 80crv2 wears. 

The other will be to hold it for 6 months or a year before dumping it and see if the casting moves and by how much, as I have some trouble believing a plane that must wholesale for about $40 or $50 would be seasoned.


----------



## Jameshow (4 Oct 2022)

D_W said:


> So, this plane's not that bad. Can't say anything about quality as far as consistency, but this particular plane will probably have about 1 hour of total setup time to deadly flat and sharp.
> 
> the fatal flaw, to me - maybe not to someone who doesn't do much with planes- is that it's a bit overweight at right around 9 pounds actual weight (8lb 15.4oz for the particular types).
> 
> ...


Nice pics??


----------



## D_W (4 Oct 2022)

I'll take some tonight


----------



## D_W (4 Oct 2022)

It's not exactly shelf jewelry, by the way. Interestingly, some odd things are off on it - like I think the frog the way it's sitting is a little off center, but it's not out of square. No clue if that's something that can be adjusted, but it's also something I don't care about. 

This type of plane (bailey) has so few crucial elements vs. what people would lead everyone to believe and I think this plane has all of them covered. They pretty much center around being able to get the frog even with the casting and locked down tight, handles tight, adjuster works freely and the bottom flat. 

I would speculate without measuring that while this plane is coarsely ground, it's not more than about 2 thousandths hollow in its length. Which is something I don't like, but probably is the norm as I see the castings slightly hollow more often than the other way around. I have my guesses as to why that is (heavy pass grinding, the toe and heel will always be least rigid).


----------



## D_W (5 Oct 2022)

Ultimately, this plane doesn't have the stability at the bottom of the frog due to a gap between the frog and casting. The only way it would be stable enough would be to add a thicker iron. 

This isn't exclusive to modern planes, but this one has less of a gap than some of the poorly thought out older designs (union planes come to mind, if I recall, and some stanley frog designs have a big gap - I think....I just don't keep the old ones that I don't like). 

so, I guess I could cover some of the stability issues by making a custom iron for the plane that's about 1/8th thick. 

Casting unbelievably hard, too. I think I may have said that already...if I didn't. 

Best fix for the lower part of this plane would actually be to set the frog just behind the casting, carefully file the sloppy bottom of the casting in place and then apply metal-filled epoxy to the small gap between the frog and the casting. 

I'll show this in a video. It's deceptive because the gap is small, but it's enough to cause instability with a thin iron and this is what you get:



Notice the edge - that is an iron that planed maybe a couple of hundred feet at most in cherry and maple. I can feel the instability in the plane, but I have a lot of experience in feeling when an iron is vibrating and it's instability vs. just flimsy feeling. In this case, the iron is moving a little bit in the cut, and the result is that even in something innocent that i planed iwth another plane fine - figured hard maple - the reverberation of the iron beats up the edge, dings it and forms a small burr out of the various nicks. This is toxic - an iron that could last much longer transmits the message to the user that it can't last, but without obviously failing immediatley. 

When the burr from these little several thousandths defects gets organized (as in, too many of them work in combination along the edge), the plane rather abruptly stops cutting. 

Here is a plane iron of my own make used in a type 20 stanley that has support all the way down. This is at twice the magnification so defects would appear twice as large. Notice that they're absent. This plane didn't plane the same wood, but did plane beech and cherry and planed about 800 or 1000 feet to get to this point. 



While I think I make the best irons in the world .....there's no way that the iron is the differentiator in this case, and the way I'll have to prove it I guess is to throw the new iron in a T20 plane, plane the same things and see what happens.

So, it's a swing and an "almost". It would be an OK plane if stanley could've managed not to make the "Frog better with better machining on the feet" and face, but rather the critical last 1/4th inch at the bottom of the plane, the cost cutting is terminal.

I will probably make a 1/8th 80CRV2 iron for this plane to make up for the poor support at the bottom of the frog and confirm that it holds up well before dumping it sometime next year (also after confirming that the flatness that I filed into the casting remains there).


----------



## D_W (5 Oct 2022)

long story short, don't buy it. Unless you're OK with filing the bottom of the frog and filling the gap with with some kind of filled glue or silver solder or something. 

It's been interesting to gradually figure out what the invisible problem was as it seemed like there was something odd with the steel. Rather, it's what the plane quietly does to it, and I think it's not bad enough test cutting with the plane or using in softwoods for stanley to address it.


----------



## D_W (7 Oct 2022)

Since I said I'd leave pictures - I filed the bottom casting ledge on this plane - below the frog. Stanley doesn't intend you use this ledge, but it just barely is tall enough to touch the back of a thin iron's bevel. From yesterday to today, this was the factor that finally made the plane stable.

