# plane blade upgrade



## lurcher (29 Jul 2013)

hi lads i need some help i have lots of planes but i have never bothered to upgrade any blades and chip breakers i am thinking about trying the quansheng blades and chip breakers i would realy apreciate any of your dealings with these blades its only me wanting to no if it is worth the money 
lurcher


----------



## tobytools (29 Jul 2013)

I would say rob Cosman irons are the ones for you is its a Stanley plane. The don't fit records so good unless you file the mouth ect, they where made for Stanly type planes. Hock irons are also good. Depends on budget really! And sharpening technique, on my record no6 with standard iron honed with a camber and well tuned chip breaker ect, cuts no better or worse than a LN, Norris and holtey. 
im not gona say what materials make better iron as this causes huge debates, its more about what works for you, types of wood you plane ect. 
I will say I don't like the shape of hock irons 
Sorry I didn't answer your question, I've no dealings with those irons. I have heard for a guy I trust that they they deal in good quality tools and would only imagine that there irons would suit.
Hope this helps, tobytools


----------



## tim burr (29 Jul 2013)

The blades are fantastic, the chip breakers seem ok however I've only used them fitted to an actual quangsheng plane, all my other planes that have the quangsheng blades fitted have a clifton 2 piece chip breaker.


----------



## tobytools (29 Jul 2013)

tim burr":26ye4z02 said:


> The blades are fantastic, the chip breakers seem ok however I've only used them fitted to an actual quangsheng plane, all my other planes that have the quangsheng blades fitted have a clifton 2 piece chip breaker.


 sorry to change subject, time have U ever used their low angle plane, im getting a new one as I only have old Stanley or record blocks and want a life keeper, its between LN, Veritas and quangsheng! I like the fact quangsheng comes with 3 irons


----------



## Vann (30 Jul 2013)

tobytools":3622s8cx said:


> The don't fit records so good unless you file the mouth ect, they where made for Stanly type planes.


I beg to differ. 

All earlier Stanleys and Records had tight mouths. When Record began producing Bailey type planes in 1931, they closely copied the Stanley planes of the day. Planes from both makers had mouths in the 4.40mm to 4.70mm range during the 1930s. All of these will need filing to fit thicker irons. 
Later, both companies let their standards slip. By the late 1960 Records were still just under 5mm, while early 1970s Stanleys are around 5.2mm. By the mid 1990s Record plane mouths were out to over 6mm.

Depending of course, on how much clearance you want in front of the cutting edge, mouths of ~5.5mm (Record or Stanley, or any other manfacture's "Bailey" type planes) will take ⅛in (~3.2mm) thick irons without filing.

If your cutting irons are in reasonable nick, the best way to upgrade is a thicker cap-iron. This is cheaper than a new thick iron, and there's no hassles with filing mouths and extending yokes, and they stiffen up the blade assembly considerably.

Cheers, Vann.


----------



## matthewwh (30 Jul 2013)

I agree, winding the frog back is usually enough to fit a 3mm iron, if your current iron is performing well then you can still get a substantial improvement just by upgrading the cap iron.

Ray Iles now makes 2mm thick replacement irons (with an S suffix). These are a little bit thicker than most original irons but should drop straight into anything. Some of the very early American made Stanleys were incredibly thin / tight mouthed, but you would detract from their value if you opened up the mouth.






Ray_Iles_Replacement_Plane_Iron_RI023S


----------



## Vann (30 Jul 2013)

matthewwh":2p925dsr said:


> Ray Iles[/url] now makes *2mm* thick replacement irons (with an S suffix). These are a *little bit thicker than most original irons *but should drop straight into anything.


I've found some very old Stanleys with 1.95mm thick irons, but most of my Record irons are between 2mm and 2.4mm.

I agree, it seems a shame to file the mouth of a plane, as it's a modification that can never be reversed - even if some sizes are common as muck.

Cheers, Vann.


