Cheap brand plane experiences

[iNewbie]

I sometimes scratch my nads One ends up redder than the other though. Must be the angle of attack and the pressure applied. :roll:

So you're obviously doing it wrong. You should get Jacob to do that for you - he'll know how. Trouble is, he'd probably get stuck into them with an oilstone (hammer) :shock: :shock: .

Cheers, Vann.

I'm doing it Freehand, no guide. :mrgreen:

 

[graduate_owner]

I remember as a teenager trying to plane wood with my Dad's plane. It was a none-too-sharp block plane. It made me think that planing was some sort of black art, and that continued until about 5 years ago (I'm 63) when a friend sharpened a Bailey plane properly for me. What a revelation. Perhaps cheap planes might put inexperienced users off planing, just like it did for me - for over 40 years!!

K

 

[G S Haydon]

PS I've ordered a Faithful 10 as I've never had one (Amazon cheapest). I'm looking forwards to giving it a good scratch and will report back.

Excellent. Looking forward too it. It looks to be ok and due to its short length if refinement is required it's not like having to take loads of material off.

 

[Vann]

I remember as a teenager trying to plane wood with my Dad's plane. It was a none-too-sharp block plane. It made me think that planing was some sort of black art, and that continued until about 5 years ago (I'm 63) when a friend sharpened a Bailey plane properly for me. What a revelation. Perhaps cheap planes might put inexperienced users off planing, just like it did for me - for over 40 years!!

I had a similar experience - except my "cheap plane" was a Stanley No.4 I bought new in 1973. I guess I got a Friday afternoon job, as I believe some useable planes were still slipping through at that time. It wasn't until this century that I found I could plane - when I bought a brand new quality plane (a Veritas LAJ). Now I have rehabed a few old Records and Stanleys, that work well for me.

Cheers, Vann.

 

[G S Haydon]

There's a pre lateral lever #5 on Ebay at the moment currently with 10 hours left and with a buy it now price of £160. Not much use as a user as it looks very tired as well as no lateral lever. If I had the dosh spare I might be tempted to stick it on a shelf and look at it now and again. http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/RARE-ANTI...4-/111137734737?ssPageName=ADME:B:WNA:GB:3160

It didn't sell! Just shows how really un-collectable they are. The only ones with any real value are pre 1880 #1 & #2 I think. I saw a 1910 #7 not sell a couple of weeks ago, I think that was on about £60 buy it now.
It's the provenance that fascinates me. An old working tool isn't like anything else, it's been used to create things by many skilled (or not) craftsmen. I think the value in these old ones is in restoring them to a pleasing condition and using them.

EDIT: From what I can gather the lateral lever made it's debut in 1885.

+1 on providence. Especially with woodies with various name stamps, some tools go on quite a journey while others gather dust. Right stop myself, becoming poetic and romantic .

 

[Richard T]

Graham wrote "Is this the right room for an argument?"

No, sorry Graham, this is 'abuse'. If you want an argument it's the next thread to the left. c Monty Python.

Edited to say : If 'it's not about the tools' ..... why the pineappleing hell does he keep banging on about them?

 

[Reggie]

I remember as a teenager trying to plane wood with my Dad's plane. It was a none-too-sharp block plane. It made me think that planing was some sort of black art, and that continued until about 5 years ago (I'm 63) when a friend sharpened a Bailey plane properly for me. What a revelation. Perhaps cheap planes might put inexperienced users off planing, just like it did for me - for over 40 years!!

K

But that wasn't because it was cheap, it was because it was poorly maintained or you didn't bother to ask your dad why you were struggling. Perhaps a set of instructions in a plane box might help new users? It's not like you just place it on a piece of wood and push, there are plenty of semi-complex parts and things that need tweaking no matter what.

 

[Jacob]

Graham wrote "Is this the right room for an argument?"

No, sorry Graham, this is 'abuse'. If you want an argument it's the next thread to the left. c Monty Python.

Edited to say : If 'it's not about the tools' ..... why the pineappleing hell does he keep banging on about them?