It's so sloppily made and roughly cast that until I started marking and bedding the iron (something you should never have to do on a stanley style plane), I wasn't aware that any part of it could contact above the bevel, I thought looking at the bottom of the casting that it could only contact the bevel.

That's a chancey thing because the bevel changes location with the plane cut depth.

So this plane planes fine now and with stability using a part of the plane that wasn't intended to bed the iron, it now doesn't damage the iron like above and the plane just works like you'd expect.

Except, it still has a huge mouth, the cap iron is still kind of crude and will let shavings through too easily without adjustment of the leading edge, the adjuster is difficult to judge - when it is actually moving the iron and when it isn't. I think I may crosshatch the back of the iron just to make it resist adjustment so that I can feel it, but that won't help with lateral - it's also obscure feeling. AS in, you can use the adjust, but it's hard to tell when it changes from slop to moving the iron. That may be because it's pushing the iron on the frog a little before it rotates laterally.

Whatever the case, it's a no go for buying it.


----------



## D_W (7 Oct 2022)

you see in the last picture the silvery bits below the frog - those are very coarsely rough cast, that was filed to get to there. It looks too short to touch a long iron bevel, but it's an illusion - the front of that casting is squared off, so the lower part even of that is gone. 

Look at the front of the frog, most of the gap is because to ease manufacturing, stanley squared off the "toes" of the frog creating a large gap. 

It's just the worst place to save a dollar. Which is probably more than the actual extra cost would be in mexico. it ruins the plane, but the whole thing even other than this is off - it can be made usable as I demonstrated above on curly hard maple, but I think getting these things right is beyond most. 

Jacob calls describing how the cap is prepared to plane like this and then set as "confusing".


----------



## G S Haydon (7 Oct 2022)

It's good to know it's bad. I don't know why they bother making them anymore. Must be a big margin.


----------



## rob1693 (7 Oct 2022)

I was working at woodside on the bailey line machining back in 2002 they had just switched from crane castings to Chinese castings and they were pretty bad back then


----------



## D_W (7 Oct 2022)

rob1693 said:


> I was working at woodside on the bailey line machining back in 2002 they had just switched from crane castings to Chinese castings and they were pretty bad back then



it's interesting that they have now gone to mexico - or maybe some of the US stuff was made in mexico already, much from stanley is. Much also is Chinese made here. In the US, there is a tariff system or at least was to encourage production anywhere in north america, and the last time I heard about fender's costs to make guitars, it was something like $50 an hour total labor and compliance cost in the US and $4 in mexico. The mexico made fender guitars are pretty nice, too, at least from my standpoint. Not custom shop nice, but for just over half the cost of US standard, they are really close in quality (about 25% of US custom shop, which is closer to what original production would've been). 

At any rate, the casting hardness is weird - lots of little things are weird, but that one picture of the filed rough casting bottom (stanley didn't intend for that to be used to bed the iron) and the frog squared off at the toes - just a poor decision. that alone halves or quarters the iron life and brings into focus the oft-said comment about a hock iron tripling the edge life on a plane - it's not the iron that's the problem, it's the plane. 

I also went and looked at older union and ohio planes to see if they are really as bad as I'm remembering (I had a union 7 and the casting is thin at the bottom and the gap is not fixable like this one - I remember it being terrible in use). 

And they are, in fact. Both makers tried to make the frog contact only one point - up under the back, with no contact in the front. I don't know why they would've been that dumb - they both sold at a lower cost than stanley, appreciably so. But the problem is so toxic that it's no wonder they never got much traction.


----------



## Jameshow (7 Oct 2022)

D_W said:


> it's interesting that they have now gone to mexico - or maybe some of the US stuff was made in mexico already, much from stanley is. Much also is Chinese made here. In the US, there is a tariff system or at least was to encourage production anywhere in north america, and the last time I heard about fender's costs to make guitars, it was something like $50 an hour total labor and compliance cost in the US and $4 in mexico. The mexico made fender guitars are pretty nice, too, at least from my standpoint. Not custom shop nice, but for just over half the cost of US standard, they are really close in quality (about 25% of US custom shop, which is closer to what original production would've been).
> 
> At any rate, the casting hardness is weird - lots of little things are weird, but that one picture of the filed rough casting bottom (stanley didn't intend for that to be used to bed the iron) and the frog squared off at the toes - just a poor decision. that alone halves or quarters the iron life and brings into focus the oft-said comment about a hock iron tripling the edge life on a plane - it's not the iron that's the problem, it's the plane.
> 
> ...


Happy to take it off your hands!!


