Over in a thread discussing the new Veritas combination plane, the question was raised of how practical combi planes are for rebating. Rather than widen that thread even more into a general discussion, I thought I'd do some experiments and discuss them in a separate thread. So here goes.
First out the box is a Record 050C from the 80s, with the blue plastic handle.
[A quick digression on models is useful here. The basic 70s/80s Record plough was the 044C. It had a single, square edged skate/body, a fence and no nickers. The 045C was the same, but with the skate chamfered and a nicker for cross-grain work. The 050C was a proper combination plane, having a chamfered body/skate, a second skate on a sliding section, a fence and two nickers. There was a conversion kit to make an 045C into an 050C, or you can do as I have and acquire some odd bits and fabricate others. ]
Here it is set up for rebating. Note that the sliding section skate (on the left) is very near the edge of the cutter. This distance is not adjustable, as the sliding section doubles up as a clamp to hold the cutter in place.
I wanted the second skate to rest on the wood, to limit the depth of cut. So my only choice was to set the fence in line with the edge of the cutter, and get the full 12mm width.
This did not go well. In practice, the left hand side was unsupported and unrestrained, so it dived down into the wood, removing untidy chunks.
I moved the fence out a little, so the second skate was properly on the wood. This was better, but what I was doing was actually ploughing a groove, so close to the edge that the little whiskers or extra wood mostly just crumbled away. You can see some here.
Next up, I tried the 044C. It's a simpler setup, with just the single, square edged skate. I set the fence to cover the edge of the cutter.
This worked reasonably well. Not having the extra support forced me to concentrate on holding the plane upright and pressed well in to the work.
I even managed to go back and widen my little rebate with the same cutter setting but the fence moved further out.
Next I tried an old Record 050. Like its newer version (the 050C) it has a chamfered skate on the body, a second one on a sliding section, and a fence which can be shifted over the edge. (As with the 050C, the sliding section is doubling up as the cutter clamp, so the position of the skate is fixed, very near the edge.)
Maybe it was because I was getting used to the technique, but this worked ok too.
On to the Record 405. On this plane, as with the Stanley 45, the cutter clamp is independent of the sliding section, so the second skate can be positioned wherever it is needed. This is essential when cutting asymmetrical mouldings but I found it was useful for a simple square rebate too. In this shot the fence is out of the way, for clarity
but here it is overlapping the outside edge, giving easy control of the width of the rebate, while still leaving the second cutter in view, where it can help control the thickness of the shaving.
Results were good, and the whole thing felt more certain and pleasant to handle. It didn't feel like a compromise.
Feeling thorough, and in the mood for spending time on this rather than all the other things I ought to be doing, I also pulled out the Stanley 55.
In this shot, it looks very similar to the 405 - you get the same independent positioning of the second skate.
However, one of several disadvantages/features of the 55 is that the second skate is not fixed coplanar with the first one. Here you can see the long threaded adjuster (with the left handed thread) which raises and lowers it.
Of course, you can try and make sure that you set it up and tighten the bits in position so they are one less thing to check, but there is a risk of slippage all the same. Consistency can't be found just by leaving bits off. (I should add that there is actually a third skate - the "auxiliary center bottom" as Stanley called it - which can fit between the other two. It has its uses on some of the more elaborate cutters, to avoid the "diving" problem I encountered back at the beginning of this post, but would only get in the way when rebating.)
I didn't really believe it until I bought one and tried it, but the amount of fiddling and setting up with the 55 is really a barrier to enjoying using it, if you just want to get on and cut a rebate.
In conclusion, let's remind ourselves of what Jacob has said so often - the simple Stanley / Record 78/078 is a good, robust plane. It has a fence and a depth stop to ensure that cuts are consistent. Off the shelf and off to work.
I'll leave unfenced planes and woodies for another day - this is an attempt to answer the question about combi planes being used for rebates.
