Tyzack router plane question

[nabs]

I got hold of a Tyzack router plane last year - I cleaned it up and stuck it on a shelf where it has sat since then. Last week I actually had a job where I could use it, only to find out it would not cut. In the end it was not difficult to fix - the first problem was that although the iron was sharp it had a back bevel that stopped it cutting. After I corrected that it would cut but not very cleanly as the sole was not at all flat - it had a small twist and a hump in the middle.

it did not take long to flatten and it works nicely now, but I have noticed something else odd. As far as I know the plane is a copy of a preston model that allowed the iron to be reversed or mounted on the handle posts, and indeed it has channels for the iron at each of these points.

What is odd is that these other slots are not as deep as the primary one, and this means the iron will not engage with the adjusting wheel (see pic).

I think I must be missing something obvious - who can enlighten me?

PS the only reference I could find to this plane says the sole was "brassed" - does anyone know how/why? (no evidence of brass colour on my sole,btw).

 

[AndyT]

How odd.

I can't see a good reason for that. Maybe it's just a machining error that slipped through. I'd like to say that I have one to compare, but that's not likely now that nice Mr Sellers has pushed the price up above £100.

How deep are the slots on the handle posts? If you unscrew a handle, can you insert the adjuster stem instead and use it in an end position, if you ever needed to?

 

[nabs]

all the slots, (bar the one that works!) - , including the ones in the handle posts - are shallow like the one in the pic. I haven't tried to measure them, but they all appear the same size. Wobbly sole aside, it does seem well made so I would guess it is by design. it is odd.

PS they do occasionally show up on ebay at a reasonable price but I had to wait for one that was in a very poor photo and just described as 'metal plane' (I got it for £44, which I think is good value!)

 

[bugbear]

Long ago, I saw one of these as a car boot (no blades, just the casting and handles), for £1.

I didn't buy it, because it wasn't Preston. Oops.

BugBear

 

[Andy Kev.]

This is probably a daft suggestion but could it be that a previous owner fitted the plane with a blade that is too big for the side posts i.e. the one you have is not the original?

 

[MikeK]

Is it possible that the channel in the handle is used to hold a fence?

 

[DoctorWibble]

Hi Nabs
I have one of these. I've just checked and on my copy the blade can be mounted easily enough in all four positions with the adjuster engaged. Mind you looking at the thing a bit more closely I can see that the slots do all vary a little in depth. I can see too that the second slot on my main pillar doesn't align with the main one. It's cut maybe a millimetre off centre. That's poor! Fortunately for me for me none of this sloppy machining appears material to the function of the plane and so I hadn't noticed it until now.
But - and this might make you feel better - that might've been because I've been too distracted by the twist in my sole which is severe enough to make the plane rock from corner to corner. I would hazard a guess that twist is a common hazard with this open frame casting and one of the reasons no-one (bar Tyzack) bothered copying a Preston design which, otherwise, has a lot going for it.
Anyway despite these being fairly rare (I think we can see why) I can't see any reason why you shouldn't attack your slots with a file and correct the dodgy machining. Obviously try and find a file with a safe edge so you don't accidently widen the slot as well as deepen it. But you can't really do a worse job than Tyzack considered good enough to box up and sell.
Cheers
Ken

 

[DoctorWibble]

Another thought occurs. If you do file it deeper be sure to make sure that all the slots are in plane at right angles to the sole. Otherwise you'll get a poor cut in those that don't present the blade to the workpiece at the correct angle. I might have another look at my own one - I'm no longer confident Tyzack would've managed that from the factory. While I did play around moving the blade to the handle positions when I first got it but haven't as yet actually worked it in anything other than its normal position.

 

[AndyT]

I reckon this thread is a handy reminder that not all unusual, collectable tools are good to use.

I suspect the extra cutting positions this model offered are one of those features that looked good in a catalogue but is actually no real advantage in practical usage.

 

[bugbear]

I reckon this thread is a handy reminder that not all unusual, collectable tools are good to use.

I suspect the extra cutting positions this model offered are one of those features that looked good in a catalogue but is actually no real advantage in practical usage.

I don't quite follow your reasoning or conclusion; this thread is about manufacturing quality; the features (for better or worse) haven't been touched on.

BugBear

 

[AndyT]

I reckon this thread is a handy reminder that not all unusual, collectable tools are good to use.

I suspect the extra cutting positions this model offered are one of those features that looked good in a catalogue but is actually no real advantage in practical usage.

I don't quite follow your reasoning or conclusion; this thread is about manufacturing quality; the features (for better or worse) haven't been touched on.

BugBear

Sorry, I'm veering off at a bit of a tangent. But if Nick only wants to use the ordinary, default cutter position on his router, then the under-machined grooves in the other positions don't matter.

You can probably guess that I'm also working on convincing myself that I don't need one of these routers to do any routing!

 

[Andy Kev.]

I reckon this thread is a handy reminder that not all unusual, collectable tools are good to use.

I suspect the extra cutting positions this model offered are one of those features that looked good in a catalogue but is actually no real advantage in practical usage.

... unless of course you can perfect the design by engineering all the faults out of it, something which it appears a small US firm called Walke Moore Tools has done (at a price of course):

http://www.walkemooretools.com/shop/rou ... odel-2500/

It's had very good reviews and the side posts are modified in such a way that its usefulness appears to have been enhanced.

 

[DoctorWibble]

I suspect the extra cutting positions this model offered are one of those features that looked good in a catalogue but is actually no real advantage in practical usage.

I vaguely remember we've waltzed down this road before. Anyway I think you're largely right. The end positions are perpendicular to the main one which I found rather limits their usefulness. Besides once you're done with all the screwing and unscrewing of handles it's quicker just to pick up a chisel or fix the router to a wide base.

 

[DoctorWibble]

That boutique version looks to have fixed my gripe about the cutting direction on the outer positions. Interesting that they appear to use the same diagonally orientated cutter design as the Veritas/Stanley/Record routers. A sensible choice so long as they're the same size. Though I have to say a bit annoying from the pov of Preston/Tyzack owners. The biggest drawback of the Preston and Tyzack design is that no modern cutters fit and of course original cutters are impossible to find leaving you stuck with those that came with the plane when you found it.
Anyway however well engineered such Preston copies might be a conventional router with an added base will do the same thing for less money and probably less faffing around.

 

[nabs]

thanks all - I took another look today and all the other slots are wrong in the same way - they appear to have been milled (?) precisely and hold the iron vertically without any lateral movement, but they are not deep enough to allow the iron to engage with the adjustment wheel. It is hard to avoid the conclusion that it was not made properly.

re. functionality, I am probably the least qualified to comment, but here goes! Being able to reverse the iron on the central post effectively gives you an open and closed throat router in one tool. Surely a good idea, if you are into that kind of thing!

the outward facing handle position could be useful on a long tenon, as it is quite a heavy plane and it would be easier to balance with more of it on the workpiece. Admittedly it would only work for reasonably deep shoulders since the so;e would interfere with the blade at smaller settings. I wonder if they had irons available with a slot cut in the side so they could be used sideways on?

Of course none of these wonders are available in my case!

 

[AndyT]

If they are all wrong, maybe you have the adjuster wheel from an ordinary No 71 router, but need a bigger one?

 

[nabs]

that is a good thought Andy, but they are all wrong apart from the one on the central post that faces towards the closed throat, which is a perfect fit.

 

[Sheffield Tony]

that is a good thought Andy, but they are all wrong apart from the one on the central post that faces towards the closed throat, which is a perfect fit.

Perhaps that's the one that has been filed deeper to make an undersized adjuster work :wink:

 

[AndyT]

that is a good thought Andy, but they are all wrong apart from the one on the central post that faces towards the closed throat, which is a perfect fit.

Perhaps that's the one that has been filed deeper to make an undersized adjuster work :wink:

Now that sounds like a good explanation.

If Nabs and DoctorWibble could measure the adjusters, we could confirm the suggestion.
Nabs could make a bigger adjuster, or just manage without one if he ever does need to use the alternative positions.

 

[bugbear]

that is a good thought Andy, but they are all wrong apart from the one on the central post that faces towards the closed throat, which is a perfect fit.

Perhaps that's the one that has been filed deeper to make an undersized adjuster work :wink:

Now that sounds like a good explanation.

If Nabs and DoctorWibble could measure the adjusters, we could confirm the suggestion.
Nabs could make a bigger adjuster, or just manage without one if he ever does need to use the alternative positions.

And this, boys and girls, is what forums are for!

BugBear