----------



## rob1693 (7 Oct 2022)

Nicholson moved their production from the us to Mexico not the same product it was, their saw files are now trash like a lot of good old tool makers they trade off their past reputation


----------



## D_W (7 Oct 2022)

rob1693 said:


> Nicholson moved their production from the us to Mexico not the same product it was, their saw files are now trash like a lot of good old tool makers they trade off their past reputation



they were definitely worse at first. Now they're not quite as bad as they were, but their issue is that they're competing against files from portugal, etc (bahco, some simonds, etc). 

And they have some big box store accounts where files were more or less $5 for triangular files. I'd bet the box stores were pushing them to cut costs further and with the US operation they'd have needed to go up. 

It's hard for me to say at this point when I can get a dozen files for $22 instead of $60 that the value proposition is worse, but the files are.

The trouble with the discussion of the shift for stanley is the last of the UK planes were worse than the mexico plane I have here, or as bad. 

the late types that had good frog support from top to bottom and no gap, I've never found one of those that I couldn't make good very quickly. I like them better than the early types - they still have the same proportions, adjustability, etc. 

In the last however many years, the work began to get so sloppy, though, that the cost pressure i'm assuming just made it not possible to make a plane that was even the equal of a 60s-70s US stanley.


----------



## D_W (7 Oct 2022)

Jameshow said:


> Happy to take it off your hands!!



I could almost guarantee that shipping to the UK would cost almost as much as I paid to get it from the UK with the cost of the plane included!


----------



## thetyreman (8 Oct 2022)

this is similar to what paul sellers has been saying for over a decade, don't buy new stanleys as they are poorly made compared to the old ones and it's too much work to get them into a useable state. I think the pre-war records with rosewood handles were the best of the old ones, and if you're really lucky get a woden or i-sorby but they are rare.


----------



## D_W (8 Oct 2022)

thetyreman said:


> this is similar to what paul sellers has been saying for over a decade, don't buy new stanleys as they are poorly made compared to the old ones and it's too much work to get them into a useable state. I think the pre-war records with rosewood handles were the best of the old ones, and if you're really lucky get a woden or i-sorby but they are rare.



I've got a pretty well cherry I sorby 7, but have had it for a while. Apparently they have gone up a lot. It was about 50% more than an old "desirable type" stanley at the time, or something like $150-$160 + shipping from the UK, which was also half as much as it is now. 

I've come over the years to prefer the later type stanleys to most things, including to records (have had maybe 8 records, but never a newer one).

I wouldn't suggest a beginner buy a new stanley over something like a later type stanley for the same price, or less. A few small changes and a really good plane is ruined. 

I think a more practical plan for anyone who doesn't want a lot of old tools is to learn how to buy and sell on ebay for a period of a year and get five of each thing and keep the best one. I can make almost anything work. By the time I eventually screw around with why the adjuster feels obscure on this plane and doesn't communicate when it's moving the iron, it will be pretty much completely solved, but I don't know if even basic flattening to a fine level is reasonable to expect of a beginner. 

At any rate, I like the sorby plane - it seems like a well made marples product even though it doesn't say marples on it anywhere.


----------



## rob1693 (8 Oct 2022)

They're quite possibly made by marples, they acquired the brand


I.
smith
SORBY, I.​name
SORBY, I.
city
Sheffield
comment
SORBY, I. SHEFFIELD
The originator of the I. SORBY mark was Isaac Sorby who traded under his own name until circa 1814, then as Sorby, Turner & Skidmore until 1821 and as Sorby & Turner until 1828. His trademark must have been of value for it continued to be used by at least ten successor firms. The eleventh was ''Turner, Naylor & Co.'' who by 1909 were a subsidiary of ''Wm. Marples''. Around 1870, the "Mr Punch" mark was added as a corporate mark or an additional trademark. (The name should not be confused with I. & H. SORBY, hanging sheep trademark.) By 1932 the firm had become part of Turner, Naylor & Co., then a Wm. Marples associate which was not however fully integrated until 1963.
Regrettably this typical Sheffield story does not end here. The planes with the "Mr Punch" trade mark are likely to date from 1900-1920 whilst those marked I. SORBY "NORTHERN" are believed to date from the inter-war period and both must therefore be Marples planes under another name. CO [GOODMAN]
period
1800-1849
1850-1899
1900-1949
source
GOODMAN: 409


----------



## Tony Zaffuto (8 Oct 2022)

What other metallic tool brands offer performance equal to, or superior to the Bailey or Bedrock design? In the US, I much prefer Millers Falls, w/2 piece lever cap, full frog bedding. 

How about the UK?


----------



## D_W (8 Oct 2022)

rob1693 said:


> They're quite possibly made by marples, they acquired the brand
> 
> 
> I.
> ...