Overall, it's a Yes. I have also confirmed my convictions that the 405 is a good, solid tool which stops short of needless overcomplexity and that any combination tool is a trade-off between performance and setup time.
First out the box is a Record 050C from the 80s, with the blue plastic handle.
[A quick digression on models is useful here. The basic 70s/80s Record plough was the 044C. It had a single, square edged skate/body, a fence and no nickers. The 045C was the same, but with the skate chamfered and a nicker for cross-grain work. The 050C was a proper combination plane, having a chamfered body/skate, a second skate on a sliding section, a fence and two nickers. There was a conversion kit to make an 045C into an 050C, or you can do as I have and acquire some odd bits and fabricate others. ]
Here it is set up for rebating. Note that the sliding section skate (on the left) is very near the edge of the cutter. This distance is not adjustable, as the sliding section doubles up as a clamp to hold the cutter in place.
I wanted the second skate to rest on the wood, to limit the depth of cut. So my only choice was to set the fence in line with the edge of the cutter, and get the full 12mm width.
This did not go well. In practice, the left hand side was unsupported and unrestrained, so it dived down into the wood, removing untidy chunks.
I moved the fence out a little, so the second skate was properly on the wood. This was better, but what I was doing was actually ploughing a groove, so close to the edge that the little whiskers or extra wood mostly just crumbled away. You can see some here.
Next up, I tried the 044C. It's a simpler setup, with just the single, square edged skate. I set the fence to cover the edge of the cutter.
This worked reasonably well. Not having the extra support forced me to concentrate on holding the plane upright and pressed well in to the work.
I even managed to go back and widen my little rebate with the same cutter setting but the fence moved further out.
Next I tried an old Record 050. Like its newer version (the 050C) it has a chamfered skate on the body, a second one on a sliding section, and a fence which can be shifted over the edge. (As with the 050C, the sliding section is doubling up as the cutter clamp, so the position of the skate is fixed, very near the edge.)
Maybe it was because I was getting used to the technique, but this worked ok too.
On to the Record 405. On this plane, as with the Stanley 45, the cutter clamp is independent of the sliding section, so the second skate can be positioned wherever it is needed. This is essential when cutting asymmetrical mouldings but I found it was useful for a simple square rebate too. In this shot the fence is out of the way, for clarity
but here it is overlapping the outside edge, giving easy control of the width of the rebate, while still leaving the second cutter in view, where it can help control the thickness of the shaving.
Results were good, and the whole thing felt more certain and pleasant to handle. It didn't feel like a compromise.
Feeling thorough, and in the mood for spending time on this rather than all the other things I ought to be doing, I also pulled out the Stanley 55.
In this shot, it looks very similar to the 405 - you get the same independent positioning of the second skate.
However, one of several disadvantages/features of the 55 is that the second skate is not fixed coplanar with the first one. Here you can see the long threaded adjuster (with the left handed thread) which raises and lowers it.
Of course, you can try and make sure that you set it up and tighten the bits in position so they are one less thing to check, but there is a risk of slippage all the same. Consistency can't be found just by leaving bits off. (I should add that there is actually a third skate - the "auxiliary center bottom" as Stanley called it - which can fit between the other two. It has its uses on some of the more elaborate cutters, to avoid the "diving" problem I encountered back at the beginning of this post, but would only get in the way when rebating.)
I didn't really believe it until I bought one and tried it, but the amount of fiddling and setting up with the 55 is really a barrier to enjoying using it, if you just want to get on and cut a rebate.
In conclusion, let's remind ourselves of what Jacob has said so often - the simple Stanley / Record 78/078 is a good, robust plane. It has a fence and a depth stop to ensure that cuts are consistent. Off the shelf and off to work.
I'll leave unfenced planes and woodies for another day - this is an attempt to answer the question about combi planes being used for rebates.
Overall, it's a Yes. I have also confirmed my convictions that the 405 is a good, solid tool which stops short of needless overcomplexity and that any combination tool is a trade-off between performance and setup time.
