Basic planes

[lurker]

Tony,

I don't believe you are being honest with yourself.

If someone ( when you started out) came along and said

"Tony mate, unless you immediately shell out on £500 worth of planes & £200 worth of chisels you arer wasting your time even thinking about getting involved in serious woodwork"

You would have taken it up???

I wouldn't even risk £30 worth of decent plane iron until I was confident of being able to sharpen it correctly.

I've seen the same sort of (sorry about this!!) snobbery with fly fishing. People try to convince you unlesss you spend a fortune on kit you are wasting your time, and so folks are frightened off. Because I bothered to learn, I can out cast (using a $30 Walmart rod) an aquaintance who owns a £ 800 one. Sure I lust after his rod but my £60 second hand (was the latest thing 7 years ago) is fine for me and if I break it then tough.

 

[dunbarhamlin]

If someone had given me a poke and said, "don't bother with those chisels, they're made of cheese," then I'd have saved a few bob, and a lot of time.

But, had I followed advice to get a PoS plane, which can't tuned to a decent level especially without the skills to do it, I may well have baulked at the first hurdle.

Same as when learning the violin, the beginner doesn't need an Amati, but a China special will need replacing sooner than later, if it doesn't put them off for life.

Old, tatty, but sound is I think a better option if they have access to a mentor.
At least one ready fettled or premium tool is worth while so they can understand what can be achieved - but that's going to be miserable if the other tools they have can't be brought up to snuff.

And heck, would have to really work at rendering a plane blade completely US.

Cheers
Steve

 

[LarryS.]

Tony,

Thanks for that advice, have to say I am sold. Just had a look on the axminster site though and they are out of stock. From all the advice I've seen I'm going to either go for a LN block plane or Veritas for a start, like you said I want to spend as much time possible woodworking and little time possible setting up tools when its not absolutely necessary - rather get in the ferrari and go driving than under the bonnet tuning a ford escort !

cheers

paul

 

[Anonymous]

"Tony mate, unless you immediately shell out on £500 worth of planes & £200 worth of chisels you are wasting your time even thinking about getting involved in serious woodwork"
.

Why not take what I said completely out of context? :roll: I suggested spending £50 on one of the best planes around that will work from the box (after a 20 second hone).



The answer to your question is an emphatic yes, I am being completely honest with myself.

I do not consider Lie Nielsen, Lee Valley or Clifton planes expensive at all. I spent two days 'tuning' a Stanley #5 and I get paid more in two days at work than the equivalent LN would have cost, therefore tuning the old plane does not make economic sense to me.
Also, I would suggest a quick look on ebay, where Lie Nielsen planes often sell for more second hand, than they cost new :shock: , and those that 'lose' money usually sell for close to their original price; if you decide to kick the hobby, I would guess that you would recoup around 75-90% of the money spent on new LN/LV planes


My entire set of LN/LV/Cliffy planes cost me less than many members spend on a single tablesaw or a planer thicknesser :shock:

Or how about cigarettes? I have never smoked. I do know that many people smoke 30 a day at say £3.50(?) a pack. So, £147 per month to burn tobacco. LV LA smoother anyone? costs less than a month's smoking and lasts a lifetime.

How much do people spend in a night down the pub? I don't really drink much beer (prefer a bottle of red with a nice meal and some friends), but beer is pretty expensive these days. A month's visits to the pub = one more plane? :lol: :lol:


There you go Lurker, I stand by what I said earlier, I do not consider these hand tools expensive. They last a lifetime, with a lifetime warranty. Worth every penny to me :wink:

 

[digitalbot]

Seen as the topic of planes has arisen, what do the number references mean on the planes. Is it something to do with the sole size?

 

[Digit]

If I'd had to spent that sort of money I sure as **** would still be collecting stamps!

Roy.

 

[MrJay]

Actually, if you don't mind I'm going to retract my advice about plane shopping and side with Philly. £100 will get you a block plane that'll work out the box and be easy to keep that way for the rest of your life. Bench planes are fussy, worry about them later.

digitalbot,
Yep, bench planes in the Stanley/Bailey tradition are typically numbered according to size; 1 being the smallest and 8 being biggest. Mostly it's in the length, but not always: a #5 1/2 differs from a #5 by being a bit wider. There are some oddities, like the Bedrock Bench Planes which use a variation of the numbering.

Planes 1 - 4 are intended for final smoothing, 5 and 6 are for rough work and fast stock removal while 7 and 8 are for getting things straight and true; though there's plenty of scope for variation and personal preference.

God might know the reasoning behind the numbering of Stanley's other planes, but I doubt it - ask him and see how long he takes to figure it out and get back to you.

 

[bugbear]

Old, tatty, but sound is I think a better option if they have access to a mentor.

And these days, mentors abound on this very inter-web ;-)

BugBear

 

[dunbarhamlin]

And these days, mentors abound on this very inter-web ;-)

Quite so, and input from your good self and others has been and continues to be invaluable to me. But as many operations and results can only be described qualitatively, getting someone in the flesh to demonstrate and then stand over you as you hone, saw, plane and pare can be a revelation, as whole banks of lightbulbs switch on: "Oo, press that hard," "Ahh, so that's what ssssssnick sounds like..." etc.