I don't know if paul is causing people to buy these, but I don't read paul's stuff - just saw a link to his page recently when looking to see if any more are for sale. 

The reason I bought this is a little different - I always liked I. Sorby's chisels and plane irons, they reminded me of Ward to some extent and I've had just about everything, so I figured getting an oddball might be nice. 

I was raiding your ebay over there because the GSP had come in - this was before they started seizing everything with brown wood anywhere on it. It's a good well-made plane with a marples style cap iron on it. Everything about it reminds me of the good versions of the marples metal planes and the decal is very marples like.


----------



## D_W (8 Oct 2022)

Tony Zaffuto said:


> What other metallic tool brands offer performance equal to, or superior to the Bailey or Bedrock design? In the US, I much prefer Millers Falls, w/2 piece lever cap, full frog bedding.
> 
> How about the UK?



Can't speak for all of the planes, but a good record is about equal to a stanley - the irons are a touch softer, which isn't that helpful. That'd be the non-SS type. 

Marples planes, I've had maybe four and half of them have some cheaper frog design - not sure what their back story is - the good ones are like early-mid 1900s stanleys. 

The i. sorby shown above is as good as any vintage plane, and while I wouldn't have preferred it to an LN early on, I would take it over any boutique plane every day of the week. 

It's probably 1-2 thousandths hollow, which is a little bit of a pain, but will take 20 minutes to fix. I had an LN 8 the same that was very difficult to use and get a good long match planed joint, so I sold that (long ago).


----------



## Jameshow (8 Oct 2022)

D_W said:


> View attachment 145037
> 
> 
> I don't know if paul is causing people to buy these, but I don't read paul's stuff - just saw a link to his page recently when looking to see if any more are for sale.
> ...


Keep ya mitts off our planes!


----------



## D_W (8 Oct 2022)

Jameshow said:


> Keep ya mitts off our planes!





giggle.

that's a small fraction of what I've extracted from over there, but admittedly, I usually "get data" from most of these and then pass them on. I'm mostly done with my data collection phase. The "hey buddy, hey guy" plane top let was something I received to test, and it also hit the road. Only one of the planes in that group is of my own make -the one far away with the brass button in the middle of the iron.

All but three of those came from england though. I've had plenty of record planes - they are nicely made effort wise, but about an even match at best with a later stanley once both have their issues corrected (both are good planes).

The blue later stanley with the round iron is one that taught me a lot - maybe my favorite smoother of a "terrible type that should be avoided".

oh...LN bronze, too. Also gone, as is the record smoother in the background. I have the aforementioned record 8 that I have to admit I only really keep because it's flat and because I know it's somewhat valuable. It appears that stanley 8s are now bringing a lot more than 7s, too.

The prices were too low over there, so someone had to do a favor for the people selling things. You might notice some missing griffiths moulding plane sets, too and about 100 chisels. And a bunch of bench planes, but those are still really cheap there - really fine planes as good as any wooden planes made in some cases, and they go for a song there. Less than the cost to ship them here.


----------



## G S Haydon (8 Oct 2022)

Tony Zaffuto said:


> What other metallic tool brands offer performance equal to, or superior to the Bailey or Bedrock design? In the US, I much prefer Millers Falls, w/2 piece lever cap, full frog bedding.
> 
> How about the UK?


Tony, I'm going to stick my neck out and say full frog bedding doesn't exist.


----------



## Tony Zaffuto (8 Oct 2022)

G S Haydon said:


> Tony, I'm going to stick my neck out and say full frog bedding doesn't exist.


Let me re-phrase that: the frog is mostly bedding surface. In the US much is made about the Bedrock frog surface versus laterBailey frogs (changed around Type 11, 12 or 13, as parts were used).

Depending how far forward the frog seats, either the end of the iron flops around in the wind, or has pressure applied by the sole.

I agree full frog bedding doesn’t exist ‘cept in the pond in the swamp down o er the hill from our home!


----------



## G S Haydon (9 Oct 2022)

Tony Zaffuto said:


> Let me re-phrase that: the frog is mostly bedding surface. In the US much is made about the Bedrock frog surface versus laterBailey frogs (changed around Type 11, 12 or 13, as parts were used).
> 
> Depending how far forward the frog seats, either the end of the iron flops around in the wind, or has pressure applied by the sole.
> 
> I agree full frog bedding doesn’t exist ‘cept in the pond in the swamp down o er the hill from our home!


Lovely response, Tony. I thought flattening the face of a frog was a good idea based on the information out there. I did it and realised I'd gained sweet FA.