----------



## tobytools (30 Jul 2013)

I won't argue with what anyone is saying, my record is dated about 50, and even when the frog is taken right back the rob Cosman iron and chip breaker still won't fit, the frog almost came apart from plane. But I've been told that a ray iles iron and a Clifton stay set will fit very well on my record. It even says on package of the cosman iron and chip breaker sets that they fit Stanly planes. I know that record and many other company had similar designs, its not so much the mouth but the block that the frog sits on it won't allow for the thicker blades. That being said the rob cosman set is over 60% thicker than the original 
Toby


----------



## Mike Wingate (30 Jul 2013)

The Cosman blade is the best. But you may have to file down the base of the frog, after flattening the front, and maybe replace the yolk lever. The Quangsheng blades are almost as good, but again you may have to do some fettling. All my planes now have upgraded blades and thicker chipbreakers. Some have Quangsheng replacement yolks. If I was to start again, I would buy QS planes. I have the QS 62, it is brilliant (after changing the tote) their large chisel plane and a low angle QS block plane.


----------



## marcros (30 Jul 2013)

all this talk of changing blades... does anybody have a spare blade (original will do) that will fit a Stanley (I think) no 3? I bought the plane off here that had a heavily cambered blade in it. Whilst that will be handy for scrubbing, I could do with a smoother as well!


----------



## Jacob (30 Jul 2013)

The single most cost effective improvement is a two piece cap iron IMHO. These radically improve a standard thin iron and together they reduce sharpening time significantly. Improvement due to "better" blades always seems marginal and barely worth it - especially as they take longer to sharpen (except the laminated 'Smoothcut').


----------



## matthewwh (30 Jul 2013)

Thanks Vann,

I've just checked again and the 2-3/8 is a little thicker (2.5mm) than the 2". 

As you can see, there was quite some variation in original blade thickness between brands and and over time, which makes it tricky to give a definitive answer to "will a 3mm iron fit in my plane - it's a Stanley/Record/Acorn etc". So far all the customers I have spoken to have been able to fit the Ray Iles 'S' iron without modification.


----------



## undergroundhunter (30 Jul 2013)

I ordered a quangsheng 2" chipbraker, iron and a yolk for my stanley No4 at the weekend from Matthew @Wokshop Heaven. When they arrive I will let you know how it fares, to be honest I did think about just changing the chip breaker but decided to go the full hog as my Stanly iron is getting a bit low anyway.

I will report back.

matt


----------



## Mike Wingate (30 Jul 2013)

I also have a couple of Smoothcut laminated blades. I used to think that they were great, and kept them for planning ebony fingerboards, however the QS and Cosman are better blades for retaining that edge. The Smoothcut blades are delicate and do lose their edge. QS all he way!


----------



## lurcher (30 Jul 2013)

well i bit the bullet and ordered a qs blade for an old stanley that i got at a boot sale for £3.00 in good used cond but no blade so will be able to compare as all of reply/s seem to suggest that it is a good way forward and i also see that they are available for a blockplane 
now that does sound a good idea to me as the blocky gets alot of use in my workshop


----------



## tim burr (30 Jul 2013)

tobytools":1ijyn1jm said:


> sorry to change subject, time have U ever used their low angle plane, im getting a new one as I only have old Stanley or record blocks and want a life keeper, its between LN, Veritas and quangsheng! I like the fact quangsheng comes with 3 irons



If you mean the block plane yes I have and it's also very good, I personally own a Veritas low angle block and a stanley sweetheart block but I actually found the quangsheng more comfortable to use as it's narrower even though I have quite large hands. Given the choice again I'd have gone for a quangsheng over the stanley.
As for the low angle bench planes I haven't tried the quangsheng one, but I do own the veritas low angle jack which to be honest I can't really get on with, it feels odd not having a frog to rest my index finger against :?


----------



## grandad211 (30 Jul 2013)

I've seen the ad for toothed blades on Workshop Heaven, anyone tried them? Looks logically a good idea for difficult grains


----------



## Paul Chapman (30 Jul 2013)

grandad211":2ei5gchm said:


> I've seen the ad for toothed blades on Workshop Heaven, anyone tried them? Looks logically a good idea for difficult grains



Yes, I've used one for a few years. They are made by Kunz and are excellent quality. Those ones are meant for bevel-down planes. You need to ensure that the cap iron is set back a fair way to prevent shavings getting trapped between the cap iron and the grooves in the blade





I ground a bit off the end of the cap iron.

