Jake's "very best" shooting plane - question

[bugbear]

I was surfing around and found this:

http://www.woodworkforums.ubeaut.com.au ... ting+plane

A shooting plane made by fixing a metal plate to the side of a cheap #4, and then abusing 7 shades of (something) out of the #4 to get a woodie blade into it, skewed.

Very cool.

Nuno Souto (also in Australia) put a wooden "sledge" under a #5.

http://nika.frontier.iarc.uaf.edu/~cswi ... =1#message

Anyway - question for Jake;

The skew angle you got is very slight; did you do any experiments to see how much (or how little) skew is required to get real benefits?

This question related to ramped shooting boards, which provide a VERY small skew angle, but people seem to find them beneficial (although ramped boards also distribute wear over the width of the blade).

BugBear

 

[MikeW]

I saw that when Jake posted it. Always wanted to have a go myself.

My feeling--and that's all it is--is that if nothing else even a slight down shear helps to alleviate any tendency of lifting on impact and of course helps on long fiber breakout on the top, presumably show side.

I have used my little #140 on smaller things. And while it makes for an easier shearing cut, one needs good firm contact with the piece and the board else when the blade begins to dull, there is a tendency for a ragged edge on the bottom of the piece being shot.

Take care, Mike
awaiting Jake's reply...

 

[Paul Chapman]

Thanks for those links, BB.

Don't you just love the way Jake describes using a shooting board 8) You can visualise the precision from the way he describes it :wink:

Paul

 

[Anonymous]

' The very best' ..... I don't know about that. but thanks.

Anyhow, how you all going ? ..sorry its been so long for me to reply. Busy week.

Honestly, I look at that knockoff stanley of mine now and I get embarrised at its appearence.

What Mike said rings a bell.

The idea of skewing the blade like thats been around for a while....there's that stanley version of it I've forgotten the number of....Somewhere in here I think...
http://www.supertool.com/StanleyBG/stan0a.html ...
#51 ?

but on end grain, quite unlike accross grain, I don't think the improvements as great as I thought it would be......I mean, you can quite easily shoot with any square bedded plane.

What I like about skewed blade, really is just that you can often start a pass slowly, ......kind of ease into and out of a pass....ie. often I've found you don't have to whip the plane in at full speed to complete the cut...

but really the cut made by a skewed blade on end grain doesn't seem to leave a finish any better than a normal one if the blades are sharp.

****
So, I don't really think there is any ideal angle to skew the blade at. From that old post theres that knockoff stanley with a plate attached, and a wooden plane(badger ?).

The knockoff's blade is skewed just slightly, and the old wooden ones tilts far more.....They both perform similarily shooting mitres, though the wooden one feels nicer to use this way. But when shooting square the wooden one jumps if you don't pressure down properly like Mike mentioned with thick timber....thats when the heavier knockoff, with all that metal and less skew seems to better.

But, these planes of mine have a couple of problems thats worth remembering.
1. If the timber your shooting is thinner than say about 10mm then problems begin.....So, I can see how a bevel up plane and a close mouth would improve on my scruffy looking planes. I wrote a thread on it...
http://www.woodworkforums.ubeaut.com.au ... hp?t=30859

2. my planes are adjusted by hammer taps. Well, unlike adjustment for regular bench work, this can cause a problem on the shooting board.......you know how you have to 'run in ' a shooting board....well, its hard not to on occation to set a blade to cut too coarsely and inadvertantly take too great a shaving.....which will permanently run the fence in for that sort of shaving...only needs to happen once....which means the fence won't support the lagging corner of your work well when you take a normal thinner shaving....leaving a little dag or tear .......more modern planes with there laterial and depth adjusters seem less prone to this happening.

Can fix it by screwing on a new fence and running that in. but its a bit of a PITA.

****
What you say about reduced wear to blade with ramped shooting board sounds right. Personally don't know if I'd bother going to the effort to make up a ramp. But we're all different eh. I often just shim up the board I'm shooting with planks to present my shoot to a fresh part of the blade. Same sort of thing......but the idea seems good alright.

