In praise of the 2-part cap.

[D_W]

Well I was not aware of this serious glitch, so apologies!

I had one of the first which came to this country and have used them ever since. I got a No. 5 sent after seeing it in Fine Woodworking mag.

Have also helped numerous students/customers set up their planes.

A little front edge fettling was required as well as the usual plane blade work.

David

It was a strange thing, because some people reported theirs to be out of spec, and I discounted them until looking at my own. I think that there was no conclusion about what production dates might've been affected (not that it's important, it's only important if a person is actually going to use the cap when they want to, and many never do).

If it was 5% of planes? I don't know. If it was 50% (i doubt it), I don't know. I would've forgotten about it (and hate to say it, but probably discounted others' comments about it) if I hadn't had one of my own that way.

It's perfectly excusable in my book for someone like LN who is responsive to customers who have complaints.

 

[Trafalgar]

Andy mine is 2 3/8".

BB I have seen a lot of these and they all pivot a little on the pin area.

This three legged stool approach makes good sense.

There were times in the last 40 years when the quality of the front edge was very poor, requiring a great deal of filing.

Round the launch of the Clifton bench planes there was also an attack of "restricted blade advance " as described in my third book.

(And Charles is talking rubbish about L-N chipbreakers..........)

David

"Well of course the mathematics depend on what one calls a 'defect.' "

 

[G S Haydon]

Douglas, reverting back to your point on the merits I do think there are some. I used to think there were more benefits and that they would have a greater influence for me. In the long term I feel it's a sound design and easy to use but in day to day practical terms it offers no quantum leap of working. One of the big things against them is perhaps in shared work spaces such busy joiner's workshops or sites the nose deflector could go missing.

I can echo your satisfaction in regard a nicely feeding plane.

 

[Vann]

Thus, it might be an idea to assemble the plane and go round with feelers or similar to see how well the components bed to each other in working conditions. With individual components out of the plane, dissembled and on the bench, they may spring to shapes they don't assume in working order.

No need for a feeler gauge - you can see the huge gap...
about-thick-cap-irons-t80018.html?hilit=Stanley_cap&start=30 (see also the last few posts previous page of that thread)

Cheers, Vann.

 

[Tony Zaffuto]

Several comments: I bought my Clifton #3 dirt cheap during that period of time when the US tool bloggers were slamming Clifton for so-called issues, using the justification that "if you're paying for a premium plane, it should arrive ready to work". Mine did and I can't remember the issues some had, but they were of the nature of hollows on the sole, etc. Maybe some here can remember what the others were, but I can't remember anything that a little bit of elbow grease wouldn't help.

I also got one of the chipbreakers D.W. mentioned in an earlier post. Again, the blade wouldn't adjust properly, and again, I did not see that as an insurmountable problem. I simply increased the slot where needed and brazed a piece of metal to close up the oversize portion (can't remember the exact details, but it was easier to fix than to return).

What seems to be missing in so many internet forums/threads/posts, is that we're supposed to be handy with our hands, and it ain't really a big deal to address these quibbles on our own. Now, yeah, there may be times that the manufacturer should be notified, say for example a frog miss-drilled poorly, or a blade not heat treated. These are tools, and through their use, they will need adjustments/fixes, just as that new handsaw will soon need sharpening (if you actually use it!_/

 

[D_W]

The two clifton issues that I recall were defective frogs that wouldn't sit square. One of the posters was a relatively well known (and experienced) user on woodnet, Bob Feeser or something like that.

I think it was just a breakdown in communication lines and nobody defined who was responsible well (between the retailer and clifton), so nobody ever did anything about it before Bob stopped posting on woodnet. The american forums are more tiring than this forum for someone who has some experience, I think that's probably what sent him packing.

I do recall him referring to planecraft quite a lot (but I've never gotten a copy of it). I'm waiting for Charlie to get tired of his copy and send it to me so that I don't have to pay for it.