Cheers :wink: 

Paul


----------



## Dovetaildave (1 Aug 2013)

Hi Lurcher,
I did exactly the same as you, wee while ago.
All the advice on the forum was really helpful and much appreciated, however......
I found that I had to invest a considerable amount of time on the "extended yokes", regarding the taper thickness and to remove the sand marks, thus improving the. Smooth adjustment. I did do a series of photos with the intention of posting on here, but was to desperate to make a mountain of shavings.
I was also concerned that the brass would block up my ezelap diamond plates, so you may want to buy a few grades of some abrasive sheets and I believe chalk used on a file will prevent it getting blocked up, sorry can't remember the correct terminology.
I was working on three brands and five sizes of planes and multiple blade/iron combos, Matthew ( thanks again) did tell me that the yoke pin was slightly tapered, can't remember which brand/vintage exactly tho.

Mike....if you were the gent ( i'll look through old PM's) who posted me the no 8 cap iron, I just won the hock combo last week, I'll get it in the post to you, when I'm back from Taiwan, just before next term begins.


----------



## Racers (1 Aug 2013)

So it was you who got the hock No8 blade and cap iron, I put a bid on that but I thought it would go much higher at the end so didn't bid again.
Looks a cracking blade let me know how it performs.

Pete


----------



## Dovetaildave (1 Aug 2013)

Apologies to the OP but........
Pete, I'm sorry, I must admit I was well surprised when I found out I'd won it, I too though it would go supernova, 
I was first bidder and stuck £40.01 and walked away (went on holiday really) i just managed to get to a working pc yesterday sinceoriginally bidding three weeks ago and when my email said it won.......and it came in just below I think.
Previously........
First one I saw that would fit the 8 and I was just beaten by "a gatherer of old planes"
Second one was a hock and it was never posted, did get my refund after eBay stepped in for me.

At last I have a working 608C, hope I'm strong enough to push it


----------



## Racers (1 Aug 2013)

Hi Dave

It works like that sometimes, not a problem, I have a almost full length cast steel one in my Record No8.


Pete


----------



## mickthetree (1 Aug 2013)

I too was eyeing that hock combo up, but I'm under strict orders at the moment! Hope it works out for you, looks a great setup.

I'm really after a 2 piece clifton cap iron to go with my clifton blade in my number 8. But again, I'm under orders....


----------



## Phil Pascoe (1 Aug 2013)

Likewise under orders. I'll have to stick with the iron my No.8 came with. It's OK though - it's laminated, and it's got "SW" inside a heart on it... :lol:


----------



## Vann (1 Aug 2013)

mickthetree":7r0vntpf said:


> I'm really after a 2 piece clifton cap iron to go with my clifton blade in my number 8. But again, I'm under orders....


Good luck with that. No-one in the UK have any stocks left, except WSH - but at horrendous cost. Clifton stopped making that size about 5 years ago.

I bought mine throught Dieter-Schmid (Germany) about three years ago. Last time I looked they, and some USA outlets, still had stocks. Better not stay under orders too long or they'll all be gone.

Cheers, Vann.

edit: I just had a look at the Dieter-Schmid website. While they still list Clifton No.8 sized cutting irons, the No.8 cap-irons are no longer listed.


----------



## mickthetree (2 Aug 2013)

Yes, Matthew has them but out of price range at the moment. Hopefully he'll have some left by the time I'm allowed out to play again ;-)


----------



## iNewbie (2 Aug 2013)

£52 - think I had a heart attack...


----------



## mickthetree (2 Aug 2013)

I think he had to import them from America so had to cover his shipping costs. You can get them from the states still, but by the time you've paid the shipping and potential import duty it'd be about the same.

I got my blade form Mike at Clifton after I had an issue with my 51/2 but they had no cap irons left.


----------



## Racers (2 Aug 2013)

I did make a replacement cap for a Record SS chip breaker record-ss-cap-iron-t35102.html I guess the other part would be makeable as well.

Pete


----------



## Peter Capon (29 Oct 2020)

I think the Quangsheng Luban bench planes are based on the Stanley Bedrock type check if they will fit the Bailey type.


----------



## Racers (29 Oct 2020)

As an update to my Record No8 blade search I found a stay set No8 blade missing the end cap but I knocked up a replacement, so now it’s sporting an laminated stay set blade.

Pete


----------



## D_W (29 Oct 2020)

Another aside here - unless something has changed, the Wood River base plane irons were T10, which is similar to 1095 steel. They should have good toughness but at same hardness, will hold an edge less long than A2, and even a little less than O1. 

You can affect edge holding by increasing hardness, though - at least up to the point that an iron starts to chip. 

I'd imagine most of the perceived improvement is the decrease in feel that you get with a thick iron and cap iron (as in, if there's little bits of tearout, etc, you may not feel them with a thicker iron whereas pretty much everything is communicated to you on thinner irons...or thinner irons and lighter planes).


----------



## Derek Cohen (Perth Oz) (29 Oct 2020)

You are aware that Veritas make PM-V11 blades specifically for Stanley planes? These are a tad thicker than standard but fit without modifying the plane. These blades are the the very best on the market, bar none. 

Regards from Perth

Derek


----------



## Felix (30 Oct 2020)

Flinn-Garlick saws now own the rights to manufacture the Clifton plane. I have a No 5-1/2 Jack plane (bought from Clifton (Clico)) and I swapped the 2 piece cap iron for a single one from Flinns. Personally I prefer the single piece cap iron. If the plane bodies are grey they are made by Flinn-Garlick, if they are green they are made by Clico. Flinn-Garlick sell a No 7 Try plane - not sure if that blade will fit a No 8

With regards to blades - I would go for a Hock blade and cap-iron (they sell them as a pair) - if you have a Stanley plane they give them a new lease of life

Have a look here: Thomas Flinn & Co.

Cheers

Dean


----------



## Vann (30 Oct 2020)

bowmaster said:


> ...Flinn-Garlick sell a No 7 Try plane - not sure if that blade will fit a No 8...


No. 

The No.7 takes a 2 3/8" wide iron (~60mm), white the No.8 takes a 2 5/8" iron (~67mm).

Cheers, Vann.


----------



## johnnyb (30 Oct 2020)

I love my Japanese laminated iron.they are thin and just superb. quangsheng are good as well. I think there both water hardening. hock Clifton etc are o1 oil hardening and I find them underwhelming. not bad but not quite there 4 me.


----------



## D_W (31 Oct 2020)

I believe the Japanese laminated irons are blue 1 or blue 2. Not sure if blue is water or oil hardening, but it seems plain to us because it's closer to o1 than some of our more alloyed replacement irons. The laminated irons are decent, but they have some weird behavior under the microscope that limits their edge holding to be equal to good o1 (Carbides come out and scuff up the edge).


----------



## johnnyb (3 Nov 2020)

mine is about 20 years old now and its still a lovely iron. I wouldn't swap it for any replacement iron.( apart from t10)
they are in fact made from single side knife blank steel. the o1 blades ive used(Clifton and hock) are no where near as nice in fact I suspect the Clifton was so bad it was faulty!
maybe its the variability of these items that causes issues. also the fact they are thin and easy to sharpen helps.


----------



## Tony Zaffuto (3 Nov 2020)

Pat Leach has a couple of unused Clifton irons, one with the "StaySet" cap, on his list that was sent out yesterday. Believe the price was north of $100 for all three (not sure of price). Seem to remember one of the irons was for a #8.


----------



## thetyreman (3 Nov 2020)

the hock blades + cap iron are incredible, I got one earlier this year and it definitely out performs most old blades, I got the 01 because it's my favourite steel and dead easy to sharpen, they are expensive though! I'd like to try their A2 blade as well but I suspect it won't leave quite as nice of a finish, I don't mind sharpening every 20-30 minutes.


----------



## D_W (3 Nov 2020)

johnnyb said:


> mine is about 20 years old now and its still a lovely iron. I wouldn't swap it for any replacement iron.( apart from t10)
> they are in fact made from single side knife blank steel. the o1 blades ive used(Clifton and hock) are no where near as nice in fact I suspect the Clifton was so bad it was faulty!
> maybe its the variability of these items that causes issues. also the fact they are thin and easy to sharpen helps.



I think it's something in the alloy. I'll dig up a picture. The fact that the japanese blades with the fault will last as long as a good O1 blade covers it up, but it's lost potential.

When I tested irons, I found that the alloy was about 80% of potential edge life. As in, if you had a high speed steel alloy and it was a bit soft, it would still outlast the best of the o1 irons, but the behavior of the steel also follows the alloy a lot, so things can get in the way of getting the most out of anything more complicated than water hardening steel (that being the least picky about ideal planing conditions). 

water hardening steel (ward) lasted about 75% of 01 (blue steel is a lot like o1, but the laminated irons at higher hardness should have slightly better edge life than a decent western hardness O1 iron - maybe close to A2), O1 was about 80% of A2 (but far better at producing a finished surface in less than ideal conditions - close to water hardening) and then M2 was about 40% longer lasting than O1 and V11 (which is a carpenter stainless alloy) was about 25% longer lasting than M2 - or double that of the japanese and O1 irons and surprisingly left a much brighter surface. 

The non-powder metal alloyed blades generally failed the least uniformly, but it didn't seem to affect their edge life vs. older charts I've seen that a controlled japanese test produced. 

The japanese iron with its odd pock marks:






O1





chinese HSS:





A2:





notice the dark spots on the A2 - for some reason, A2 goes along fine for a while and then seemingly starts to shed its polish. This is the second time I've tested A2 irons a decade apart and several brands - they all do this. poor quality irons chip earlier. 

V11 was the clear winner in my test, but it was an ideal test in clean wood and I don't think the gap is nearly as large in rough wood or wood with any dirt in it - plus, it hones half as fast, and will probably result in the same issue that A2 has - A2 has a reputation for being chippy, but most of the chipping is due to the fact that it hones about half as fast (as does v11) as A2 and the average person will think they've honed all of the defects out of it honing 25 or 50% longer than they would with O1, but they'll have left defects. 

The blue and O1 irons hone faster and part of their reputation as being easier to get a finished surface off of is probably just because they hone fast enough for the average person to remove the damage they can see as well as the damage they can't see.


----------



## D_W (3 Nov 2020)

thetyreman said:


> the hock blades + cap iron are incredible, I got one earlier this year and it definitely out performs most old blades, I got the 01 because it's my favourite steel and dead easy to sharpen, they are expensive though! I'd like to try their A2 blade as well but I suspect it won't leave quite as nice of a finish, I don't mind sharpening every 20-30 minutes.



If you're planing wood that's come out of a machine and manage to hone off all of the damage, A2 works fine, but the proportion of its honing vs. the O1 and its wear just isn't a good bargain. (it'll potentially last 20-25% longer than the O1 iron, but it'll take more than 20-25% longer to hone. 

when I tested irons, I found that even I (who tend to hone more and probably more heavily than most) thought I had a defect free iron only to get a look at the edge under a scope and see tiny defects left. Defects lead to failure around the defect and sometimes lines right away on work. Once I went to the trouble of checking to make sure absolutely every defect was out of every alloy, all held up fine in clean planing and the minor defects on the edge didn't translate to anything big enough to see on the surface of wood. It was an eye opener for me (i'd always attributed early lines to nicking and poor performance, but I was the poor performer. To actually hone something like A2 twice as long as O1 is kind of agonizing, and it's slower grinding on the power grinder, which is also annoying). 

The hock O1 iron is a good iron, and would probably be a touch better if it was a point or two softer on the C scale (it would wear as long but be a little tougher).


----------



## johnnyb (3 Nov 2020)

that is some fascinating stuff. I love that the edge photography is so detailed. I'm 100% with you on a2 being a devil to get just so when honing. so much so that I only really get a reliable good edge after grinding. ie honing on stones as often as not doesnt perfect the edge. how did a2 become the goto Steel for boutique makers? sharpenability is the key not just a desirable thing. take carving chisels the best are easy to sharpen and take a good edge. even slightly softer than ideal is OK as long as they are easy to hone.


----------



## johnnyb (3 Nov 2020)

D_W did you test more than one of any iron? were the results the same or similar?


----------



## johnnyb (3 Nov 2020)

another thing occur to me that may make my smoothcut "experience" better is the feel of the planing. maybe the hardness makes them stiffer or flexible in a different way.


----------



## D_W (3 Nov 2020)

johnnyb said:


> D_W did you test more than one of any iron? were the results the same or similar?



I tested one of each for this test because each planed several thousand feet. I've had at least three of the laminated irons, though, and have experienced similar performance from each (about matching O1 despite higher hardness, but the lamination makes them relatively easy to sharpen). 

The little pocks that came out in the test for (these were tsunesaburo brand) probably slightly reduced edge life, but they aren't big enough to show up as lines on work, and my comments above about surface brightness is counter to what I expected. It was only easy to see the difference when using one iron after another and rotating them. 

Keep in mind that other than testing a hock O1 iron against my own make of O1 iron, my O1 is around 62/63 hardness, so it doesn't suffer the slightly lower keenness that a softer iron would per given finish level. 

