Did Preston Make Wooden Planes?

[D_W]

There is a nice try plane on ebay in the UK, it looks almost unmistakably griffiths to me inside the mortise and with the style of the wedge.

I would guesstimate the era as late 1800s or possibly early 1900s.

Do any of you guys know if Preston ever made their own planes, or did they subcontract that work to a maker like griffiths?

 

[Cheshirechappie]

Depends which 'Preston' you mean.

There's a G.P.Preston of Sheffield - they were tool merchants who never made any tools, but sold thousands made by others and stamped with their mark (I have a round plane so marked - I gather it was made by Varvill of York).

Then there's the long-lived firm of Edward Preston (Edward Preston and Sons, Edward Preston and Sons Ltd) of Birmingham, started about 1833 and were bought out by C&J Hampton (Record) in 1934. They did make planes, both wooden and metal, and much else besides.

There's also Henry Preston of Birmingham, James Preston of Westminster in London, William Preston of Birmingham, and a William Preston of Pentonville Road, London - may be the same one. No idea if they are of the same family, or unrelated.

That's mostly from BPM2. There may have been other Prestons making planes as well!

Bear in mind that most planemakers were quite small enterprises, or a small department in a bigger tool firm. BPM2 has a graph on page 3 which shows that in about 1860, there were 140 plane-making firms active - by 1940 that had dropped to fewer than 20. How much sub-contracting went on is anybody's guess, but except in the case of the known tool dealers, it's a reasonable bet that the maker's mark on a wooden plane indicates that they probably did make it, though I suspect the majority bought in cutting irons. Even some of the big boys did that - Mathieson's are known to have sourced some (if not all) their irons from Sheffield.

A plane marked 'G.P.Preston' wasn't made by them, but any other Preston marked plane probably was made by the marker.

 

[D_W]

In this case, it's edward preston. I didn't know there were that many (but here in the states, consolidation of planemakers happened pretty early, as did a decline in quality for most makers).

It's striking how similar the details on the E. Preston plane are to the griffiths (the shape of everything inside the mortise, the shape of the eyes and how they are oriented in the mortise, the shape of the wedge and details on it). Maybe there was some consensus on the aesthetics.

When I started making planes, my favorite plane that I'd purchased was a griffiths try plane. I sold it for too little and probably should've kept it, and so have a jones about maybe getting another good condition plane of the same make at some point. Generally, good quality low use english planes don't exist in much quantity in the US.

Thanks for the info, by the way.

 

[bugbear]

There is a nice try plane on ebay in the UK, it looks almost unmistakably griffiths to me inside the mortise and with the style of the wedge.

I would guesstimate the era as late 1800s or possibly early 1900s.

Are you claiming to be able to discriminate between UK makers of 19th C plane by style details? That would be remarkable.

BugBear

 

[D_W]

There is a nice try plane on ebay in the UK, it looks almost unmistakably griffiths to me inside the mortise and with the style of the wedge.

I would guesstimate the era as late 1800s or possibly early 1900s.

Are you claiming to be able to discriminate between UK makers of 19th C plane by style details? That would be remarkable.

BugBear

No, rather I suspect copying in this case. I'm making the statement only for those two planes - that they're very similar - the inside of a mathieson plane and a griffiths plane are different, as are the wedges.

I've watched a lot of UK tools, especially bench planes, as finding a bench plane that is in great shape that performs well while still being tightly made - not so common. By that, I mean the similarities in the preston plane and the griffiths plane I had are that:
* the wedge was almost identical
* the iron and cap iron have the same attributes - it's necessary for the cap iron to have a specific profile to work close to the end of the iron while still having the tight and slanted wear that the two planes have
* the eyes are of identical shape, and identical orientation of the plane
* the angles inside the mortise are all cut almost identically

What I suspect is not that I can tell the makers specifically, but instead that where such attributes are so similar but the makers are different, there was some copying going on.

Either of the two planes I mentioned would be spectacular examples for an aspiring plane maker to copy, but change even one variable (put a different cap iron maker in the preston or griffiths plane) and the plane may not work well. 1/2 or so of the cap irons I have would cause a clog in the preston and griffiths plane if set closely, leaving the user to then mutilate the plane by opening the mouth, which is fairly common in the used planes I've had.

So, anyway, I'm surprised the details are that similar and suspect copying. From what I've learned making double iron planes, those details being shared in common is interesting because they are absolutely ideal for a double iron wooden plane whereas many others are not quite so good.

Mathieson's mid-era planes share all of those details (often including the mouth) but don't quite look the same.

I know enough from seeing griffiths moving fillisers (I have two) that you can't conclude two things:
* identical details mean a plane came from the same shop
* different details mean that a plane didn't (the two griffiths marking moving fillisters that I have are not similar at all - probably decades apart in make or maybe for another reason).

 

[AndyT]

I've spent some time talking to plane collectors with far more detailed knowledge than I shall ever have. One thing that I have learned is that the plane making business was concentrated in a few places because it was also concentrated in a small number of families. It's entirely possible that a plane with one name on can closely resemble another named plane either because they were made by the same bench hand who worked for one then the other, or by two hands trained by the same master, quite likely in the same family.
You could speculate that the apprentice system fostered an attitude that there was one right way to make a tool, the way that the apprentice had been taught, and any variation of detail was wrong.

 

[D_W]

These are alike enough that I'd imagine the process to make them was copied, including the fixtures and angles (so the idea of family or another way that knowledge would be traded among firms doesn't seem unlikely).

But like I said, the function of a plane like these (to be able to clear chips and still have a tight mouth and a wear with as much angle as they do) is not too common, especially in the US. It requires fixturing to repeat as there isn't much margin for error.

I make some planes, but I'm sure the process of making a lot of them has a lot less hand labor and more fixturing (to get clean lines - as in final paring, etc) than I use, so I may be in the weeds a little here guessing at things.

Nonetheless, I appreciate the attention on the inside of these planes to make them so ideal, and wouldn't at all be surprised if the makers were related or someone had taken knowledge from one place to another somehow. Even after the outsides of the planes started to get a little bit less crisp in the 19th century, the insides continued to improve over the old single iron design. Part of the case with the two planes I'm mentioning is an all steel cap iron that can be made precisely and with a shallow leading primary angle until the last little bit (but still sprung, unlike current milled makes). Ward and mathieson made caps like this, and the one with the preston plane on ebay is the same.

If I ever tried to make planes for money (which I have zero plans for), I would aspire to try to make caps and irons like those.

 

[swagman]

DW; you may not be aware of it coming from the U.S, but traditional plane making in the Uk and many parts of Europe was a recognised trade, which when entered into, were required under agreement with your employer (more than likely a master craftsman), to reach a high level of proficiency within your craft by the time you reached the end of your tenure.

A knowledge into Uk Planemaker's would show that Griffiths was based in Norwich, England, while Mathieson was based in Glasgow, Scotland.

Stewie;

 

[D_W]

I'm aware of that. Griffiths and Mathieson are both made to a high standard. But they are overall not as similar as the Griffiths and the preston.

What they do share is the proper cap iron and sort of similar mortise work, but that appears to have been fairly widespread among the good makers. The US trade was apprentice based early on, but the organization of the trades gave way to cheapening of the details earlier. The style of cap, tight mouth and sharply angled wear is not found in many us made planes. I have only owned one us made plane of that quality.

 

[Derek Cohen (Perth Oz)]

Hi Dave

I see the plane sold for 62 quid. Did you get it? Or someone else here?

Very nice plane - I might have been tempted if I had not been aware of your interest. The only downside was the blade, which looked quite short - lots of room for use, but I did wonder whether it was original bearing in mind the excellent condition of the plane body, itself.

Regards from Perth

Derek

 

[Biliphuster]

The first rule of eBay is you never talk about eBay. Unless it's your item you are selling.

 

[D_W]

Hi Dave

I see the plane sold for 62 quid. Did you get it? Or someone else here?

Very nice plane - I might have been tempted if I had not been aware of your interest. The only downside was the blade, which looked quite short - lots of room for use, but I did wonder whether it was original bearing in mind the excellent condition of the plane body, itself.

Regards from Perth

Derek

No, I didn't. That's a typical price, I suppose, but with shipping it would've been about $120 and that's without me bidding on it. A little above what I want to pay. The last nice 24 inch try plane that I saw in similar condition sold for $185, and when I sold mine in the states only, I only got $66 for it less ebay fees. It had an unused ward set with it that was bright and shiny and as hard as anything I've seen - I should've kept the plane and put the iron and cap iron in one of my own make for me to use. Same happened with a mathieson fore that I had, I sold it at a moment of weakness and it went for less than the cap and iron set was worth to me. I just hate harvesting irons and caps out of really good planes.

I would guess that the iron is original. Most of the old ones I see that are unused are about 8 inches with the longest being about 8 1/2. It's probably within 1/2 inch or so of full length looking at it.

I also bid on the badger plane this seller had, but it went way higher than I wanted to pay. I'd like to make a couple of skew planes, but since I've sold off most of my power tools now and will soon be unloading all of my routers, they need to be double iron to do heavy work.

 

[D_W]

The first rule of eBay is you never talk about eBay. Unless it's your item you are selling.

You're right, I kind of gave up on it early - I knew it would go high. I did figure that this place of all places is filled with people who will not spend more than 2 pounds on a plane!!

If someone in country did get that plane and intends to use it, they'll get a lifetime of service out of it, and if I didn't already have two of my own make and struggle to find something to do with the second one, I would've, too.

I hope the person who buys it knows how to use a cap iron.