Cheers
Steve

 

[pobo]

think i'm with tony on this one, i pretty new to the slippery slop. i bought a stanley two years ago and put me off completely then inherited my grandads record no.50 , a little better, then for christmas my wife bought me LN no.5 and it the pride and joy of my workshop, and not just because it make me look like i know what i'm doing. it the write size for taking down rough sawn timber,adjust the mouth and it almost long enough for a bit of jointing. Its taken me about a couple of weeks to get use to sharpening the blade and get use to setting up. it worked wounders now and glad i went for LN. looking for a low angle block plane next, thinking of LV.

I not a hand tool purist either i think the right tool for the job is best. but using planes has given me a great understanding of then way wood works and needs to be worked. and taking rough saw down to planned ,with agood plane, is not as hard as you may think.

pete

 

[frugal]

I do not consider Lie Nielsen, Lee Valley or Clifton planes expensive at all. I spent two days 'tuning' a Stanley #5 and I get paid more in two days at work than the equivalent LN would have cost, therefore tuning the old plane does not make economic sense to me.

It all depends on how you want to bill your time. Yes, if you have to take two days unpaid leave to fix a plane, or miss a deadline by two days then it is more cost effective to go out and buy the better plane and not spend the two days. However if you are a hobbiest and arfe working in your free time with no deadlines then that two days does not cost anything.

I have a pair of no 4 and no 5 Stanley planes. Are they great planes? No. Are they good enough for the small pieces I work with? Just about as I also have a thicknesser. Am I going to upgrade them to better planes? Yes, as and when I figure out what I want to spend the money on. Are they top of my list? No, a decent set of sharpening stones and a guide are as there is no point spending £150 on a new plane if I can not sharpen the blade.

I am fairly certain that I need a block plane to square off boards, but I am not sure exactly what sort and I am quite happy to use the cheap planes I have for the moment to work out what it is I am missing.

 

[Anonymous]

I do not consider Lie Nielsen, Lee Valley or Clifton planes expensive at all. I spent two days 'tuning' a Stanley #5 and I get paid more in two days at work than the equivalent LN would have cost, therefore tuning the old plane does not make economic sense to me.

It all depends on how you want to bill your time. Yes, if you have to take two days unpaid leave to fix a plane, or miss a deadline by two days then it is more cost effective to go out and buy the better plane and not spend the two days. However if you are a hobbiest and are working in your free time with no deadlines then that two days does not cost anything..

I am a hobbiest and my day job is very far removed form woodwork, however, two days tuning a plane is two days wasted time when I can't do what I actually wanted to do - woodwork. It is very rare indeed that I get two full days in the workshop over a period of a month.

I can only cost my time at the rate my employer pays me, and that rate it is cheaper to buy the LN.


Also, in my original post I forgot to include the cost of a new chip breaker and new blade for the old Stanley (popular upgrades during tuning).
Thus, for the cost of a single day's wages, one can have a much better plane that works from the box (and has a warranty against defects - LN/LV will replace tools no questions asked if they are faulty in any way).


An example, I saw a Record #5 on the bay go for £30 (+£10 P&P)recently. A new chipbreaker (Clifton 2-piece) and Hock blade are around £45-50 when postage is included.
So, £85 and lets say 4-8 hours 'tuning' if it is a bit ropey.

Clifton #5 that works far better than the Record, and does so straight from the box costs £169 including P&P.


I suspect that many people 'tune' old planes because they simply want to 'tune' old planes, not to save money. You makes your choice and pays your money

Cheers

Tony

PS I do not understand why many people consider a LN/LV or Clifton plane expensive at £170 but a Xcalibre tablesaw fairly priced at over a grand :shock:

 

[Racers]

Hi, Tony

Most people would think twice at spending £170 on a plane, not everybody has that sort of cash to splash out on one item, people with large mortgages, kids and low paid jobs have trouble making ends meet. I showed people at work my Lie-Nelsen 60 ½ and they all thought it was nice but expensive, but they thought nothing of spending more on an Xbox!. Two days in the work shop fettling a plane is good problem solving time and all adds to your experience and motor skills.

Pete

 

[dunbarhamlin]

Compared to days of yore, good quality hand tools are inexpensive.
But whether one can sensibly factor in tune up time when comparing new with old really does depend on available funds.

The day's wages (compared to a week or more in times gone by) that a new tool may cost will for many already be ring fenced for more mundane requirements (food, lodging and so on) in which case free time can't be factored in to the cost if funds for a tool must be found.

I remember scrimping for a couple of months before hitting the button for a Clico #7 (and then feeling guilty,) but am contemplating several similar purchases this month alone - similar income then and now, but very different circumstances.

The priority has to be a functioning tool at the end of the day - either payed for in cash for an instant fix (Clico/LN/LV (trivial risk, significant outlay) or reputable supplier reconditioned oldie (some risk, moderate outlay) or with one's own time. The latter won't break the bank, but does have an inherent risk and new skillset to develop before putting edge to grain.

