40 1/2 scrub plane..

[Anonymous]

Lee Valley do one too:

http://www.leevalley.com/wood/page.asp?page=46873&category=1,41182&ccurrency=2&SID=

That is the ECE I mentioned earlier. LV and many others sell them. High quality, low price and fun!

 

[Midnight]

The parcel cleared customs this morning.....

<checks the watch......... drums fingers....... looks out the window......checks the watch.....

 

[Alf]

Thought this thread showing a conversion of a jack to a scrub might be of interest. Those shavings really aren't scrub-a-like at all though.

Cheers, Alf

 

[Anonymous]

mmmm... good idea for my chinese #5 (but with a veritable Stanley iron).

Now... Alf, what's the point of rounding the fore lip of the mouth ?

Second question: how to re-bevel the iron (as in the American thread) without making a whole mess ?

Cheers
Alberto

 

[Alf]

Alberto,

Now... Alf, what's the point of rounding the fore lip of the mouth?

I assume to allow plenty of space for the thick chips which tend to be that shape in cross section (thickest in the middle, curving away towards the edges). Although, if the mouth is big enough, I don't suppose it matters much.

Second question: how to re-bevel the iron (as in the American -thread) without making a whole mess?

Well I can't speak for doing it on a Bailey iron, but what I did on my #40 1/2 was:
-Select a radius. I chose 3" in the end, if I recall correctly. Advice in the Porch Archive seemed to vary between 2 and 3" and I reckoned it was easier to grind it tighter if I wanted to, than the other way round. :roll:
-Draw it out on a piece of card, and cut it out.
-Scribble marker pen over the back of the blade, offer up your radius template and scratch round it into the marker pen ink.
-Set grinder rest so you're grinding straight across the edge, no bevel angle at all, and freehand the curve down to the guideline.
-Then set the grinder rest to the desired angle and put a bevel on the curve.
-Freehand hone the bevel as usual (hey Mike, you're gonna have to learn to freehand hone after all :shock: )
Resulting in:

This is definitely a case of "If I can do it, anyone can"; heck, I even used the hand cranked grinder so it was one handed. :lol: And of course, the actual quality of the edge isn't very important anyway in this case, so it's nothing to worry about. Have fun.

Cheers, Alf

 

[Anonymous]

Hice one Alf

I have an oold Record #4 - by the end of the weekend I hope to have a Record Scrub!!

Do you remove the chipbreaker when converting as the LN doesn't have one?

Cheers

Tony

 

[Alf]

Do you remove the chipbreaker when converting as the LN doesn't have one?

On the whole, I'd think not. You might have to set it back quite a way though, but it'll still give a bit of additional rigidity to the blade I think. Ideally a suitably sized iron from a woodie would be good, 'cos of the additional thickness. I really don't know for sure though, 'cos I've never done it!

Cheers, Alf

P.S. How old a Record #4? Not "old" old I hope? :shock:

 

[Anonymous]

No, not 'old', just 4 years - retired when i got the 4 1/2

Cheers

Tony

 

[Alf]

Phew!

 

[Anonymous]

To be a little more accurate, opening up the mouth of a #4 or #5 and putting a camber in the blade makes these planes jack planes not scrubs.
The 3" radius Alf put on her plane is pretty close to my most agressive #5. If you put any more camber in, the chipbreaker either extends over the ends of the blade or you run out of room on the the depth adjustment.

A chipbreaker really has no place on a scrub plane because the shavings (if you can call them that) aren't fragile enogh for the chipbreaker to have any effect other than clogging.

My scrub has a much more agressive camber. I don't try to grind on a radius, I just put in the amount of camber I want (about 1/8" on a jack, 3/16" or so on a scrub) and grind somewhat symetrically. (I use a hand grinder, too, Alf!) On these planes (jack and scrub) only the center portion of the blade cuts so there isn't any need to be critical. This goes back to my assertion that there is no need for LN type precision on bench planes. If you try to prep wood in .001" increments, you will never get a board 4 squared and I'm too slow as it is.

What I do think is helpful on the LN scrub is the thick A2 blade. With no frog or chipbreaker to stabilze the blade, a scrub blade vibrates a lot. Since the cut is focused to a small area in the center of the blade, it is under much more strain than other plane blades and it gets HOT! The thicker, tougher A2 LN blade should have a big advantage over the Stanley blade in edge retention.

 

[Alf]

A chipbreaker really has no place on a scrub plane because the shavings (if you can call them that) aren't fragile enogh for the chipbreaker to have any effect other than clogging.

Agreed - kind of. But backing off the cap iron well away from the edge would solve any problems.

My scrub has a much more agressive camber.

Is that the camber it came with, Roger? I was just wondering because the Old Tool List Archive was extremely contradictory on this! I ended up going with what L-N put on theirs (they must know something, right? :wink: )

Really what it boils down to I think, is that a converted jack just isn't the same as a real scrub, but it's better than nothing (or the sofa if LOYL finds out you've ordered an L-N...). And timber being the price it is over here, you don't really want to get too carried away with a scrub anyway. :shock: :lol:

Cheers, Alf

 

[Anonymous]

And timber being the price it is over here, you don't really want to get too carried away with a scrub anyway. :shock: :lol:

Cheers, Alf

Amen to that!! :wink:

Cheers

Tony

Who will be making a #4 into a scrub if he ever gets out of this office tonight :evil:

 

[Bean]

Ohh I dont know about that Alf, Tony.......It can be quite cheap :wink:

GLOAT GLOAT GLOAT GLOAT GLOAT


In case you missed it :lol:


Bean

 

[Anonymous]

A chipbreaker really has no place on a scrub plane because the shavings (if you can call them that) aren't fragile enogh for the chipbreaker to have any effect other than clogging.

Agreed - kind of. But backing off the cap iron well away from the edge would solve any problems.

On my Stanleys. if you back the cap iron away over 1/8", the adjuster doesn't have enough travel to withdraw the blade fully.

My scrub has a much more agressive camber.

Is that the camber it came with, Roger? I was just wondering because the Old Tool List Archive was extremely contradictory on this! I ended up going with what L-N put on theirs (they must know something, right? :wink: )

Yes, I've stayed with the camber as I recieved it because it works just right for my woods. I have no idea what the original camber was. I remember that conversation on the Porch but at that time I had no scrub plane for comparison. I have had four #40's since and they were all radiused to about 2" except for one which had been ground nearly straight across :lol: . One of the #40's appeared unused and I'm pretty sure it had the factory grind on the edge. Have you checked your #40 1/2?

Really what it boils down to I think, is that a converted jack just isn't the same as a real scrub, but it's better than nothing (or the sofa if LOYL finds out you've ordered an L-N...). And timber being the price it is over here, you don't really want to get too carried away with a scrub anyway. :shock: :lol:
Cheers, Alf

What you call a "converted jack" is what I call a true jack and I think it is the most under appreciated tool of all. I keep 2 #5's and 2 #5 1/2's under my bench with cambers ranging from 1/8" down to a few thousandths and are my most used planes. One of them will be appropriate for any project I work on.

I agree about not getting carried away with a scrub! A couple of months ago I turned 16 feet of rough 4"x4" black willow into finshed 3"x3" stock and I was grateful for the fast cutting scrub but I don't use it unless I need to remove more than 1/8" from a board. At that point a jack plane is the appropriate tool.

I have purchased a great deal of lumber for very little cost but most of it is rough and out of wind so the scrub and jack planes get a workout. It also makes any project a long term affair so I'll be buying finished lumber from now on :lol: .

 

[Alf]

What you call a "converted jack" is what I call a true jack

Ah, the murky waters of terminology. I'm assuming a certain degree of taking a file to the mouth and so forth when I describe it as a converted jack. Although I think a lot of us, myself included, don't have as an aggressive a camber on the jack iron as perhaps we should, now you come to mention it. Good point. Oh, and it occurred to me a source for a possible scrub-a-like; the humble, and frequently depth stop and fenceless, #78 rebate plane. Nice narrow iron, solid frog. Worth a shot anyway, if anyone has one spare about the place. (Who? Me? )

Oops, nearly forgot. My scrub came with a straight ground iron, thus giving me nothing to go on.

Cheers, Alf

 

[Anonymous]

My apologies, Alf. I missed the part about filing the mouth open which would help alleviate the chipbreaker problems. Another candidate would be the lowly modern Stanley SB planes.

Finding specific information on the amount of camber to be used in plane blades is frustrating. Bernard Jones in "The Practical Woodworker" recommends a "bare 1/8" " for jack planes and the trying plane "not as much" and no mention of scrub planes. And this is the most specific I've found! Garrett Hack in "The Handplane Book" lists cambers of .001" for smoothers and jacks (!) and cambers from 1/64" - 1/8" for rough jacks and scrubs. R. A. Salaman doesn't mention blade cambers at all and Graham Blackburn just says jack plane blades should be "fully rounded" and scrubs "markedly rounded". Mr. Blackburn also says scrubs came about in the 19th century as a specialty plane but there is evidence they were used earlier than that on the Continent, particularly in Germany. They were referred to as roughing, cow, scud, and scurf planes and the German horned variety were known as "Bismarks" in Britain.

Jim Kingshott didn't use a scrub but a wooden jack plane with an agressively cambered blade sufficed very well for him. I don't have any documentation on the setup.

Because of this lack of information, I feel many people are missing out on much of the fun of planing. Planes with cambered irons are easy to set and use even for beginners and plane sole flatness isn't much of an issue so old metallic and wooden planes can be used effectively.

Smoothing planes and jointing planes (jointers, block, rabbet, etc) need to be sharpend straight across but planes used for stock prep should all have some camber.

 

[Alf]

My apologies, Alf. I missed the part about filing the mouth open which would help alleviate the chipbreaker problems.

Probably because I neglected to mention it...

Another candidate would be the lowly modern Stanley SB planes.

Possibly all they're good for. :roll:

Finding specific information on the amount of camber to be used in plane blades is frustrating.

D'you know, I've never really studied the issue? Hmm, might have to see fi I can find what Charles Hayward says, if anything. "Planecraft" suggests 1/64" - 1/32" for "coarse or rough work", which seems a bit light. I suppose the influence of machine-prepared timber must effect the suggested camber, so perhaps we need something pre-machinery. :?

Because of this lack of information, I feel many people are missing out on much of the fun of planing. Planes with cambered irons are easy to set and use even for beginners and plane sole flatness isn't much of an issue so old metallic and wooden planes can be used effectively.

Right. The campaign starts here.

Smoothing planes and jointing planes (jointers, block, rabbet, etc) need to be sharpend straight across but planes used for stock prep should all have some camber.

<buzz> Objection! Oh deary me, we're going to fall out over uncambered jointer irons... :shock:

Cheers, Alf

 

[Anonymous]

<buzz> Objection! Oh deary me, we're going to fall out over uncambered jointer irons...

Fall out? No! I think we're dancing in step to the "terminology tango" :lol: . I prefer the terms "fore plane" or "try plane" for those planes over 18" with cambered blades and "jointer" for those planes that actually cut the surfaces to be glued or joined. I keep two #7's handy, one with a cambered iron for "trying" and one with a straight iron for jointing or flattening large surfaces. I keep my #8's honed straight across because I use them for match planing. Using a cambered iron for match planing would create a mess.

Hand tool terminology inconsistency is another barrier to those starting out with hand tools. Most of us will pick a book or other publication and take the author's opinions as gospel. Then we'll find another "authority" who takes a different tangent. Of course the terminology has been affected by time, location and technology.

 

[Alf]

I think we're dancing in step to the "terminology tango" :lol:

Ah, I like that one.

I prefer the terms "fore plane" or "try plane" for those planes over 18" with cambered blades and "jointer" for those planes that actually cut the surfaces to be glued or joined. I keep two #7's handy, one with a cambered iron for "trying" and one with a straight iron for jointing or flattening large surfaces.

Hmm, I think maybe we are disagreeing you know. Now this may be hard for some people to believe, but I only have one #7 (yes, it's true :shock: I did have a second once, but I was pursuaded to part with it. A black day indeed). It has a slightly cambered iron, and it gets used for trying, jointing, big a** smoother etc etc. Just the one iron, no swap outs for uncambered alternatives or anything. Now while I'm right on board the idea of needing more tools :wink: , does this ever-so-tiny camber really make any difference to the joining of two boards? Unless, of course, you favour a rubbed joint, in which case perhaps it does? Crumbs, this is hard brainwork for a Sunday afternoon! :shock:

Cheers, Alf

 

[Anonymous]

Now while I'm right on board the idea of needing more tools , does this ever-so-tiny camber really make any difference to the joining of two boards?

I couldn't tell you as I haven't tried. If you have successfully made edge joints like this then I would say the proof is in the pudding. Do you stand the boards on edge and check the face alignment with a straightedge? It seems to me the slightly hollowed edge would make that tricky.

After I square edges with the try plane, I clamp two boards to the bench and match plane the edges which requires a straight across blade. Here is a good place for the wider blade of the #8. I'm looking for an even longer woody jointer with a wider blade.

Graham Blackburn and Garrett Hack advocate straight across edges on jointers. Bernard Jones says the jointer is just a longer try plane without saying if the blade profile remains the same.