Benchwayze
Established Member
Quansheng. Comparable with the big two but much more realistically priced. Failing that Record 1950s Finally a Stanley 1950s. Both abundant on eBay.n
John
John
3, The wooden try was a pleasure, the heavy camber ment I could (timber dependent) take 1/6" off each pass ...
Matt
I have both the (Workshop Heaven - which sells a better spec than Rutlands 'equivalent') LA Jack and a Wood River 5 1/2.I have a Quangsheng low angle jack and find it a very good plane. I don't think I would get it first, the 5 1/2 or even 5 is more versatile and very useful. But the variable angles one gets with the three blades are useful for handling different types of grain.
BTW for shooting board work, the sole does not have to be square or even flat. The edge of the blade does. The sole plays virtually no part in a shooting board action, just the bottom of it runs along the straight edge.
I agree with this. I used a converted plane as a scrub for a long time and it worked. I then received a LN 40 ½ as a birthday present and it is simply a pleasure to use. Much less effort as the blade is considerably narrower making it possible to take very deep cuts to get to where you want to be really quickly.I would seriously consider a proper Scrub rather than converting a no4. They are easier to use, and as a consequence get used more.
Can you explain more about that? EG Why is a narrower blade better than a wider blade with a more pronounced camber so that the effective width is the same as a narrower blade?I used a converted plane as a scrub for a long time and it worked. I then received a LN 40 ½ as a birthday present and it is simply a pleasure to use. Much less effort as the blade is considerably narrower making it possible to take very deep cuts to get to where you want to be really quickly.
The camber on a 40 ½ is massive as well as the blade being narrow and very thick. This means you can sink it in very deep. It produces deep furrows in the wood which seem to make subsequent passes easier. The effort involved with my 40 ½ is, or at least seems to be, much less than using a heavily cambered blade in a 4 for example. I’ll upload a video of it in action when I get a chance.Can you explain more about that? EG Why is a narrower blade better than a wider blade with a more pronounced camber so that the effective width is the same as a narrower blade?
I have never used a "proper" scrub plane. My scrub is a converted (cheap) No 4. It seems to work OK but I have nothing to compare it with.
Here is me flattening a board for a box using the 40 ½ and a No 5 and a panel plane.The camber on a 40 ½ is massive as well as the blade being narrow and very thick. This means you can sink it in very deep. It produces deep furrows in the wood which seem to make subsequent passes easier. The effort involved with my 40 ½ is, or at least seems to be, much less than using a heavily cambered blade in a 4 for example. I’ll upload a video of it in action when I get a chance.
There is nothing wrong with the adapting approach. That’s what I did for 30 years.
If I've read your post correctly then the 5 1/2 will be your only bench plane? Are you starting with rough sawn or par timber?
If prepping rough sawn you are going to get very fed up very quickly, as others have said a 5 1/2 is (and in my opinion) far too heavy for dressing rough timber. I have tried several planes, here are my thoughts on the common choices. 1. a no4 converted to a scrub, 2. a 5 with a cambered iron and 3. a wooden try plane with a 10" radius iron, these were all used quite extensively before I had machines to do the grunt. Here is my 2p worth,
1, the no4 scrub was great at whipping timber off in very shot order but I found I had to check frequently that i was staying flat and not creating a banana. 2, The no5 with a cambered iron was easier to keep the timber flat but it was quite tiring to use.
3, The wooden try was a pleasure, the heavy camber ment I could (timber dependent) take 1/6" off each pass, the work stayed pretty flat due to the longer sole of the plane, being a wooden plane I could work for longer without stopping as they are a lot lighter than their metal counterparts. All I would say is with wooden planes you ideally need a lower bench so you can get over the plane instead of behind it.
If you are dressing par then the 5 1/2 is a great choice.
Matt
The quangsheng is an interesting shout... Has anybody got hand on experience? The only thing I've ever heard was a guy I met had bought one and found it to be off square but the reviews on workshop heaven (the ones the post at least) are glowing
Enter your email address to join: