It's hard to believe, but stanley still makes a #7

[D_W]

you see in the last picture the silvery bits below the frog - those are very coarsely rough cast, that was filed to get to there. It looks too short to touch a long iron bevel, but it's an illusion - the front of that casting is squared off, so the lower part even of that is gone.

Look at the front of the frog, most of the gap is because to ease manufacturing, stanley squared off the "toes" of the frog creating a large gap.

It's just the worst place to save a dollar. Which is probably more than the actual extra cost would be in mexico. it ruins the plane, but the whole thing even other than this is off - it can be made usable as I demonstrated above on curly hard maple, but I think getting these things right is beyond most.

Jacob calls describing how the cap is prepared to plane like this and then set as "confusing".

 

[G S Haydon]

It's good to know it's bad. I don't know why they bother making them anymore. Must be a big margin.

 

[rob1693]

I was working at woodside on the bailey line machining back in 2002 they had just switched from crane castings to Chinese castings and they were pretty bad back then

 

[D_W]

I was working at woodside on the bailey line machining back in 2002 they had just switched from crane castings to Chinese castings and they were pretty bad back then

it's interesting that they have now gone to mexico - or maybe some of the US stuff was made in mexico already, much from stanley is. Much also is Chinese made here. In the US, there is a tariff system or at least was to encourage production anywhere in north america, and the last time I heard about fender's costs to make guitars, it was something like $50 an hour total labor and compliance cost in the US and $4 in mexico. The mexico made fender guitars are pretty nice, too, at least from my standpoint. Not custom shop nice, but for just over half the cost of US standard, they are really close in quality (about 25% of US custom shop, which is closer to what original production would've been).

At any rate, the casting hardness is weird - lots of little things are weird, but that one picture of the filed rough casting bottom (stanley didn't intend for that to be used to bed the iron) and the frog squared off at the toes - just a poor decision. that alone halves or quarters the iron life and brings into focus the oft-said comment about a hock iron tripling the edge life on a plane - it's not the iron that's the problem, it's the plane.

I also went and looked at older union and ohio planes to see if they are really as bad as I'm remembering (I had a union 7 and the casting is thin at the bottom and the gap is not fixable like this one - I remember it being terrible in use).

And they are, in fact. Both makers tried to make the frog contact only one point - up under the back, with no contact in the front. I don't know why they would've been that dumb - they both sold at a lower cost than stanley, appreciably so. But the problem is so toxic that it's no wonder they never got much traction.

 

[Jameshow]

it's interesting that they have now gone to mexico - or maybe some of the US stuff was made in mexico already, much from stanley is. Much also is Chinese made here. In the US, there is a tariff system or at least was to encourage production anywhere in north america, and the last time I heard about fender's costs to make guitars, it was something like $50 an hour total labor and compliance cost in the US and $4 in mexico. The mexico made fender guitars are pretty nice, too, at least from my standpoint. Not custom shop nice, but for just over half the cost of US standard, they are really close in quality (about 25% of US custom shop, which is closer to what original production would've been).

At any rate, the casting hardness is weird - lots of little things are weird, but that one picture of the filed rough casting bottom (stanley didn't intend for that to be used to bed the iron) and the frog squared off at the toes - just a poor decision. that alone halves or quarters the iron life and brings into focus the oft-said comment about a hock iron tripling the edge life on a plane - it's not the iron that's the problem, it's the plane.

I also went and looked at older union and ohio planes to see if they are really as bad as I'm remembering (I had a union 7 and the casting is thin at the bottom and the gap is not fixable like this one - I remember it being terrible in use).

And they are, in fact. Both makers tried to make the frog contact only one point - up under the back, with no contact in the front. I don't know why they would've been that dumb - they both sold at a lower cost than stanley, appreciably so. But the problem is so toxic that it's no wonder they never got much traction.

Happy to take it off your hands!!

 

[rob1693]

Nicholson moved their production from the us to Mexico not the same product it was, their saw files are now trash like a lot of good old tool makers they trade off their past reputation

 

[D_W]

Nicholson moved their production from the us to Mexico not the same product it was, their saw files are now trash like a lot of good old tool makers they trade off their past reputation

they were definitely worse at first. Now they're not quite as bad as they were, but their issue is that they're competing against files from portugal, etc (bahco, some simonds, etc).

And they have some big box store accounts where files were more or less $5 for triangular files. I'd bet the box stores were pushing them to cut costs further and with the US operation they'd have needed to go up.

It's hard for me to say at this point when I can get a dozen files for $22 instead of $60 that the value proposition is worse, but the files are.

The trouble with the discussion of the shift for stanley is the last of the UK planes were worse than the mexico plane I have here, or as bad.

the late types that had good frog support from top to bottom and no gap, I've never found one of those that I couldn't make good very quickly. I like them better than the early types - they still have the same proportions, adjustability, etc.

In the last however many years, the work began to get so sloppy, though, that the cost pressure i'm assuming just made it not possible to make a plane that was even the equal of a 60s-70s US stanley.

 

[D_W]

Happy to take it off your hands!!

I could almost guarantee that shipping to the UK would cost almost as much as I paid to get it from the UK with the cost of the plane included!

 

[thetyreman]

this is similar to what paul sellers has been saying for over a decade, don't buy new stanleys as they are poorly made compared to the old ones and it's too much work to get them into a useable state. I think the pre-war records with rosewood handles were the best of the old ones, and if you're really lucky get a woden or i-sorby but they are rare.

 

[D_W]

this is similar to what paul sellers has been saying for over a decade, don't buy new stanleys as they are poorly made compared to the old ones and it's too much work to get them into a useable state. I think the pre-war records with rosewood handles were the best of the old ones, and if you're really lucky get a woden or i-sorby but they are rare.

I've got a pretty well cherry I sorby 7, but have had it for a while. Apparently they have gone up a lot. It was about 50% more than an old "desirable type" stanley at the time, or something like $150-$160 + shipping from the UK, which was also half as much as it is now.

I've come over the years to prefer the later type stanleys to most things, including to records (have had maybe 8 records, but never a newer one).

I wouldn't suggest a beginner buy a new stanley over something like a later type stanley for the same price, or less. A few small changes and a really good plane is ruined.

I think a more practical plan for anyone who doesn't want a lot of old tools is to learn how to buy and sell on ebay for a period of a year and get five of each thing and keep the best one. I can make almost anything work. By the time I eventually screw around with why the adjuster feels obscure on this plane and doesn't communicate when it's moving the iron, it will be pretty much completely solved, but I don't know if even basic flattening to a fine level is reasonable to expect of a beginner.

At any rate, I like the sorby plane - it seems like a well made marples product even though it doesn't say marples on it anywhere.

 

[rob1693]

They're quite possibly made by marples, they acquired the brand

1. I.

smith

SORBY, I.​

name
SORBY, I.
city
Sheffield
comment
SORBY, I. SHEFFIELD
The originator of the I. SORBY mark was Isaac Sorby who traded under his own name until circa 1814, then as Sorby, Turner & Skidmore until 1821 and as Sorby & Turner until 1828. His trademark must have been of value for it continued to be used by at least ten successor firms. The eleventh was ''Turner, Naylor & Co.'' who by 1909 were a subsidiary of ''Wm. Marples''. Around 1870, the "Mr Punch" mark was added as a corporate mark or an additional trademark. (The name should not be confused with I. & H. SORBY, hanging sheep trademark.) By 1932 the firm had become part of Turner, Naylor & Co., then a Wm. Marples associate which was not however fully integrated until 1963.
Regrettably this typical Sheffield story does not end here. The planes with the "Mr Punch" trade mark are likely to date from 1900-1920 whilst those marked I. SORBY "NORTHERN" are believed to date from the inter-war period and both must therefore be Marples planes under another name. CO [GOODMAN]
period
1800-1849
1850-1899
1900-1949
source
GOODMAN: 409

 

[Tony Zaffuto]

What other metallic tool brands offer performance equal to, or superior to the Bailey or Bedrock design? In the US, I much prefer Millers Falls, w/2 piece lever cap, full frog bedding.

How about the UK?

 

[D_W]

They're quite possibly made by marples, they acquired the brand

1. I.

smith

SORBY, I.​

name
SORBY, I.
city
Sheffield
comment
SORBY, I. SHEFFIELD
The originator of the I. SORBY mark was Isaac Sorby who traded under his own name until circa 1814, then as Sorby, Turner & Skidmore until 1821 and as Sorby & Turner until 1828. His trademark must have been of value for it continued to be used by at least ten successor firms. The eleventh was ''Turner, Naylor & Co.'' who by 1909 were a subsidiary of ''Wm. Marples''. Around 1870, the "Mr Punch" mark was added as a corporate mark or an additional trademark. (The name should not be confused with I. & H. SORBY, hanging sheep trademark.) By 1932 the firm had become part of Turner, Naylor & Co., then a Wm. Marples associate which was not however fully integrated until 1963.
Regrettably this typical Sheffield story does not end here. The planes with the "Mr Punch" trade mark are likely to date from 1900-1920 whilst those marked I. SORBY "NORTHERN" are believed to date from the inter-war period and both must therefore be Marples planes under another name. CO [GOODMAN]
period
1800-1849
1850-1899
1900-1949
source
GOODMAN: 409

I don't know if paul is causing people to buy these, but I don't read paul's stuff - just saw a link to his page recently when looking to see if any more are for sale.

The reason I bought this is a little different - I always liked I. Sorby's chisels and plane irons, they reminded me of Ward to some extent and I've had just about everything, so I figured getting an oddball might be nice.

I was raiding your ebay over there because the GSP had come in - this was before they started seizing everything with brown wood anywhere on it. It's a good well-made plane with a marples style cap iron on it. Everything about it reminds me of the good versions of the marples metal planes and the decal is very marples like.

 

[D_W]

What other metallic tool brands offer performance equal to, or superior to the Bailey or Bedrock design? In the US, I much prefer Millers Falls, w/2 piece lever cap, full frog bedding.

How about the UK?

Can't speak for all of the planes, but a good record is about equal to a stanley - the irons are a touch softer, which isn't that helpful. That'd be the non-SS type.

Marples planes, I've had maybe four and half of them have some cheaper frog design - not sure what their back story is - the good ones are like early-mid 1900s stanleys.

The i. sorby shown above is as good as any vintage plane, and while I wouldn't have preferred it to an LN early on, I would take it over any boutique plane every day of the week.

It's probably 1-2 thousandths hollow, which is a little bit of a pain, but will take 20 minutes to fix. I had an LN 8 the same that was very difficult to use and get a good long match planed joint, so I sold that (long ago).

 

[Jameshow]

View attachment 145037

I don't know if paul is causing people to buy these, but I don't read paul's stuff - just saw a link to his page recently when looking to see if any more are for sale.

The reason I bought this is a little different - I always liked I. Sorby's chisels and plane irons, they reminded me of Ward to some extent and I've had just about everything, so I figured getting an oddball might be nice.

I was raiding your ebay over there because the GSP had come in - this was before they started seizing everything with brown wood anywhere on it. It's a good well-made plane with a marples style cap iron on it. Everything about it reminds me of the good versions of the marples metal planes and the decal is very marples like.

Keep ya mitts off our planes!

 

[D_W]

Keep ya mitts off our planes!

giggle.

that's a small fraction of what I've extracted from over there, but admittedly, I usually "get data" from most of these and then pass them on. I'm mostly done with my data collection phase. The "hey buddy, hey guy" plane top let was something I received to test, and it also hit the road. Only one of the planes in that group is of my own make -the one far away with the brass button in the middle of the iron.

All but three of those came from england though. I've had plenty of record planes - they are nicely made effort wise, but about an even match at best with a later stanley once both have their issues corrected (both are good planes).

The blue later stanley with the round iron is one that taught me a lot - maybe my favorite smoother of a "terrible type that should be avoided".

oh...LN bronze, too. Also gone, as is the record smoother in the background. I have the aforementioned record 8 that I have to admit I only really keep because it's flat and because I know it's somewhat valuable. It appears that stanley 8s are now bringing a lot more than 7s, too.

The prices were too low over there, so someone had to do a favor for the people selling things. You might notice some missing griffiths moulding plane sets, too and about 100 chisels. And a bunch of bench planes, but those are still really cheap there - really fine planes as good as any wooden planes made in some cases, and they go for a song there. Less than the cost to ship them here.

 

[G S Haydon]

What other metallic tool brands offer performance equal to, or superior to the Bailey or Bedrock design? In the US, I much prefer Millers Falls, w/2 piece lever cap, full frog bedding.

How about the UK?

Tony, I'm going to stick my neck out and say full frog bedding doesn't exist.

 

[Tony Zaffuto]

Tony, I'm going to stick my neck out and say full frog bedding doesn't exist.

Let me re-phrase that: the frog is mostly bedding surface. In the US much is made about the Bedrock frog surface versus laterBailey frogs (changed around Type 11, 12 or 13, as parts were used).

Depending how far forward the frog seats, either the end of the iron flops around in the wind, or has pressure applied by the sole.

I agree full frog bedding doesn’t exist ‘cept in the pond in the swamp down o er the hill from our home!

 

[G S Haydon]

Let me re-phrase that: the frog is mostly bedding surface. In the US much is made about the Bedrock frog surface versus laterBailey frogs (changed around Type 11, 12 or 13, as parts were used).

Depending how far forward the frog seats, either the end of the iron flops around in the wind, or has pressure applied by the sole.

I agree full frog bedding doesn’t exist ‘cept in the pond in the swamp down o er the hill from our home!

Lovely response, Tony. I thought flattening the face of a frog was a good idea based on the information out there. I did it and realised I'd gained sweet FA.

 

[Homeless Squirrel]

What other metallic tool brands offer performance equal to, or superior to the Bailey or Bedrock design? In the US, I much prefer Millers Falls, w/2 piece lever cap, full frog bedding.

How about the UK?

Have Millers Falls myself. 9 and 10 but have peepers out on a 14 and 18 atmo and might swap him for my 1850's no6 low knob