It's about using them, and, as in this thread, about what happens when you use them.
Perhaps a vague distinction but you get the impression that a lot of the tool talk is just theoretical, as in this thread.

 

[Jacob]

I remember as a teenager trying to plane wood with my Dad's plane. It was a none-too-sharp block plane. It made me think that planing was some sort of black art, and that continued until about 5 years ago (I'm 63) when a friend sharpened a Bailey plane properly for me. What a revelation. Perhaps cheap planes might put inexperienced users off planing, just like it did for me - for over 40 years!!

K

But that wasn't because it was cheap, it was because it was poorly maintained or you didn't bother to ask your dad why you were struggling. Perhaps a set of instructions in a plane box might help new users? It's not like you just place it on a piece of wood and push, there are plenty of semi-complex parts and things that need tweaking no matter what.

Yes, if only he'd sharpened it! :lol: NB You still have to sharpen expensive planes BTW.

 

[bugbear]

PS I've ordered a Faithful 10 as I've never had one (Amazon cheapest). I'm looking forwards to giving it a good scratch and will report back.

You know, for someone who loudly states that he doesn't care about tools, only woodwork, you do put a LOT of time money and effort into blathering on about tools.

Your "test" will prove nothing, since we know you're going to say your test supports your conclusion, what ever happens; your history of selectiveness, over statement, careful omissions, and over generalisation destroyed your credibility years ago.

BugBear

 

[Jacob]

BB trolling away for the armchair theorists, as usual!! :lol: :lol: :lol:
You ought to have a go at woodwork one day BB, you might enjoy it and it could make your contributions more meaningful instead of predictable re-hashed bits n bobs you have picked up from magazines. Mind you you'd have to be less sceptical about all these things you don't understand or haven't previously read about in a crummy mag. :lol:

 

[Corneel]

BB, I think it's time you quit nitpicking everything Jacob writes.

Some ten years ago the internet was populated by engineers, software programmers, database analysts etc. Nowadays normal people are using the Internet too. Especially with a subject like handtool woodworking this is very valuable. When people, who learned the trade when there was still a trade to learn, share their experience on a forum like this, it's time to start to listen.

It was all very interesting in the engineers days. But it was also the time of the infill hysteria, the flat bottom theorists, the polishing apostels, the reverence to the ultimate sharpening jig, the chipbreaker demonizers, etc. Nowadays a lot of common sence has come to the forums, luckily. It's not about the tools, it's about how to use them.

I have no idea if Jacob is right about the soft modern planes. And I don't really care because I don't own any modern planes. But the oposition against his experience in this regard, strikes me as very peculiar. Nothing but vague armchair theorising, nobody who counters with some real world experiments.

 

[Richard T]

If 'cheap' = the cost to buy the plane, it's very variable ( second hand market etc.) But if 'cheap' = the cost of making the plane it can be more likely that the plane won't work well.

Trouble is that new planes appear to be both. Some are cheap to make and expensive to buy ... but none are expensive to make and cheap to buy.

Expense usually equals time. Casting is time - cheap, finishing is time - expensive. Most new planes are very poorly finished from what I can see.

Mild steel is dirt cheap but Karl H spends quite a lot of time on it and the end result is quite expensive.

Roll - on 3D printing with metal.


What would be in your list of instructions Reggie? I think that between us we could come up with a very comprehensive list of things to do .... might be a bit long though .....

(Edited for illiteracy.)

 

[AndyT]

Does anyone else remember, back in the distant past, when Reggie, a new member of this forum, bought a cheap plane from Axminster and was quite pleased with it?

He thought that it would be a useful bit of information to share - we don't all have lots of cash to spend on tools so if there are bargains out there it would be good to know.

Since then this thread has wandered a long way off that useful point but not really got very far.

To try and keep this forum the helpful and welcoming place that, at its best, it still can be, could I just ask everyone to talk about woodwork tools, not about how we imagine other members of the forum to be.

We all know some things but none of us knows everything.

 

[G S Haydon]

Does anyone else remember, back in the distant past, when Reggie, a new member of this forum, bought a cheap plane from Axminster and was quite pleased with it?

