Do I want a Clifton No 4, or No 4 1/2 smoothing plane?

[Beatsy]

I was determined to NOT buy any new tools after my recent return to woodworking but already succumbed to a Japanese saw. I'm really glad I did though! It made the repetitive task of accurately hand-cutting blocks from hardwood stock a lot easier and I get *much* more accurate results (and cleaner cuts) than I could ever hope to achieve with a "western" saw.

After that success and since I've already wavered anyway, I'm further tempted to get "just one more" useful tool. I lost my Stanley No 4 smoothing plane yonks ago and managed with a couple of block planes ever since (one low-angle, one not). I'd like to buy a quality (new) smoother to replace my old Stanley, about the same size, but not Stanley. Their product quality is nothing like it was when I bought that lost plane decades ago, so I'd like to try another brand.

Although I can do it myself, if I must, I'd prefer the plane to come with the sole and cheeks ALREADY accurately ground - or at least very close. That rules out Rider and Stanley IMO. Veritas planes blow the budget of £300-ish. So after looking around, it seems the Clifton No 4 is the only game in town for me. But I noticed they do a No 4 1/2 at a very slightly higher cost. I'm tempted to buy that one instead because it might make a better shooting plane (extra heft and wider blade). I guess at least 80% of my usage would be for truing-up stock, jointing small pieces and smoothing faces. Only 10% of the time would be spent shooting, if that (the missing 10% is for random needs I haven't thought of).

My question is, given that I only want to buy ONE, new, general purpose plane/smoother, would the No 4 1/2 work just as well as the No 4 "off the shooting board"? I wonder if its significant extra heft and/or width might detract from that. Conversely, could the No 4 work just as well as the No 4 1/2 "on the shooting board", and thus remove any need to consider the No 4 1/2 at all?

In short, do I get the Clifton No 4 or or Clifton No 4 1/2? Or have I missed other options?

Interested to hear any general views or opinions about either Clifton plane (the No 4 or No 4 1/2) from owners too.

Thanks

 

[Jacob]

..... ONE, new, general purpose plane/smoother, ....

5 1/2 is a lot of peoples recommended one plane. Old Stanley or Record. You don't get much for the extra money with Clifton

 

[Jameshow]

5 1/2 is a lot of peoples recommended one plane. Stanley or Record. You don't get much for the extra money with Clifton

Agreed I find the 4 1/2 just plane bulky!

If I need the width then I like a bike more length of the 5 1/2.

No 4 is the best all rounder tbh. Which is why it's the most popular.

 

[D_W]

4

If you're going to use them only a little, it won't matter which you get. If you're going to put significant wear on a smoother, the extra weight of a 4 1/2 will become a burden. It offers no advantage to anyone other than beginners, and then for not very long.

4 1/2s never became popular in the states, but I've seen varying accounts about why they were popular in the UK (as a replacement for infills, etc, though most infills were 2-2 1/4" smoothers, with 2 1/8th being common, and weights in the widely sold planes (early spiers, norris no 2, etc) early on being a lot more like 4s in proportion and weight - around 3 pounds.

I have a norris 13, and even that, I think, is lighter than the only 4 1/2 that I still have. The bigger #13 panel planes were boat anchors, and probably has something to do with them never selling in very large numbers.

Clifton and the brand woocraft sell compound the problem by adding even more weight beyond stanley and beyond Lie Nielsen, who makes planes generally a step heavier than stanley.

 

[D_W]

I just checked -the marples 4 1/2 is actually heavier than the #13 norris by 6 ounces, and the #13 is probably the heaviest of the early norris smoothers.

The later norris planes with adjusters probably aren't reliable as a matter of what would've been made for cabinetmakers to use as everything in them that takes labor is cost cut and the adjuster and junkier r.sorby irons were added (softer and probably something much easier to heat treat and machine than the earlier ward irons).

 

[Jarno]

I think a 4 as well

According to Rob Cosman, you should buy a 4 1/2 and 5 1/2, but despite being 2m tall and nearly 220lbs myself, I think they are just too heavy for most work. I like mine a lot (an old Woden 4 1/2 and an Record 5 1/2) and especially the 5 1/2 does get used, but the plane till just above my workbench has a couple of 4's and a 5, grab and go. The wider planes just take a little more deliberation, because of their heft.