A reader while I was putting the test together asked for me to test a hock O1 iron against mine since you can't buy my irons - but the O1 iron wasn't really the purpose of the test - the real purpose was to put a bunch of irons up against the V11, which hadn't been compared in any significant tests (the other irons were LN A2 - the best of the A2 irons, the japanese blue steel iron, high hardness high speed steel chinese iron (that was XRFed to find composition and it was just short of M2), CPM 3V and then in a second test, someone offered a CPM M4 iron - that just barely beat the V11 iron, but had much more cut friction.

The bits and pieces coming out of the japanese iron aren't likely a defect, it's likely an issue of the alloy/rolled steel used. The chinese iron had the same thing, but was less refined and the pocks were bigger. The A2 iron is cryo treated, so the way it "flaked" off looked different, and the powder metal irons had more of a gritty and more uniform look. 

For reference in terms of edge life, though, even though I was disappointed that the japanese iron shed those bits both in maple and beech, it still went 800 feet (in both) before not staying in the cut.


----------



## D_W (3 Nov 2020)

johnnyb said:


> another thing occur to me that may make my smoothcut "experience" better is the feel of the planing. maybe the hardness makes them stiffer or flexible in a different way.



Separate and aside, if you compare an iron that's 62-66 hardness against one that's high 50s like some vintage irons may be, the higher hardness iron will seem more keen and will perform better in harder woods if the shaving is thin. 

I don't know if I've done an outright comparison of 62 vs. 66, just noted the feel of a soft iron vs. any of the harder irons. 

(FWIW based on what I mentioned above, in an A/B test, my iron vs. hock, i believe mine planed 50 feet longer than the hock iron, which is very likely in the error range - I suspected the hock irons are a bit too hard and thought I could make an iron that would go longer just by making it a click softer, but not soft, and the reality in the test was that they just both felt similar - whatever the hock iron may give up on the edge very early because of the high hardness, that wears off pretty quickly and it settles in and mine wasn't really overall any better).


----------



## D_W (3 Nov 2020)

johnnyb said:


> that is some fascinating stuff. I love that the edge photography is so detailed. I'm 100% with you on a2 being a devil to get just so when honing. so much so that I only really get a reliable good edge after grinding. ie honing on stones as often as not doesnt perfect the edge. how did a2 become the goto Steel for boutique makers? sharpenability is the key not just a desirable thing. take carving chisels the best are easy to sharpen and take a good edge. even slightly softer than ideal is OK as long as they are easy to hone.



having made a bunch of irons and now getting into chisels, and talking to someone who I won't mention having a discussion with LN, I believe that at the time LN switched to A2, they couldn't harden their water hardening steel up to the slot, so they were hardening only the first inch of a plane iron assuming that few would get past it. 

Some professional users went through the first inch and asked them about it and they confirmed that they had warpage issues. 

George Wilson at the time had been using A2, so did a lot of knife makers, and so did karl holtey, so its stability was known. Rather than get into an optimized O1 iron (which would be easier than water hardening steel), LN switched to A2 and touted its abrasion resistance. It will plane more feet than any water hardening steel that I have, but it's less predictable in use and I'd rather use water or oil hardening steel (white is water hardening and blue is probably also water hardening but closer to O1 in composition and it feels like oil hardening steel on natural stones). 

So, long story short, I believe that it solved a manufacturing problem. 

George was toolmaker at Colonial williamsburg and a maker of a zillion things on the side - perhaps as good as any maker alive in the last 75 years. He experimented with A2 and had shuffled through sharpening stones at williamsburg (it was his responsibility to choose their supplies) and stocked stones that would sharpen it. I believe he said early/mid 90s was around that time for him, and holtey was probably close to that or not long after. 

At any rate, George mentioned the same to LN - that they should consider A2 - they didn't respond to his advice, but later went to it. They'd mentioned stability issues to him, too, and that was his suggestion. 

I probably have more than 100 sharpening stones in my drawers right now - it's kind of a fascination. It's not like I don't have things on hand that would sharpen A2, but looking under the scope, I found that after I could no longer see defects, I left lots of tiny ones in the iron edge and when i started counting strokes to see what it actually took to get them out vs. O1, no thanks. It wears on stones almost as slow as V11 but is not nearly as nice to use otherwise, and V11 takes about twice as many strokes on a diamond hone to remove the same amount of material. 