----------



## Homeless Squirrel (11 Oct 2022)

Tony Zaffuto said:


> What other metallic tool brands offer performance equal to, or superior to the Bailey or Bedrock design? In the US, I much prefer Millers Falls, w/2 piece lever cap, full frog bedding.
> 
> How about the UK?


Have Millers Falls myself. 9 and 10 but have peepers out on a 14 and 18 atmo and might swap him for my 1850's no6 low knob


----------



## Tony Zaffuto (11 Oct 2022)

Homeless Squirrel said:


> Have Millers Falls myself. 9 and 10 but have peepers out on a 14 and 18 atmo and might swap him for my 1850's no6 low knob


I’ve been searching high and low for a 15 (5-1/2 size) but no luck to date. Though they are “collector items”, the MF “Buck Rodgers” planes are superb!


----------



## Just4Fun (11 Oct 2022)

Homeless Squirrel said:


> Have Millers Falls myself.


I know nothing about MF plane numbers and very little about MF planes. I did use one a couple of years ago, the size of a #4 in old money. It had the 2-piece chip breaker. In the limited time I used the plane I didn't form an opinion about that, good or bad. What is your view? Worth having or not?


----------



## Tony Zaffuto (11 Oct 2022)

Just4Fun said:


> I know nothing about MF plane numbers and very little about MF planes. I did use one a couple of years ago, the size of a #4 in old money. It had the 2-piece chip breaker. In the limited time I used the plane I didn't form an opinion about that, good or bad. What is your view? Worth having or not?


We have idiosyncrasies, likes and dislikes, opinions and so forth. We tout loudly that which works for our subjectives ways of holding/using tools.

To me, MF planes are beyond superb! When wood sees my reaching for MF smoother, why sub .001” shavings just jump off the timber before the sole even touches the surface.

In all seriousness, I find MF planes very well made, with those with two piece lever caps falling in between Stanley Bailey and Bedrock planes. In other words pretty much to same as other well made planes.


----------



## Homeless Squirrel (11 Oct 2022)

Just4Fun said:


> I know nothing about MF plane numbers and very little about MF planes. I did use one a couple of years ago, the size of a #4 in old money. It had the 2-piece chip breaker. In the limited time I used the plane I didn't form an opinion about that, good or bad. What is your view? Worth having or not?


I like mine but as long as blade is sharp and held correctly you could plane with a Stanley knife blade. 
But yes seems ok and something different to the Stanley Mafia plus a dung plane is a dung plane no matter what make/model if casting is poor as seems to be with new Stanley's etc
Blades seem good but the older blades seem sharper than newer gear


----------



## Homeless Squirrel (11 Oct 2022)

Tony Zaffuto said:


> I’ve been searching high and low for a 15 (5-1/2 size) but no luck to date. Though they are “collector items”, the MF “Buck Rodgers” planes are superb!


no6 i just got i think is a tad too old and fragile for often use? "is around 170 years old"


----------



## Homeless Squirrel (11 Oct 2022)

Question! So what's the Sweet spot with planes? As in many have Type 1.2.3.4 and so on with changes along the way like soles made thicker/stronger and frogs also.
Yes i know Older is more collectable and newer not so good so there must be a sweet spot where there made better with best changes and blades


----------



## Just4Fun (11 Oct 2022)

Homeless Squirrel said:


> ... as long as blade is sharp and held correctly you could plane with a Stanley knife blade.


There speaks someone who has never done battle with a Stanley RB5 or RB10! I do take your point though.


Homeless Squirrel said:


> Blades seem good but the older blades seem sharper than newer gear


The one I used had been "acquired" (liberated?) from the local army camp when the yanks left after WW2. I couldn't see any real difference between it and a similar Stanley or Record, but I didn't use it for long.


----------



## CStanford (21 Oct 2022)

They still make a 3, 4, 4 1/2, 5, and 6 as well. Also a 78, high and low angle block planes, etc. 

Spear and Jackson even make a 5, maybe others.

Take a look:





__





Amazon.com : stanley hand plane






www.amazon.com


----------



## mikej460 (31 Oct 2022)

I couldn't resist this No. 6 at £45 + p&p on Facebook. It arrived today and looks in excellent condition, I haven't had chance to try it yet.


----------



## Tony Zaffuto (31 Oct 2022)

I’ve got a Stanley #6, Type 11, bought 20 years ago, used a few times, but it is not something I reach for! Either the #7 or the #5!


----------



## D_W (2 Nov 2022)

Tony Zaffuto said:


> I’ve got a Stanley #6, Type 11, bought 20 years ago, used a few times, but it is not something I reach for! Either the #7 or the #5!



The 5 seems to be the one I never use, but probably because of what I'm not doing with it (jack work - that is left to a wooden plane). This whole screwing around with a mexico stanley thing made for a flurry of playing with metal jointers, but I don't use those that much, either, except for trimming guitar bits and match planing. 

