Clifton Plane

[Amateurrestorer]

Hello , just a quick question , I have seen a nearly new clifton number 5 for £135 , I want to use it for smoothing and occasionaly shooting is it a good buy? any advice on what to buy would be welcomed.

 

[Philly]

A
Not a bad price (Axminster have brand new ones for £165). I have one and it is a very fine tool. Bedrock design and well made with a cracking iron. Well worth it. Will work great for smoothing if you set it up as one and due to its weight is very handy on the shooting board.
Hope this helps
Philly

 

[bugbear]

Hello , just a quick question , I have seen a nearly new clifton number 5 for £135 , I want to use it for smoothing and occasionaly shooting is it a good buy? any advice on what to buy would be welcomed.

It's a good, well made tool, although if you were using a #5 as it's normally described (rough-ish stock prep), it's a bit of a waste of Clifton quality.

A #5 is not a well suited size for either smoothing or shooting.

Further. 135 quid ain't a GREAT price; APTC lists it at 164.

http://www.axminster.co.uk/product-Clif ... -21777.htm

I would think carefully before spending your 135.

BugBear

 

[woodbloke]

Philly wrote:

I have one

....just the one, Phill? :lol: - Rob

 

[Waka]

Philly wrote:

I have one

....just the one, Phill? :lol: - Rob

Yes I've got the other :lol: :lol:

 

[Anonymous]

They are a very nice plane and although not really classed as a smoother, they will do this job very nicely. They also have enough weight to make a nice shooting plane

I am currently selling a Lie Nielsen LA smoother on here which might be of interest.

 

[AHoman]

A #5 is not a well suited size for either smoothing or shooting.

I'm somewhat surprised that you don't find 14" length suitable for shooting. I use a LN 62 for shooting (same size as #5) and find that it's perfect for that. And the Record techical jack was a #5 (unless I'm mistaken), and certainly intended for shooting -- otherwise they would have chosen a larger or smaller plane to make "technical" with the side-mounted knob.

Or is it the width that is not desirable for shooting? I know that in instructional DVDs, both David Charlesworth and Rob Cosman can be seen using a 5 1/2 for shooting, and I can see where the extra width would be favorable for shooting thicker stock.
-Andy

 

[Amateurrestorer]

Tony ,thanks for the reply I am acquiring a little bit more knowledge every second, where will I find your posting for the Lie Neilsen plane ? I am interested in having a look.Cheers

 

[Paul Kierstead]

A #5 is not a well suited size for either smoothing or shooting.

Hmm, a #5 is my most often used shooting plane. It is also handy for jointing smaller boards. And I don't see why it couldn't be used for smoothing, though I have to admit I prefer shorter planes for that.

 

[Alf]

I'd have thought it was the width; apparently the T5 started life with a 2 1/4" cutter. But wadda I know, I don't like using the #5 for anything. :lol:

Cheers, Alf

 

[bugbear]

I'd have thought it was the width; apparently the T5 started life with a 2 1/4" cutter. But wadda I know, I don't like using the #5 for anything. :lol:

Cheers, Alf

Heh. Speaking as an owner of the sometimes-hallowed #T05 I don't find it especially good for shooting; I normally use a #6, preferring both the additional width and mass.

I do use my (flattened #05 a lot, but many of my workpieces are small, so the labour requirments are low; my #5 is in effect a panel plane for small workpieces.

BugBear

 

[woodbloke]

The T5 is intended to be used on a shooting board as it has the additional side handle but still has a tendency to rock in use, so it still needs to be used with some care to ensure that it's used accurately - Rob

 

[Anonymous]

I normally use a #6, preferring both the additional width and mass.

Absolutely - works very nicely.
Mine has a knob on the side in a similar fashion to the #9 - I do a lot of shooting and the plane side becomes uncomfortable after a while

 

[bugbear]

Absolutely - works very nicely.
Mine [#6] has a knob on the side in a similar fashion to the #9 - I do a lot of shooting and the plane side becomes uncomfortable after a while

How did you fix the side-knob?

BugBear

 

[Alf]

I can't possibly neglect this opportunity to prove I'm not a collector. Not only do I not have a #5, I don't have a #6 either. Or a #9. Or a T5 (no zero, BB :wink: )

Tsk, I think I'd better go and buy a plane to make up for this sad defficiency I seem to have... \/

Cheers, Alf

 

[AHoman]

I'd have thought it was the width; apparently the T5 started life with a 2 1/4" cutter.

Alf,
I'd be surprised if the 1/4" difference would make the #5 less suitable for shooting than the T05 -- since that difference can easily be compensated by changing the design of the shooting board itself. And for shooting thicker stock, I'd be looking for more than 1/4". Besides, the #9 also has a 2" blade.
Anyhow, it's probably debatable whether anyone can definitively say that the #5, T05, #9, 62 etc. are good or not good for shooting. Seems to be a matter of preference. As for whether the 14" long planes (62, 5, 5 1/2) are useful for anything, it seems to relate to the users' style of work and typical board dimensions.
-Andy

 

[Anonymous]

Absolutely - works very nicely.
Mine [#6] has a knob on the side in a similar fashion to the #9 - I do a lot of shooting and the plane side becomes uncomfortable after a while

How did you fix the side-knob?

BugBear

I have 2 #6 planes and so simply drilled a hole and tapped it M8 in the side of one of them. This plane is used on the shooting board only.

 

[Derek Cohen (Perth Oz)]

I can't possibly neglect this opportunity to prove I'm not a collector. Not only do I not have a #5, I don't have a #6 either. Or a #9. Or a T5

Alf, we "do not have" the same planes! :lol:

I can only assume that the reason why a #5-size plane is thought of as the correct size for a shooting board is because of tradition or habit. Even today we think of the LA Jack, both LV and LN, as being great planes for the shooting board (which they are).

The important fact to keep in mind is that bench planes use their soles for registration, but shooting planes use the side fence. Length is not the big issue with a shooting plane - I use a block plane at times. I think the LV LA Smoother is fantastic. I hate using a #7 and, while I don't have a #6, I think I'd dislike this one as well (sorry BB), although the HNT Gordon Trying Plane is the same length (but feels small). More relevant is matching the heft of the plane to the density of the wood. The LV LA Jack is my go-to shooter for hardwoods.

The closest I have to a #5 is a Stanley #62. I do love the balance of this plane. It has a light and delicate feel in the hand. I could imagine why a #5 would make a sweet short jointer and panel plane. But the #62 has a low angle advantage over a #5 for the shooting board, and I have come to appreciate this factor - which is why I stopped using the Gordon for end grain.

I don't think that a #5 would be my first choice as a plane. It is indeed a jack of all trades and can do a number of things reasonably well. It is just that I prefer my smoothers to be shorter (in length) and my shooters to be lower (in cutting angle).

Regards from Perth

Derek

 

[Alf]

Andy,

Steady on! I was merely speculating that width might have been BB's objection. Personally I use the 2" wide iron of the #164 for shooting. I certainly wouldn't be so crazy as to suggest there's only one plane for shooting.

However, don't dismiss the difference 1/4" can make to the feel of a plane. The two low angle jack planes on the market are a good example. Even 1/8" can feel different, if you've ever compared a 2 1/4" #5 1/2 to a 2 3/8" one. Heck, I can't be the only one getting all that spam telling me how size matters... :lol:

Cheers, Alf

 

[AHoman]

Heck, I can't be the only one getting all that spam telling me how size matters...

Hehe!
Alf and others,
What is your opinion of Clifton planes in general? I have the opportunity to get some at a very good price but am hesitant due to the "grey iron"; I'm concerned that the plane will be more troublesome to maintain due to changes over time, compared to ductile cast iron of LN.
-Andy