Since I can afford the quick fix, I like to support modern toolmakers when it's an option (I've only reconned one metal bench plane for myself - a Record T5.) But it's like organic food - not for everyone, whether by preference or pocket.

Cheers
Steve

 

[Oryxdesign]

The priority has to be a functioning tool at the end of the day - either payed for in cash for an instant fix (Clico/LN/LV (trivial risk, significant outlay) or reputable supplier reconditioned oldie (some risk, moderate outlay) or with one's own time. The latter won't break the bank, but does have an inherent risk and new skillset to develop before putting edge to grain.

Since I can afford the quick fix, I like to support modern toolmakers when it's an option (I've only reconned one metal bench plane for myself - a Record T5.) But it's like organic food - not for everyone, whether by preference or pocket.

Cheers
Steve[/quote

Nicely put

 

[Chris Knight]

As far as costing one's time is concerned, I think there is an argument for costing holiday and other "free" time in inverse proportion to the fraction of total time it represents.

Thus if I (say) have 2 weeks holiday in a 52 week year, my holiday time is worth 52/2 = 26 times my other time.

Of course this is a gross simplification that makes no allowance for weekends, evenings etc. but accord it no monetary value is dead wrong in my view.

 

[frugal]

I suspect that many people 'tune' old planes because they simply want to 'tune' old planes, not to save money. You makes your choice and pays your money

I must confess that I bought the planes that I have because I did not know any better. Had I known then what I know now, I would probably have just bought a decent block plane and left it at that

PS I do not understand why many people consider a LN/LV or Clifton plane expensive at £170 but a Xcalibre tablesaw fairly priced at over a grand :shock:

I think a lot of it is the law of diminishing returns and the perceived complexity of the product. People can look at a table saw and see the number of complex moving parts and see a reason why this £1,000 saw with a sliding table and super micro adjustable fence is worth more than this £500 saw with just a small aluminium table. But to a lot of people a plane is just a thing to hold a blade at a fixed angle and that a Clifton/LV/LN plane is just the same as a Stanley or Record, but made from more expensive materials to justify the higher cost.

Personally I would like to try the different planes and see how they work for me, so I will probably try to get to one of the Axminster or Yandles events this summer if possible.

Plus having a leaking garage roof in the old house that ruined a lot of tools I would feel really guilty if I let a LV/LN work of art get spoiled.

I still am waiting to see what this years bonus is like to see if I can afford the £140 to repair the bandsaw never mind buy new tools

 

[bugbear]

As far as costing one's time is concerned, I think there is an argument for costing holiday and other "free" time in inverse proportion to the fraction of total time it represents.

Thus if I (say) have 2 weeks holiday in a 52 week year, my holiday time is worth 52/2 = 26 times my other time.

Of course this is a gross simplification that makes no allowance for weekends, evenings etc. but accord it no monetary value is dead wrong in my view.

Of course, in the case of many other hobbies this time/money argument is meaningless. Nobody tries to save money by playing golf, football, etc.

Assuming one is a hobby woodworker, surely the consideration is total expenditure divided by total enjoyment (howsoever measured)?

I happen to be lucky - I simply enjoy being creative in my workshop, and make no distinction between household tasks, metalwork, woodwork or tool restoration.

BugBear

 

[johnnyb]

i think that beginners should start at the beginning and usually that involves buying older tools and making them work. to skip this stage completely is to miss a stage that is informative in itself. metalworking and wood working are brothers in arms. to imagine that it is possible to buy any tool and not have to spend time fettling and setting up is wrong at all levels. and the adjustment has to occur throughout the items lifetime. to skip this stage is to skip the realisation that adjustment is a constant necessity for accurate working. for me anyway this occured at a very young age trying and failing to sharpen a chinese chisel and wondering why? its a chisel why wont it sharpen. then i tried to harden and temper it using instructions from the metalworking section of the same book that recommended i buy a chisel.... still no joy. i then realised that the tool was low carbon steel and would never become sharp, but how much did i learn from this piece of junk.

 

[Oryxdesign]

i think that beginners should start at the beginning and usually that involves buying older tools and making them work. to skip this stage completely is to miss a stage that is informative in itself. metalworking and wood working are brothers in arms. to imagine that it is possible to buy any tool and not have to spend time fettling and setting up is wrong at all levels. and the adjustment has to occur throughout the items lifetime. to skip this stage is to skip the realisation that adjustment is a constant necessity for accurate working. for me anyway this occured at a very young age trying and failing to sharpen a chinese chisel and wondering why? its a chisel why wont it sharpen. then i tried to harden and temper it using instructions from the metalworking section of the same book that recommended i buy a chisel.... still no joy. i then realised that the tool was low carbon steel and would never become sharp, but how much did i learn from this piece of junk.

This was my point entirely, it is also better to learn on a cheaper tool that you are not scared to try stuff on than an expensive one you are scared to ruin. I was about to start buying some better planes but this thread has actually put me off. I have a stanley 9 1/2 that I have probably spent hours on over the last 15 years and it cuts well, I think. I'm sure I could select my plane out of a whole bunch of others and I used to it. I am curious about how good a LN or veritas version is but now only curious.