And once in a great while, wood that's straight up nasty that probably should've been saved for utility junk only (like making shop shelves), like this back bracket on a basement TV shelf. For scale, I think it's probably about 18" wide. Just garbage. 



The top part of the shelf isn't a whole lot better.


----------



## D_W (2 Nov 2022)

mikej460 said:


> I couldn't resist this No. 6 at £45 + p&p on Facebook. It arrived today and looks in excellent condition, I haven't had chance to try it yet.
> 
> View attachment 146233



looks great to me!


----------



## Jameshow (2 Nov 2022)

Homeless Squirrel said:


> Question! So what's the Sweet spot with planes? As in many have Type 1.2.3.4 and so on with changes along the way like soles made thicker/stronger and frogs also.
> Yes i know Older is more collectable and newer not so good so there must be a sweet spot where there made better with best changes and blades


You need a variety tbh. 
A no3 is only a little larger than a block plane. 

No4 the most common jack plane. 
No5 I use as a scrubbing plane. 

4 1/2 wider and still short unloved tbh. 

5 1/2 sweat spot to many. Does much of what the 4-5 do and what the 6-7 do..

6-7 longer planes for joining boards or flattening long boards, heavy to use. 

Others are far more experienced than me!


----------



## D_W (2 Nov 2022)

Homeless Squirrel said:


> Question! So what's the Sweet spot with planes? As in many have Type 1.2.3.4 and so on with changes along the way like soles made thicker/stronger and frogs also.
> Yes i know Older is more collectable and newer not so good so there must be a sweet spot where there made better with best changes and blades



Not sure what that would be in the UK. Much of the discussion of quality was started by collectors in the states, and maybe some by people like patrick leach who also make declarative statements about the usefulness of tools with bits left out. Who on here has had several different scraping planes, but doesn't generally work on veneer?

Personal opinion? I like later stanleys better than anything else, but not later than type 20. Post WW2 used to be considered junk because collectors had something for the very early planes and the sweetheart stuff with decals. In terms of doing the job, it doesn't make any difference for my use if everything is in a certain range (type 10 functionally the same as type 19), and my preferences for later tools have more to do with the larger adjuster wheel, typical lower miles and what seems like more predictability in how adjustment will feel. If a plane is coming out to swipe something between machine work and sanding, that stuff doesn't really make any difference.


----------



## Homeless Squirrel (2 Nov 2022)

Jameshow said:


> You need a variety tbh.
> A no3 is only a little larger than a block plane.
> 
> No4 the most common jack plane.
> ...


I wasn't talking about sizes but types(year made) as they went on changes was made like early Stanley's Thinner/Fragile castings often with casting stress fractures included! then they changed the beds making more rigid till later had ribs inside bed so lessens ends snapping off!

Blades changed over the years many Laminated early years 

So must be an era of sweet spots like some say about Record with 50's there best years where the invocations to builds and quality to castings and blades are best as ok pre war steel (post Nuclear era)is better and more sort after by many inc Dubious people stealing ship wrecks out in Pacific etc southern Hemisphere seas.


----------



## Jameshow (2 Nov 2022)

Homeless Squirrel said:


> I wasn't talking about sizes but types(year made) as they went on changes was made like early Stanley's Thinner/Fragile castings often with casting stress fractures included! then they changed the beds making more rigid till later had ribs inside bed so lessens ends snapping off!
> 
> Blades changed over the years many Laminated early years
> 
> So must be an era of sweet spots like some say about Record with 50's there best years where the invocations to builds and quality to castings and blades are best as ok pre war steel (post Nuclear era)is better and more sort after by many inc Dubious people stealing ship wrecks out in Pacific etc southern Hemisphere seas.


Sorry I'll haul myself into my cave of faithfull planes!


----------



## frogesque (2 Nov 2022)

Jameshow said:


> Comes up as a 7 here in UK?!


Easy enough to make an iron from oil hardening gauge plate. You can still sharpen the blade on normal stones yet the steel holds the edge better than plain carbon steel. 

Probably not worth the effort (or expense) for jack work but far better for fine finishing, especially on hardwoods. 

Also, be careful with the plane body. Modern planes are usually cast iron and the 'flat' base is polished on a belt polisher. They are anything but flat! 

As an aside, I corrected the body of an old beechwood plane with a wooden wedge to hold the iron. With careful fine cuts on the base to get it truly flat and a sniff of beeswax rubbed in and polished out its performance was magic!