(Kees heiden also confirmed that by measuring metal abraded with a machine - i believe he made the machine assuming that abrasion resistance would yield proportional planing - and that's mostly true against O1 - but some steels are slow abrading and don't get a proportional gain - like A2).


----------



## SteL (9 Nov 2020)

After reading this thread I thought I'd give my plane an upgrade with a replacement Hock iron and chip breaker. I was quite happy with the originals but I thought it was worth an experiment!

When they arrived I was a bit disappointed that the edge on the iron had a tiny chip and the edge on the chip breaker was a bit messy. I understand they don't come ready to go, but not having a grinder meant I was in for a bout of RSI. After a workout session on my stones, I was very happy with the results. Even with my lack of skill I was able to take shavings thinner than I've been able to do before. Usually, if I try to get very thin shavings they become inconsistent. The shavings were that thin I could see through them...






This was my best effort with my old iron and chip breaker...






I've got no doubt that someone with more knowledge and skill could get those fine shavings with my old blades. Give it a month of my cack-handed sharpening and I'll have these new blades cranking out uneven thick shavings like the one above! I'm going to put a camber on the old blade and keep the new ones for fine shavings and only sharpen them using the honing guide.

Also, there's a great video on YouTube by David Charlesworth on prepping the chip breaker - that was a big help. I didn't try the ruler trick on the iron, though. I'll save that for another day of experimenting!


----------



## D_W (9 Nov 2020)

The missing link to getting shavings like that with older blades is generally using finer abrasives. The higher hardness irons (hock, etc) will take a shallower groove off of a similar abrasive, which results in a slightly sharper edge off of the same stones (and the higher hardness also means less foil, wire edge left behind). 

Stanley's irons have a temper that you'd pick if you were doing site work or maybe some heavier work (as in, if you were going to do jack plane work or plane through knots, I'd rather have the original iron - if you're going to do all smoothing and you have a sharpening routine you don't want to change, it'll probably be easier to get fine shavings out of a hock iron and the iron will wear a little bit longer due to the higher hardness). 

I used to make irons optimized to the washita so that it would barely cut them and the edge would be really fine. After this recent go around with the buffer, I found the buffer to cut so finely that it kind of eliminates the difference you're seeing (but it doesn't eliminate the fact that softer irons won't hold a really fine edge for long).


----------



## SteL (10 Nov 2020)

Thanks for that, D_W. I have been thinking of adding a finer stone (or 2). I only go up to 1000 grit (I think - whatever the fine Norton oil stone is!) at the moment before stropping. I am trying to keep it simple while I'm getting used to sharpening, though. I'm avoiding any fancy steels as that would require changing my sharpening setup and routine. When I do expand It'll be interesting to give the old blade a go on the finer abrasive.


----------



## D_W (11 Nov 2020)

There's no great reason (for purposes of productivity making things) to ever go up the ladder in steel. Most of the steels that wear a lot longer also sharpen and grind slower and are not as damage resistant in less than ideal conditions. 

If you had the good favor of doing nothing but smoothing long clean bits of wood, then the more exotic steels can keep the process going longer between sharpenings, but I still like the plain steels in most cases. I was wowed by V11 in testing in an ideal scenario (double the planed distance of O1, and in an abrasion test, abraded at half the speed - the two go together), but most of my planing is getting to the point of ideal use, and then the ideal planing is done in a couple of blinks, and V11 is probably the best alternative to old or O1. It's benefit is lost once the planing is less than ideal - I'd call it a toss up vs. O1 for anything other than ideal final smoothing. 

As far as going finer in stones, autosol on medium hardwoods is an ideal follow up to a 1k stone. There's probably not a synthetic stone that's more practical than that.


----------



## D_W (11 Nov 2020)

I'm sure I posted this somewhere on here, but I can't find it in this thread:

* Shapton cream (12k)





* Dursol (autosol looks the same, just don't have a picture on imgur).





* Lest there's some question about dursol's speed - here's 10 seconds after a mid stone (a little finer before this than a 1k stone).





That is, the fantastic surface finish on the back of the iron is available after a mid stone with 10 seconds of rubbing. No more than that on the bevel side. Dursol and autosol on wood both leave almost no wire edge (by that, I mean even microscopically) - there's no need to follow this with anything at all.