He thought that it would be a useful bit of information to share - we don't all have lots of cash to spend on tools so if there are bargains out there it would be good to know.

I do, and I'm enjoying the feedback good & bad from those who have actually purchased and used them. I look forward to Jacob's feedback on the #10 Faithfull. I hope the thread can stay on track so it can offer some real perspective to those thinking about buying cheaper planes so they can avoid lemons (my Faithfull #7) or quite serviceable tools (my Faithfull #4 or Reggies Axminster #5)

 

[Vann]

...I'm enjoying the feedback good & bad from those who have actually purchased and used them. I look forward to Jacob's feedback on the #10 Faithfull. I hope the thread can stay on track so it can offer some real perspective to those thinking about buying cheaper planes so they can avoid lemons (my Faithfull #7) or quite serviceable tools (my Faithfull #4 or Reggies Axminster #5)

Or it maybe that Faithfull and Axminster have their QC standards sufficiently low that say 50% are serviceable, while the other 50% are dogs - in which case it will always be a lottery (like Stanley in the 1970s when I bought mine).

But I'm looking forward to reading of others experiences.

Cheers, Vann.

 

[G S Haydon]

Tis true I fear although as long as the plane sole is not too long flattening is not a huge issue and the rest of the parts seem adequate to perform well as a Bailey Plane.

 

[Reggie]

If 'cheap' = the cost to buy the plane, it's very variable ( second hand market etc.) But if 'cheap' = the cost of making the plane it can be more likely that the plane won't work well.

Trouble is that new planes appear to be both. Some are cheap to make and expensive to buy ... but none are expensive to make and cheap to buy.

Expense usually equals time. Casting is time - cheap, finishing is time - expensive. Most new planes are very poorly finished from what I can see.

Mild steel is dirt cheap but Karl H spends quite a lot of time on it and the end result is quite expensive.

Roll - on 3D printing with metal.


What would be in your list of instructions Reggie? I think that between us we could come up with a very comprehensive list of things to do .... might be a bit long though .....

(Edited for illiteracy.)

Lets see:

1. a guide to sharpening by hand or jig (whatever gets you there the quickest)
2. how to adjust the angle of the end of the chipbreaker so that it meets the back of the blade at the breakers front edge
3. how to adjust the chipbreaker to blade end distance
4. fettling the frog, lapping the frog base if necessary, adjusting the frog so that you set the correct blade to mouth distance
5. how to use the adjuster wheel, bearing backlash in mind and final approach direction, checking yoke for tightness and how it rides the adjuster wheel groove
6. adjusting the blade laterally
7. checking sole and cheeks? are flat and square, lapping if necessary
8. exercising your right to send junk back and have it replaced :-D

That should just about cover it

 

[Corneel]

Today I was cleaning out a bit and encountered my Quengsheng blockplane. I knew I had this plane, it had just slowly shifted out of my consiousness. Anyway, I immediately thought about this thread. I also have some old UK made Stanleys, waiting for repair.

So I got a punch and an 800 gr hammer. The punch has a tapered point. It penetrates easier into metal when it is softer, so the indent will be larger. You can then meassure the circumferance of the indent to get an idea about the hardness of the material. I didnt do anything special with the hammer, just letting it drop down from shoulder height without putting extra handpressure into the swing. I hit the topside of the casting, in a spot which isn't right in sight. Two punches on each plane.

Result: The Stanley got holes almost 1mm wide. The Quengsheng around 1.5mm. The difference is quite obvious.

Conclusion: The Stanley is quite a bit harder.

To give this experiment more substance, everybody should now rush out to their shop and do similar on their old planes, LV's, LN's, QS's, Faithfulls, whatever, and report back. I can't compare with other new planes because I am now pretty sure I don't have any more.

 

[iNewbie]

Conclusion: The Stanley is quite a bit harder.

To give this experiment more substance, everybody should now rush out to their shop and do similar on their old planes, LV's, LN's, QS's, Faithfulls, whatever, and report back. I can't compare with other new planes because I am now pretty sure I don't have any more.

Only one conclusion? I could also conclude the Quengsheng you have maybe softer than another one. Just an armchair theory, though... :wink: