bugbear
Established Member
Pete Maddex":3qbckuct said:
Heresy!
BugBear
Hand Plane Tuning - How far?
- Thread starter Bluekingfisher
- Start date
Help Support UKworkshop.co.uk:
Heresy!
BugBear
Cheshirechappie
Established Member
There's a law of diminishing returns in regards to the improvement in performance a plane is capable of with different 'tuning' tweeks. Clearly, correcting gross faults will have the most benefit. Then making sure the iron is sharp, and the cap-iron properly fitted to it, and maybe fitting a better quality cap-iron and maybe even cutting iron. After that, the tweeking will take longer, and deliver smaller improvements.
Some are still worth it. Smoothing the front of the mouth opening lightly with a fine file is worth it, as is ensuring that the lever cap sits true on the cap-iron and doesn't rock on an errant lump. Taking any other rough edges off the sole casting is worthwhile, too. It's a good thing to ensure that the frog (with it's fixing screws loosened off) sits true on it's mountings on the sole casting, and doesn't rock because it's a tad clear of one - because if it does, it'll twist when the screws are nipped up (to be fair, I've never had one that didn't sit true on all four pads). Replacing or reshaping uncomfortable handles is worth it, especially for a plane you may be using for some length of time. Sole flattening is only worth it if the plane won't take a fine shaving, though a nicely-finished sole is better than a rough one (and a slightly - very slightly - convex sole is better than a slightly concave one). If you're going to use the plane on a shooting board, it helps if the sides are at 90 degrees to the sole, but if you're not, it doesn't really matter.
Polishing the back of the iron is only necessary to ensure that the very edge is polished to the same level that you're going to finish the bevel to, so that the edge is defined by two meeting surfaces equally polished. So that really only means about 1/2mm or so behind the edge needs to be polished - hence the 'ruler trick' repopularised by David Charlesworth. Polishing all of the back from edge to screw slot is just wasted effort. (You can't use the ruler trick on chisels, though - they do need to be flat on the backs all the way to the edge, though not necessarily polished all over.)
With a secondhand plane, it's down to personal whim whether to repaint or not. Some people enjoy the pristine appearance of new paint, but the plane will work perfectly well without such treatment.
Some are still worth it. Smoothing the front of the mouth opening lightly with a fine file is worth it, as is ensuring that the lever cap sits true on the cap-iron and doesn't rock on an errant lump. Taking any other rough edges off the sole casting is worthwhile, too. It's a good thing to ensure that the frog (with it's fixing screws loosened off) sits true on it's mountings on the sole casting, and doesn't rock because it's a tad clear of one - because if it does, it'll twist when the screws are nipped up (to be fair, I've never had one that didn't sit true on all four pads). Replacing or reshaping uncomfortable handles is worth it, especially for a plane you may be using for some length of time. Sole flattening is only worth it if the plane won't take a fine shaving, though a nicely-finished sole is better than a rough one (and a slightly - very slightly - convex sole is better than a slightly concave one). If you're going to use the plane on a shooting board, it helps if the sides are at 90 degrees to the sole, but if you're not, it doesn't really matter.
Polishing the back of the iron is only necessary to ensure that the very edge is polished to the same level that you're going to finish the bevel to, so that the edge is defined by two meeting surfaces equally polished. So that really only means about 1/2mm or so behind the edge needs to be polished - hence the 'ruler trick' repopularised by David Charlesworth. Polishing all of the back from edge to screw slot is just wasted effort. (You can't use the ruler trick on chisels, though - they do need to be flat on the backs all the way to the edge, though not necessarily polished all over.)
With a secondhand plane, it's down to personal whim whether to repaint or not. Some people enjoy the pristine appearance of new paint, but the plane will work perfectly well without such treatment.
Cheshirechappie
Established Member
Pete Maddex":1ws0rgi7 said:
I wonder how you tune a pitchfork? Polished handle, sharpened spines - then what?
Phil Pascoe
Established Member
CC - For use on a shooting board, it doesn't matter much how square the sole is to the side - the iron could be offset accidentally or deliberately. Even if it's square, every time it's used it should be checked if perfection is expected.
bugbear
Established Member
phil.p":38tcylgj said:
it's much easier to shim the workpiece than square up a plane's sides!
BugBear
Cheshirechappie
Established Member
phil.p":304n0b1r said:
Actually - that's fair comment. However well-tuned your tools are, it's basic good practice to check the components of whatever project you're working on against one another, and adjust to the fit you want.
Phil Pascoe
Established Member
I remember that from school - people making chessboards. they would check everything to start, then stop half way through to hone the blade, put it back and then wonder why the wood was very slightly out of square. They hadn't checked it the second time.
I got a lot of benefit from reading David Charlesworth's books on the subject of plane tuning, and have used his teachings to tune up a modern Stanley plane. It is definitely worth going through this process, if nothing else it will teach you how to set up even a premium (LN / LV) plane correctly. However I see too often in magazines and posts , people explaining how it is so easy to turn an old / new cheap plane into something as good as a premium plane -- usually it will require a new Premium blade (£40?) an assumption that you have files, polishing compounds, the necessary skill etc...
If time is money and/or you are more interested in woodworking than metallurgy then just bite the bullet and buy a premium plane. I really enjoy picking up my LN no. 5.
If you have time, the tools and enjoy the process then fettle /tune away.
Either way, read David Charlesworth 's books!
Day
If time is money and/or you are more interested in woodworking than metallurgy then just bite the bullet and buy a premium plane. I really enjoy picking up my LN no. 5.
If you have time, the tools and enjoy the process then fettle /tune away.
Either way, read David Charlesworth 's books!
Day
Billy Flitch
Established Member
bugbear":2nw0xj4m said:
Its also easier to use the lateral adjuster.
MMUK
Established Member
Personally I find fettling and setting up hand planes and chisels very theraputic, the ideal way to de-stress and much better for me than smoking :wink:
I know what I do is completely unnecessary but I don't give a fluke. I like my soles, sides and irons highly polished, almost mirror like. I like my tools clean and neat, it's about the only time I could ever be accused of having OCD :lol: It has no adverse affect on their performance whatsoever and I feel much happier using them as opposed to grubby tools that look like they've been left out in the rain. I take pride in my work and I take pride in my tools. I give all my jobs 100% so I give my tools the same 100%. That's just me, that's how I am. (homer)
I know what I do is completely unnecessary but I don't give a fluke. I like my soles, sides and irons highly polished, almost mirror like. I like my tools clean and neat, it's about the only time I could ever be accused of having OCD :lol: It has no adverse affect on their performance whatsoever and I feel much happier using them as opposed to grubby tools that look like they've been left out in the rain. I take pride in my work and I take pride in my tools. I give all my jobs 100% so I give my tools the same 100%. That's just me, that's how I am. (homer)
How far? Is this far enough?
I was given this wartime Plane (thick casting) around 10 years ago. Work wasn't plentiful so I poured much energy into the then rusty old No. 4. It pretty much got the whole treatment, including the Bubinga handles that I made. I don't think it's possible to fettle a Plane more than this! The original blade was mighty thin ( strangely thinner than the usual affair). It was also pretty close to the key hole, so I fit a tapered Sorby iron (from a woodie). Of course that meant modifying the yolk. Some time later I bought a thick Ray Iles iron and a Clifton 2 piece chipbreaker. That combination remains on it to this day. The Plane works as one would expect. But it doesn't work any better than my Stanley 5.5 circa 1970 and that hasn't received any treatment, except that it has an old, thin (but very good) Acorn blade. I suspect the 5.5 just happens to have been accurately made, possibly more by accident than design. The stars were aligned that day .So I'm in the camp that says sharpen the blade, make sure the chipbreaker fits and try it. If it doesn't give good results check the sole. A hollow just in front of the blade will always affect performance adversely. Those of us who make and use woodies are all too well aware of this issue. Humidity changes effect the geometry of the sole of a wooden Plane readily.
If you have the time and feel inclined to fettle an old Plane to a high standard I don't see much wrong with that either. I enjoyed the restoration process on my No.4 even though it really was beyond the call of duty.
I was given this wartime Plane (thick casting) around 10 years ago. Work wasn't plentiful so I poured much energy into the then rusty old No. 4. It pretty much got the whole treatment, including the Bubinga handles that I made. I don't think it's possible to fettle a Plane more than this! The original blade was mighty thin ( strangely thinner than the usual affair). It was also pretty close to the key hole, so I fit a tapered Sorby iron (from a woodie). Of course that meant modifying the yolk. Some time later I bought a thick Ray Iles iron and a Clifton 2 piece chipbreaker. That combination remains on it to this day. The Plane works as one would expect. But it doesn't work any better than my Stanley 5.5 circa 1970 and that hasn't received any treatment, except that it has an old, thin (but very good) Acorn blade. I suspect the 5.5 just happens to have been accurately made, possibly more by accident than design. The stars were aligned that day .So I'm in the camp that says sharpen the blade, make sure the chipbreaker fits and try it. If it doesn't give good results check the sole. A hollow just in front of the blade will always affect performance adversely. Those of us who make and use woodies are all too well aware of this issue. Humidity changes effect the geometry of the sole of a wooden Plane readily.
If you have the time and feel inclined to fettle an old Plane to a high standard I don't see much wrong with that either. I enjoyed the restoration process on my No.4 even though it really was beyond the call of duty.
Bluekingfisher
Established Member
Thanks all, I enjoyed reading your thoughts on the subject.
David
David
Similar threads