 

[Cheshirechappie]

It's all gone a bit quiet on this thread.

Hey, chaps, when I suggested measuring with the plane assembled rather than with the parts dissembled on the bench, I wasn't intending to needle or 'get at' anybody. It was a genuine suggestion. If I've upset or offended anyone, I apologise unreservedly. That wasn't the intent at all.

The reason I suggested checking IN the plane was this. The two-piececap-iron applies pressure to the cutting iron (pressure coming from the lever cap) differently to most one-piece capirons.

With a one-piece, the capiron beds at two places, one right up close to the cutting edge, and one near the top of the frog casting. The pressure at the cutting edge tends to bend the blade back and slightly down, pivotting it at the heel of the cutting iron's bevel or at the base of the frog casting. That tends to make the middle part of the cutting iron lift a bit from the frog casting. Thus, when a cut is applied, it can act like a flat spring, 'fluttering', and when conditions are right, vibrating and causing chatter.

The two-piece capiron beds in the same two places as the one piece, but critically, also at the joint between the two pieces. The lever-cap pressure is applied to the cap-iron nose-piece BEHIND the cutting iron bevel or frog bottom end, so some of it's pressure is applied to the top of the cap-iron nose-piece (at the cap-iron joint). Together with the lever-cap pressure at the top of the frog pressing the top-piece down (and this piece is in close contact with the blade for it's full length), this presses the blade into contact with the frog casting at the cap-iron joint, thus stopping it acting like a long, flat spring, and stiffening things up considerably compared to the one-piece cap-iron.

The Bailey patent one-piece is intended to transmit the lever-cap pressure in the same way as the two-piece, trapping the blade against the frog casting. For some reason unknown, most one-piece cap-irons don't quite conform to the Bailey patent, though.

Thus, the two-piece capiron gives a better-performing plane than the same plane with the same blade and a non-Bailey one-piece cap-iron, because the whole assembly uses lever-cap pressure better to give a stiffer assembly.

You can demonstrate this with a six-inch steel rule on the bench. Clean off a patch of bench with a nice, well-defined edge, and place the ruler at right angles to it, hanging-hole end pointing towards the back of the bench, and about 10mm or so overhanging the front edge, which represents the base of the frog casting. Place a finger firmly on the hanging-hole end, representing the top of the lever cap pressing against the top of the frog. Now put a bit of finger pressure at the tip of the overhanging end of the ruler, representing the toe-end of the cap-iron bearing close to the cutting edge. You'll notice that the rule bends, pivotting about the bench edge. and popping up clear of the bench at about the 2 1/2 inch mark. Now with the finger pressure still on the hanging-hole end, apply another finger at about the 1 1/2 inch mark, representing the pressure of the two-piece capiron at it's joint. Now press down again at the 'cutting edge'. You'll find the same pressure causes much less downward deflection, and than the middle of the rule, being trapped, doesn't pop up. Everything is much stiffer.

I agree with Douglas - the Stay-set and the Clifton two-piece are worthy of praise.

 

[Tony Zaffuto]

Thanks C.C.!

Maybe now, with your explanation, there may be someone other than me, in the great state of Pennsylvania (USA) that has/uses the "Stay-Set" cap iron (as well as the Clifton blade, which I like better than most irons, though the Ray Isles O1 is also pretty sweet). What I have a problem with, is all the fussing that many want to put into doing tasks. I'm a hobbyist, though my woodworking started with my father, who was a house builder/finish carpenter (I'm 63), with him showing me "workman" ways to use tools, meaning time is money. Because of that, I think today, I do rather than think about, many tasks, including using a plane, touching up a saw, sharpening a chisel and so forth.

But I believe D.W. made a very valid point about American forums and how many are populated more by those that accumulate more/use less their tools, along with following internet bloggers to lead them to each successive purchase. This forum seems populated with more professionals and people that use/take a more practical approach to their tools.