 

[okeydokey]

There are some online used tool specialists who fully refurb and set up old planes it might be worth looking to see if you can get an old Stanley/Record fully ready to go for a third of a new plane - not an eBay chancer - the quality of your lost one is still available. Might be worth googling around

 

[D_W]

I think a 4 as well

According to Rob Cosman, you should buy a 4 1/2 and 5 1/2, but despite being 2m tall and nearly 220lbs myself, I think they are just too heavy for most work. I like mine a lot (an old Woden 4 1/2 and an Record 5 1/2) and especially the 5 1/2 does get used, but the plane till just above my workbench has a couple of 4's and a 5, grab and go. The wider planes just take a little more deliberation, because of their heft.

Rob teaches beginners almost exclusively. An experienced planer will set the cap iron on a #4 and increase the shaving depth instead of going for wider or heavier planes. It's still less work, but a little bit more difficult for beginners to get a handle on getting a lighter plane moving and solving sins that create an intermittent cut (tearout, especially).

The 5 1/2 must've been a recommendation for joiners in the UK as I've got one 5 1/2 (a record) that a joiner in the UK had. He had a stanley 4 and a record 5 1/2, and worked his entire career with those two planes.

By the time those planes (5 1/2s) became popular, work was mostly site work.

if planing is mostly cleaning the odd thing up and following a thicknesser, then I doubt it matters much.

using a 5 1/2 as a rough work plane is a slog, though - straight up. Especially the boutique ones. Even with constant waxing, they're not close to being as productive as an English 20-22 inch try plane, or jack plane, whichever one you're trying to turn them into.

The Cosmans and sellers types of the world are always going to be selling something for beginners, and it won't look like what you'll do a year in if you actually go deep on using the tools.

I said something to Cosman at one point that setting people out to rough plane boards with a 5 1/2 is a good way to convince them that they can't do much work by hand, and that anyone starting will have a few things they need to reckon with - doing rough and middle work with wooden planes. He felt that was a bad idea, and I think I know why - because you can't have a class where beginners come in off of the internet with boxes full of dilapidated wooden planes. Nobody at this point is making really good quality wooden planes. ECE makes a range, but they're kind of crude and the whole primus adjuster thing is a fix for problems that don't exist on the smoother side.

cosman has a line of planes to promote, too.

Brian holcombe worked almost entirely by hand for a while. You can see what he used (I made two planes for him to use as he was using LN planes, which are a burden to dimension - he was pretty pleased with the results and used them for a while even though I said he could throw them away if he doesn't use them - there's no expectation that he's promoting something on my behalf because I have nothing to promote). Eventually, he got enough reference work that he bought high quality machines. that's a relevant fact if you're working for profit - you can't have cranky customers and give up revenue.

Finding many other people who work with only hand tools rather than demonstrating (often in cheap wood and not in relevant hardwoods in context, or in boards that are chosen because they're soft and mostly flat) is not so easy.

 

[Jarno]

There are some online used tool specialists who fully refurb and set up old planes it might be worth looking to see if you can get an old Stanley/Record fully ready to go for a third of a new plane - not an eBay chancer - the quality of your lost one is still available. Might be worth googling around

So many of them around, and most can be refurbished pretty easily (mostly clean of a bit of rust), there's also youtube video's on that. I'd keep an eye out on car boot sales and buy a few at a 10 EUR/GBP each, avoid recent ones (chinese made Stanley). Check for cracks or repaired cracks.

 

[D_W]

I can tell paul sellers has never done much rough work by hand.

I finally found a blog post of his that stated flatly that before he started with teh whole homestead thing, he was trying to make stuff for the craft circuit. My mother sold over a million dollars of stuff here over four decades on "the craft circuit". There was nothing in that circuit like high dollar furniture - you have to take a bag full of trinket kind of work that you can make quickly and that won't get expensive enough for someone to hesitate to buy. People will buy things in 20 seconds that they wouldn't buy if they had 2 weeks to think about it. If the goods are expensive enough that you have to think, the chance that someone will come back around to buy later are very low.

He can use hand tools, of course. but when he tries to demonstrate dimensioning, it looks like a huge struggle or he's in a hurry. It doesn't really work like that - you end up creating problems - the work is done at an efficient pace and accuracy is as important as work rate to eliminate too much clean-up work.

 

[hlvd]

Neither, get a No5!

 

[Vann]

I'm with those who say the No.4.5 too heavy. I have one and seldom use it.

My only other Clifton is a No.3 and I love it.

But I don't use either for chuting.

My tuppence worth.

Cheers, Vann.

 

[Ttrees]

Couldn't imagine using a 4 1/2 now after learning how to properly use a smoother,
(thanks to David)
The effort required would be too much if using the cap iron to its full potential on such a short plane, while a no.4 is just right.

The 5 1/2 is a great tool for shooting, I bought a second just for the job,
as I find it the best for panel work.

A cheap no 4 makes a good roughing plane, or a 5 if you like long sleeves.

Tom

 

[thetyreman]

I like my 4 1/2 smoother, and not a fan of no4 and no3 planes, because I have huge hands and long fingers, they get in the way, so use what suits your hands, you don't necessarily need the clifton, I'd rather have an old one and buy a hock blade and cap iron to pimp it up.

 

[Beatsy]

Thanks for all your comments folks. Overall you've convinced me the 4.5 was just requirements creep on my part, and the heft of it will compromise every "normal" use anyway. I'll get the No 4.

To those who mentioned 2nd-hand planes and fixing them up - I recently got some with that in mind. Three old Stanleys in a job lot - No's 4, 5 and 5.5. They all turned out to be square in the soles and cheeks, which was very welcome, but they're still beat up (worn, grooved and/or scored) and all need work around the blade bedding areas and mouths. So far, I only got the No 4 done. It's OK but still not quite right. To be honest - I simply lost interest in the faffing about and have put them away for "fettling at a later date". I do like the look of the No 5 1/2 though and would like to bring that back to life sometime. It needs a new blade and a new tote, but those are easy to get. It's now waiting until the "urge to fettle" strikes me again. Meanwhile, I'll just buy a decent new plane and use it - rather than spend hours trying to make older or lesser planes usable. Life's too short an' all that - and lately, the way things are going, I'm minded to spend any spare cash while it's still worth something!

Cheers

 

[Peter Sefton]

@Beatsy if we can help give us a shout, just down the road from you between Upton and Welland, our Clifton stock is very low but might have something to suit your needs.

Cheers

Peter

https://woodworkersworkshop.co.uk/

 

[Phil Pascoe]

The 5 1/2 must've been a recommendation for joiners in the UK as I've got one 5 1/2 (a record) that a joiner in the UK had. He had a stanley 4 and a record 5 1/2, and worked his entire career with those two planes.

By the time those planes (5 1/2s) became popular, work was mostly site work.

The old chippie I worked with many years ago always maintained 4s and 5s were site planes. 4 1/2s and 5 1/2s were shop planes - because you didn't need extra weight to carry around on a site.

 

[Derek Cohen (Perth Oz)]

Does Clifton still make a #3? That is my preferred size in a smoother. I have both a bronze LN and a Stanley (set up with an older Clifton blade). Both work very well. The bronze LN #3 has a little more heft - about the same as a Stanley #4. More heft in a small package is nice.

While I prefer smaller planes (as they are more nimble), occasionally I pull out a heavy smoother, and it performs with greater ease - carries more momentum into the cut. I have a bronze Anniversary LN #4 1/2, and this is massive ... but not nearly as much as the Marcou smoother I had at one time. Now that was a tank! But, it was also the best smoother I have ever used ... just did not pull it out much ... the extra mass was just too much to deal with.

Regards from Perth

Derek

 

[Beatsy]

Just to conclude the tale. I fetched my Clifton No 4 today, and a lovely little smoother it is too. I got a deal on a demonstrator, so saved a little too.

As a smoother, it's the best plane I've used (though only Stanleys before, and one Ryder low-angle block plane). Lots of adjustments available to "tune" it for specific problem woods - which is very welcome. After getting the blade shaving-sharp, it just whispers across the wood. Lovely to use.

For the small bits of timber I work with, the Clifton makes for a credible little shooting plane too! Sole and cheeks are reasonably square out of the box, for one thing. Not perfect, but well within the blade tilt range, so no laborious fettling needed there. It doesn't have much heft though, which seems a desirable feature of "proper" shooters, but I've never liked depending on momentum to crash iron through "difficult" wood. I prefer a sharper blade, narrower mouth, shallower cut, pushing harder and all that. I'm sure there are plenty of woods that could make me eat those words in a heartbeat - but I avoid those - or resort to flat-lapping with sandpaper

All in all, a success.

 

[isaac3d]

I'm sure the OP will be happy with his No.4 Clifton plane. However, for anyone else considering No. 4 or 4.5, don't dismiss the No. 4.5 lightly. I have one and really like it. I like the extra weight, it helps the plane slide through the timber, especially hardwoods with wild grain. As with all planes, personal preference is a big factor; what fits your hand, what feels right, not to mention how often you use it and the type of wood you will use it for.
If it is possible, go to a store selling the alternatives you might be interested in and try them out. Of course if it costs a lot to travel then that might be a problem.