* 1 micron diamonds:





You would have to buy a sigma power 13k to get close to the look of the dursol or 1 micron diamond, but the SP 13k is much slower and it's a soft stone that's easily damaged, or the 30k shapton which is barely finer than the sigma power 13k at a much higher price (not a big deal if you want to spend the money on something like that, but a total waste of money if you don't - guru recommendations notwithstanding).

25 carats of 1 micron diamonds (years worth of diamond on a hard substrate like cast iron, maybe a decade) is about $10.


----------



## weekend_woodworker (17 Nov 2020)

D_W said:


> I'm sure I posted this somewhere on here, but I can't find it in this thread:
> 
> * Shapton cream (12k)
> 
> ...


Hi D_W, can I ask a daft question about the Autosol? How do you apply it? Do you just rub it on with a cloth or do you put it on a flat surface and then polish the blade on the surface?
Thanks,
Mark


----------



## D_W (17 Nov 2020)

Just put it on clean wood and then pull the iron bevel across the wood (obviously can't push it) or pull it diagonally oriented. Then work the back of the iron like you would on anything else with a little pressure bias toward the tip. 

The wood needs to be reasonably flat, but the reality is that your finest step isn't really that big of an issue with flatness - no stone follows it, so there's no harm to do. It either works (flat enough) or it doesn't (needs to be a little flatter). 

The wood gives the autosol a little bit of cushion (if the stuff isn't cutting fast enough, pick wood that's a bit harder - medium hardwoods and southern yellow pine here in the states work great - white pine and some of the other very soft woods don't have quite enough stiffness to be a backbone for the abrasive). 

Not a complicated thing, of course - just handy that it works well. 

For chisels, if you were to use autosol on the back and my buffer trick on the tip on the front after knocking the bevel angles down a few degrees, you're unlikely to buy anything at any price that will give a better edge (certainly a shapton 30k edge brought to a sharp point won't be nearly as durable if it matches keenness). 

Hard truth of expensive stuff - it's not necessarily better, and autosol on medium hardwood is faster than a shapton 30k. Given a money-even choice to use both, I'd rather use autosol or dursol - it's faster and I don't have to baby the wood or flatten it.


----------



## Andy Kev. (18 Nov 2020)

DW,

your data on the various steels is exhaustive and remarkable, especially the microscope images. However, I can imagine that the subject in general could be a bit daunting to a beginner who has perhaps never given much thought to the different types of steel - maybe he/she just thought there was steel and that's it.

So if somebody said to you, "I'm just starting and I've bought an LA jack, a No. 4, a No 7, a blockplane and I'm going to get some bench chisels and a paring chisel, which steels would you recommend for each?", what would your answer be? (Let us assume that this person is going to work with the usual softwoods like pine and conventional hardwoods like cherry, walnut and American poplar.)

Andy.


----------



## D_W (18 Nov 2020)

paring chisel - vintage English in good shape. There's nothing else the same now unless you can find someone to make a thin profile chisel like that. 

bench chisels - some bevel edge chisels of relatively plain steel that show in tests (wood by wright has a long list) to be 60-63 hardness or so. I'm not a fan of the basic narex chisels and anything softer (they need the unicorn trick to really hold a decent edge). 

No wondersteels in chisels (like V11 or A2, etc), they are abrasion resistant but carbon and hardness are all that's needed for good edge holding - abrasion resistance just makes chisels take longer to sharpen and they increase the chance that someone will burn an edge on a grinder as they don't abrade/spark off that easily and tons of heat builds up. 

(O1, Chrome Vanadium, Chrome Manganese, etc, they're all about the same - all fine. They're plain steel with some additives to make them more forgiving to harden. The names make them sound like they have a whole lot of something in them other than iron and carbon, but they don't).


----------



## weekend_woodworker (19 Nov 2020)

D_W said:


> Just put it on clean wood and then pull the iron bevel across the wood (obviously can't push it) or pull it diagonally oriented. Then work the back of the iron like you would on anything else with a little pressure bias toward the tip.
> 
> The wood needs to be reasonably flat, but the reality is that your finest step isn't really that big of an issue with flatness - no stone follows it, so there's no harm to do. It either works (flat enough) or it doesn't (needs to be a little flatter).
> 
> ...


Thanks D_W that sounds really straight forward. I’ll have to give it a go.


----------