----------



## D_W (2 Nov 2022)

Most of them are cast and ground, but the grinding is really coarse. The issue with them isn't so much that, but rather that it seems like they may have some bias in them from harsh grinding or lack of seasoning and the little hills and valleys are more abrupt even if they aren't "more thousandths" than vintage planes. 

And the modern castings on the stanley planes are *really* hard and really not suitable for hand lapping. They have to be ground or filed on the long planes. 

I'd imagine stanley's solid irons are either tungsten steel like W1 or they're oil hardening. I guess I haven't ever really looked. Sweet spot O1 is nice (figure tempered 375-400F and the hardness depends on the quench), or oil hardening gage as it may be referred to in England. 

Stanley's steel quality is good, though. I may have mentioned it earlier on here, but the very early irons were a tad soft, probably in deference to hand sharpeners with a sandstone grind stone (as in 1860s/1870s early), and the round top irons are soft. The rest of them are pretty good. I kind of prefer them to O1 once a really fast sharpening routine is mastered (like a minute total), but many others don't seem to like the vintage irons - in some cases, I think it's like changing mufflers on a harley. 

If someone is actually using a jack plane with camber for jack work, the older water hardening irons will fare better than O1, and miles better than A2 or V11. Not that the latter will last less long, but taking into account nicking and then honing and grinding out chromium carbides - you can't get a proportional return in rough work because they take damage that cancels out abrasion resistance. 

if I were in the UK, I'd probably hand out oddball plane irons for the cost of materials just for an excuse to turn them out like people make pens. I like 80crv2 quite a lot - it wears about like O1, but is tougher for same hardness and has a finer grain with crazy little evenly distributed carbides. And it's cheap.


----------



## D_W (2 Nov 2022)

Homeless Squirrel said:


> I wasn't talking about sizes but types(year made) as they went on changes was made like early Stanley's Thinner/Fragile castings often with casting stress fractures included! then they changed the beds making more rigid till later had ribs inside bed so lessens ends snapping off!
> 
> Blades changed over the years many Laminated early years
> 
> So must be an era of sweet spots like some say about Record with 50's there best years where the invocations to builds and quality to castings and blades are best as ok pre war steel (post Nuclear era)is better and more sort after by many inc Dubious people stealing ship wrecks out in Pacific etc southern Hemisphere seas.



Yeah, for practical purposes, at least in american stanleys - once you get past the really early soft irons and thin castings, and before you get to the post type-20 planes, everything in the middle kind of works about the same. Some of the later irons are definitely a little bit lower in carbon (like the square top type 20s), but I haven't tested much other than really early and really late. More out of curiosity to see if there is surplus carbon in the laminated irons so that they could be driven higher in hardness (there is surplus carbon, but they do something to manufacture them and constrain or grind them - they turn into potato chips if you try to reharden them), and then on the softer block plane irons and 750 chisel to see if stanley made them soft and it wasn't a matter of a poor alloy (that is the case - both are very good. I think the 750s might be something similar to O1 - they can be made to match anything boutique if they're rehardened). 

Stick to something that looks a little grayish with smoother machining if you're concerned about later irons being a touch softer. Until they get really soft (like the round tops), you might prefer them in something like a jointer. 

Smoothers are really the only thing where a harder iron can be gamed, and even then, I don't think harder irons provide any benefits in an all hand tool cycle - more like for a smoother that's following wood out of a planer.


----------



## Homeless Squirrel (3 Nov 2022)

D_W said:


> Yeah, for practical purposes, at least in american stanleys - once you get past the really early soft irons and thin castings, and before you get to the post type-20 planes, everything in the middle kind of works about the same. Some of the later irons are definitely a little bit lower in carbon (like the square top type 20s), but I haven't tested much other than really early and really late. More out of curiosity to see if there is surplus carbon in the laminated irons so that they could be driven higher in hardness (there is surplus carbon, but they do something to manufacture them and constrain or grind them - they turn into potato chips if you try to reharden them), and then on the softer block plane irons and 750 chisel to see if stanley made them soft and it wasn't a matter of a poor alloy (that is the case - both are very good. I think the 750s might be something similar to O1 - they can be made to match anything boutique if they're rehardened).
> 
> Stick to something that looks a little grayish with smoother machining if you're concerned about later irons being a touch softer. Until they get really soft (like the round tops), you might prefer them in something like a jointer.
> 
> Smoothers are really the only thing where a harder iron can be gamed, and even then, I don't think harder irons provide any benefits in an all hand tool cycle - more like for a smoother that's following wood out of a planer.


