Hand planing hardwood - bad idea?

[Molynoox]

In view of the fact you have A plane and a piece of sandpaper, well done for perseverance and application, whats next on the list?.

Yeah thanks I'm happy to have achieved something at long last.
Next up is probably small boxes of some sort, maybe for pencils. Give dovetails a go. It looks easy...
I don't have a saw but I have some very old ones I can restore. One of them is a tenon saw that I'm hoping will be suitable.
I stripped it down yesterday and started to clean up the blade. I tried cutting with it and it's useless so it will need a sharpen.

So I have to decide if I should invest in files to sharpen it or if I should just buy a saw?

 

[Jacob]

Hello again
A head torch is no good,

Oh yes it is - but not for your convoluted methods, which just don't make sense to me at all.

....
as you cannot really see the back of the work otherwise,

Can't say I've ever felt the need!

The lamp is not just for candling or matching in this regards.
Not sure how you're going about checking along the width otherwise,
and likewise along the length.

Check the width winding sticks and/or a short straightedge. Combi square blade is good - if you rub it to and fro it marks the high points, though you might need to apply pencil lead
Check the length by looking down it.

You might see folks sneering regarding Charlesworth's teaching aids.

Not sneering, just questioning in a constructive way.
He did rather overplay the guru though, but maybe that's just how his natural manner comes across. The Odate plate thing was very s illy!

Bear in mind what you wish to do is bordering more skilled use,
i.e planing thin stuff and aiming to have individual pieces which are surfaced precisely,
a lot of what is not considered traditional nor efficient.

If you've only got what material you have, then you might not find much trad stuff which is
addressing the work that is needed.

One more thing, not sure what camber profile you have chosen, i.e how wide is the shaving
when smoothing is,
If not wishing to have much camber, then one must overhang the plane off the edge substantially more than Charlesworth or others suggest.

Can do it differently, but that way relies on thick or multiple shavings and is a process which is wasteful.

Can't quite follow this last paragraph.
You seem to have got hung up on some particularly dubious ramblings of our Dave. Maybe you should look around a bit more?

 

[Jacob]

.......

So I have to decide if I should invest in files to sharpen it or if I should just buy a saw?

Just buy one file. Not a major investment. Or take saw to a saw doctor

 

[Jacob]

View attachment 150216
View attachment 150217
View attachment 150218

I made a thing.
Due to the ridiculous amount of shavings removed from the edges it's no longer big enough for a chopping board. But it's definitely more useful than scrap wood which is what I started with. So I'm happy with it. Thanks for the assistance

Here is the pile of shame
View attachment 150219

I originally put a chamfer on the underside and a tiny round over on the top which looked great but unfortunately I did it upside down and the good surface was on bottom. Duuuh. So I had to convert the chamfer on bottom to a large round over on top. Not great but not a disasster.

Suitable for serving very long and thin items such as sausages, bread sticks and cucumbers
Martin

All good practice. You could make shoehorns?

 

[Alli]

Something that used to happen to me was getting the stropping bit wrong. I concentrated 100% sharpening on the stones but not on the strop.

I believe I was rolling the iron down the strop rather than holding the iron at the correct angle, this then caused the cutting edge to roll over. I worked this out by testing the sharpness by taking a few hairs off my arm before stropping and the irons sharpness was great. I then stropped the iron and tested again and found I couldn't get any hairs to come off.

When planing wood before understanding the above, I found the plane wouldn't start cutting until the blade was far too out, which meant it was blooming hard work to push through the stroke.

Might be of no use to you but I remember tearing my hair out trying to work out what I was doing wrong, and it took me a long time to realise. I still think sharpening is a dark art and offering need to be made to the shaving gods!!!!

 

[Ttrees]

Oh yes it is - but not for your convoluted methods, which just don't make sense to me at all.

Can't say I've ever felt the need!

Check the width winding sticks and/or a short straightedge. Combi square blade is good - if you rub it to and fro it marks the high points, though you might need to apply pencil lead

It doesn't make sense to you because you're simply not familiar with the process.

I don't need to do any of that faffing about with winding sticks and needless walking/reaching for accurate preparation on the work.

Check the length by looking down it.

Check the width if looking like so,

Not sneering, just questioning in a constructive way.
He did rather overplay the guru though, but maybe that's just how he comes across.

There's lots of things which one can take from his teachings, they don't need these teaching aids.
He's the only man who's advice will be to respect the reference in both orientations, i.e length and width, regardless of who's methods you think are best.
That's just one reason.

The Odate plate thing was very s illy!

Wouldn't be something I'd spring for.

Can't quite follow this last paragraph.

Not sure which you're referring to,
Try being a bit more specific, and I'll give an answer.

Tom

 

[Jacob]

It doesn't make sense to you because you're simply not familiar with the process.
I don't need to do any of that faffing about for accurate preperation on the work.

There's lots of things which one can take from his teachings, they don't need these teaching aids.
He's the only man who's advice will be to respect the reference in both orientations, i.e length and width, regardless of who's methods you think are best.
That's just one reason.

Wouldn't be something I'd spring for.


Not sure which you're referring to,
Try being a bit more specific, and I'll give an answer.

Tom

I just don't get what you are on about. Looking at the back or the underside of a workpiece "in any orientations" is easily achieved just by turning the thing over and looking at it.

 

[Molynoox]

Here is the saw in question

Is it worth bothering with? Seems like a lot of effort. How much is a decent saw to get me started doing dovetails joints, £40?
I sanded down the handle, that's come up well

I did clean the blade with some citrus cleaner thinking that might work but it's still pretty bad.

Martin

 

[HOJ]

That plate looks close to being unsalvagable, I no expert on the subject though, but I do sharpen and look after all my saws in my own way which I'm not going to waffle on about!!, if you have the inclination to try and fix it up take a look at this post from @deema about Saw restoration.

 

[Ttrees]

I just don't get what you are on about. Looking at the back or the underside of a workpiece "in any orientations" is easily achieved just by turning the thing over and looking at it.

You can turn over the worked side of the timber all you want, but you won't get the idea if the surface isn't flat and you won't look with the lamp.

As far as I'm concerned, not doing such is pretending to be a CNC machine with a DRO.
I don't think I'm better than my flattish bench, though I could make it flatter if I wished with more shimmed chocks, it's not what I mean.

and when I see the opposite of this regarding the work,
I see it as someone fighting flatness, and it's akin to perhaps someone boxing Floyd Mayweather,
as in a lot of swipes and effort with no result with said swipes,
well that of whom are honest workers.

My comment was regarding that Charlesworth had much emphasis on the edges,
by that I mean perimeter,
His methodology is totally respecting this, and goes hand in hand with sensible work also,
and is the obvious follow on once one has watched the jack plane work from others, that is who
is honest and can get pretty close, which is enough for some folks standards.

i.e
Not deforming the work with clamping, especially thinner stuff.
(I had presumed the OP had made his panels thinner, hence my warning)
The use of having a flat surface for working thin stock.
Planing in rows, and not crossgrain planing destroying this valuable perimeter for ones
bench, or winding sticks to rest on.

Checking things can be sped up by the use of the bench instead, as one can see both length and width in one.


Tom

 

[Jacob]

You can turn over the worked side of the timber all you want, but you won't get the idea if the surface isn't flat and you won't look with the lamp.

As far as I'm concerned, not doing such is pretending to be a CNC machine with a DRO.
I don't think I'm better than my flattish bench, though I could make it flatter if I wished with more shimmed chocks, it's not what I mean.

and when I see the opposite of this regarding the work,
I see it as someone fighting flatness, and it's akin to perhaps someone boxing Floyd Mayweather,
as in a lot of swipes and effort with no result with said swipes,
well that of whom are honest workers.

My comment was regarding that Charlesworth had much emphasis on the edges,
by that I mean perimeter,
His methodology is totally respecting this, and goes hand in hand with sensible work also,
and is the obvious follow on once one has watched the jack plane work from others, that is who
is honest and can get pretty close, which is enough for some folks standards.

i.e
Not deforming the work with clamping, especially thinner stuff.
(I had presumed the OP had made his panels thinner, hence my warning)
The use of having a flat surface for working thin stock.
Planing in rows, and not crossgrain planing destroying this valuable perimeter for ones
bench, or winding sticks to rest on.

Checking things can be sped up by the use of the bench instead, as one can see both length and width in one.


Tom

Sorry it makes no sense at all. I don't check things with a bench and workpiece upside down, I do it right way up by looking at it with the aid of winding sticks etc as described above.
Have you got a link to Dave C doing this? Either he was out on a limb (not unknown) or you've misread it.

 

[Ttrees]

You'll see Cosman doing it, far as I know there was some English craftsmen he was thought by,
one which springs to mind is Alan Peters.
The flat bench method could be from multiple places, fine benches likely been around for long time,
it might not have been popular per se, haven't a clue.
From what I can make out, a bit of Charlesworth's info might be from some Robert Wearing stuff,
I'd guess you might have read his books.
Does emphasis of the flat surface correlate, mention of planing thin stock?

If you use the bench as such, ie under what might call challenging circumstances,
then as far as I'm concerned, anything else just doesn't make sense.

The winding sticks being used on a cabinetmakers workbench to me,
well at least for planing panels and such, looks like a mish mash of techniques to build
a workbench, so you don't have to do the same faffery again.

 

[Ttrees]

Just to add to this, it seems common lightbulbs became a thing in houses since the 1930's
surely those who've published such writings wouldn't be such a luddite to omit such a thing.

i.e If you've got something which will benefit you, why not use it.
Surely this would have been a big thing regarding the woodworking world?

 

[Jacob]

You'll see Cosman doing it, far as I know there was some English craftsmen he was thought by,
one which springs to mind is Alan Peters.
The flat bench method could be from multiple places, fine benches likely been around for long time,
it might not have been popular per se, haven't a clue.
From what I can make out, a bit of Charlesworth's info might be from some Robert Wearing stuff,
I'd guess you might have read his books.
Does emphasis of the flat surface correlate, mention of planing thin stock?

If you use the bench as such, ie under what might call challenging circumstances,
then as far as I'm concerned, anything else just doesn't make sense.

The winding sticks being used on a cabinetmakers workbench to me,
well at least for planing panels and such, looks like a mish mash of techniques to build
a workbench, so you don't have to do the same faffery again.

Had a look at Wearing. His "true face" planing is totally orthodox, much as I've described above.

 

[Ttrees]

Had a look at Wearing. His "true face" planing is totally orthodox, much as I've described above.

As is the videos with Charlesworth, if you're referring to the use of winding sticks,
and using the non show side as the reference.
Is there anything on thin stock?

 

[Jacob]

......
and using the non show side as the reference.

What does this mean? If you are planing the best face (show side) that is what you look at. If you are planing the back (non show side) that is what you look at, and the gauge lines of course - you will be thicknessing too.

Is there anything on thin stock?

No. Why would there be? He probably has wheezes and jigs in his other books.
He's good on edge jointing for table tops etc.
You get the sense from Wearing that he was always a teacher without much experience of earning a living from woodwork itself. Could be wrong.

 

[Ttrees]

What does this mean? If you are planing the best face (show side) that is what you look at. If you are planing the back (non show side) that is what you look at, and the gauge lines of course - you will be thicknessing too.

So your saying you'd rather shim the work to use your winding sticks?

No. Why would there be? He probably has wheezes and jigs in his other books.
He's good on edge jointing for table tops etc.
You get the sense from Wearing that he was always a teacher without much experience of earning a living from woodwork itself. Could be wrong.

I very much doubt that someone with writings concerning hand planes, hasn't mentioned planing thin stock.

The use of the bench as I'm suggesting, Cosman's been demonstrating the use of it as such since at least 2004, from his old videos.

These lamps have likely been in most workshops since I'd guess at least the seventies or eightys,
and I'd guess mentioned in a few books.
Surely there's someone in-between the advent of the lightbulb and Cosman to use such a bench?
I'm guessing it was the norm for one of Cosman's mentors.

Between whoever they might be, a few others like Klausz, Frid, and so on have had continental benches which they have managed to keep well.
Perhaps it's a continental thing?

 

[Molynoox]

That plate looks close to being unsalvagable, I no expert on the subject though, but I do sharpen and look after all my saws in my own way which I'm not going to waffle on about!!, if you have the inclination to try and fix it up take a look at this post from @deema about Saw restoration.

That's a brilliant post from @deema.
I think it might be best to buy a saw for now, I don't want to put barriers in front of me actually making stuff, I'm bad enough with over planning without introducing even more distractions

 

[mikej460]

Just to point out that the right technique is the one that is right for you...

 

[Jacob]

So your saying you'd rather shim the work to use your winding sticks?

No. If a piece was so rocky it wouldn't sit on a bench I 'd probably put it in the vice to flatten the back a bit. Shims doesn't sound a good idea to me at all.

I very much doubt that someone with writings concerning hand planes, hasn't mentioned planing thin stock.

He didn't. Why would he?

The use of the bench as I'm suggesting, Cosman's been demonstrating the use of it as such since at least 2004, from his old videos.
ht be, a few others like Klausz, Frid, and so on have had continental benches which they have managed to keep well.
Perhaps it's a continental thing?

What, this upside down thing? Still means nothing to me.