The 1850's 6 i got for me was too high risk on breaking due to age and thinner castings plus setting up harder so swapped with friend for Millers Falls 18 and some other tools like 78,sliding square,Bevel and an old brass backed saw etc as don't have a workshop just my Keter bench and kitchen worktop! So have to carry in bag to likes of Wood group and mens shed not so bad when could use car but these day's with ULEZ it's Pubic transport.
He didn't have an old 6(Has just about every other plane in existence some still new in boxes!) and i like the Millers falls ones as have 9,2 10's,15 and the 18.
Have a pile of Stanleys also 3.4's.41/2's,5.51/2 some mint in boxes plus got a 91/2 knuckle plane SW one with matching blade works a treat.

Got a 2nd MF no10 as wanted cap iron for 18 and blade now odd one is the casting is different to other 10 even though looks same age one had rib in front of slot lower and thicker than other plus one has a smaller brass wheel while others larger nickel'd one.

I also got a MF trinket 199 multi screwdriver gadget like a low angled screwdriver so could tweak handle screw with other bits in the way like blade/lever


----------



## D_W (3 Nov 2022)

MF planes are in the ballpark of stanley bailey in the range that I mentioned. They had the trick lever cap design and they kept a milled casting face longer, but the irons aren't quite as good as stanley's, at least in my experience (maybe 8 or 10 of them?). They're a favorite around here among folks who pick up used planes, though, and they do have nice soft castings, which someone might scowl at as a comment, but there's no reason for a casting to be bullet hard and difficult to flatten. they flatten nicely. I don't have any at this point not for any other reason than I just don't keep a lot of bench plane duplicates and some of the planes that I do have were just like antique market finds, like $15 unused later 6s, etc. 

Most of the other planes around that were cut cost compared to stanley to find a place in a tool seller's catalog just flat out aren't as good (ohio metal planes, the union versions with an unsupported front frog and a gap between frog and casting, etc).

There was a time here about 12-15 years ago that you could get millers falls type 2-4 planes really inexpensively, except for some reason, the #2 sized plane (which isn't something I'd ever buy). That's another reason that I had a bunch of them. $15 9/14 planes were very common in good shape, and only the type 1s brought money on ebay. Those didn't get any attention in antique malls. Everything was about half stanley's price. 

a quick look on ebay now shows their average sale price is about the same as stanley. It's been so long since I looked around with any intent other than this recent flurry of 7s that I don't know who is stylish on ebay in the US. There's always one or two people trying to premium price planes and call them "tuned", but that existed 15 years ago with a few people refinishing the life right out of planes, sometimes belting any markings off of the castings and turning them into bananas with pretty japanning. I managed to find two sevens for an average well under $100, but also did see a seller who was able to sell "tuned" planes that weren't reground or anything for pretty high dollars. $250-ish for a jointer, more than double the actual average sale average). 

It did look like a case of the guy having 20 and selling 2, though. 

Fun's kind of over, I want to make and use things and unload stuff I don't keep, and Ebay's PIA compliance with data submission now means I have to try to come up with some kind of proof or record of purchase or I'll be charged income tax on the entire sale. Not worth the trouble any longer.


----------



## Homeless Squirrel (3 Nov 2022)

Love the ones over your side on ebay with "Founders Grade"!!!


----------



## D_W (3 Nov 2022)

Homeless Squirrel said:


> Love the ones over your side on ebay with "Founders Grade"!!!



I've bought stuff from them, but only from auctions not on ebay. MJD tool is the site here. I can say I got some lots of things that turned out to be useful and were well priced.

And I've also gotten some lots from them that had significant omissions to cancel those out, and at one point, they tried to send me several hundred pounds of lobster fishing weights or some weird offshore bits when I won a lot of handsaws. And when I got the ship notification and called, I said "you have me assigned to the wrong lot, what is it". I showed them my winning bid, it didn't match their shipping list and they tried to blame it on something other than their error and I said "I'd like the saws, still"

"No sir, those have already been shipped to someone else". 

(I sure would like a refund then!)

"Sir, we're just checking, but are you saying you don't want the fishing weights now either?"

That would be a reasonable question outside of the fact that I never bid on the lot for them. Of course I don't!

Not a necessary story, but I'm well aware of the founders grade folks. They do a decent job putting on big auctions here, but the pictures have been lacking on things i would definitely consider necessary to show, and since they've gotten me back to "even odds" by following up good deals with later stinkers (and then sinkers?), I don't want to go below zero. It's like leaving the casino. 

Too, I don't know how those businesses work when they price something super high, because it's a really good way to sell 10% of your inventory each year, but who wants to have and track all of that stuff?

I find the original handles for sometimes $125 on planes I wouldn't pay $125 for complete pretty humorous. 

There is probably as core group of well heeled consumer/hoarders in the US who are targeted with those listings. We just saw the appearance of the hoard of someone similar in the last couple of weeks.


----------