From what I've learn't so far, for those who can't afford dedicated shooting planes or bevel up planes etc, I'd recommend shooting with a plane with less height when its on its side, like a #3 stanley bench plane. Less likely to wobble about......its unlikely I think, that you'll find use for a wider blade anyway. There's a definete limit to how thick a timber you can shoot anyway. I rarely bother trying to shoot timbers any thicker than about 1", and that well within the scope of a #3's blade. If you know what I mean.

I'd definetly install whatever plane you use with a thick blade though(end grains hard...chatter etc), a fine setting and a very closely set mouth. End grain shavings don't jam up as easily as with grain shavings, so you might as well keep it tight, for planing thin stock. ...suspect keeping it tight helps the finish a little too....but not much. IMO. ......but having said that, you can live without these last points. I have been for years with my shooting planes. If the blades sharp, you can often get away with anything I've found.

I betta shut up now. deary me, I do rave a lot.

 

[MikeW]

...I betta shut up now. deary me, I do rave a lot.

Yeah, Jake, but we listen...

Thanks for the reasonings and relating the experience of using it. Especially about the hammer setting. I wouldn't have thought about that until perhaps it was a bit late.

Take care, Mike

 

[bugbear]

but on end grain, quite unlike accross grain, I don't think the improvements as great as I thought it would be......I mean, you can quite easily shoot with any square bedded plane.

Yeah - planing end grain (with a sharp blade) is not a problem.

But...

What I like about skewed blade, really is just that you can often start a pass slowly, ......kind of ease into and out of a pass....ie. often I've found you don't have to whip the plane in at full speed to complete the cut...

Spelching AKA blasting out the grain at the back of the cut is a problem. This is why I want a skew; it makes for a gentle/gradual start and end of the cut.

Instead of all the fibres on the back edge being ripped of at the same time, the skew makes the cut traverse (quickly!) in the thickness of the workpiece, so the fibres are partially support by their neighbour (until the very last fibre)

Since it appears your "very best" plane is configurable for angle, would it be possibly for you to try some experiments in this respect?

Cards on the table; I want to build (*) a heavy, laminated (Steve Knight/Krenov) plane, with a long nose, and skewed blade, for shooting.

The less skew I use, the less metal I have to grind off a good vintage blade, and the easier the geometry will be.

So I would dearly like to know the minimum skew to gain the benefit I refer to.

BugBear
(*) Of course, this may take as long as my scrub plane

 

[Anonymous]

Spelching AKA blasting out the grain at the back of the cut is a problem. This is why I want a skew; it makes for a gentle/gradual start and end of the cut.

Instead of all the fibres on the back edge being ripped of at the same time, the skew makes the cut traverse (quickly!) in the thickness of the workpiece, so the fibres are partially support by their neighbour (until the very last fibre)

Hello Bugbear, interesting stuff.

slicing out, so that you don't blast out the grain, makes sense....I agree.

And that kind of impleys that the more skewed the angle the better, right ? ....

The last thing I want to do is kill off any enthusiasm for your idea.....but , I have a concern thats worth considering I think. Sort of mentioned it before, and you probably well aware of it.

First,,,, in practise, I feel, this 'slicing out nicely' due to a skewed blade plays little significance. The run-in of the backing board determines the amount of tearout. IMO.

I believe that little tearout (or as you put it 'spleching' yes ?) is caused mostly to the shooting boards 'run in' being set for its heaviest setting to date........ie. is quite likely that at any one time the depth setting of your blade is set lighter than it has before, so that the backing board is not properly supporting the cut....

...this will happen regardless to how skewed the blade is. And I think it would happen a lot, because blade setting depth is very subjective over time, isn't it ?..........

I mean the only time you can be really shore that the piece your shooting is backed perfectly, is the first day you 'run in' your board and use it. (one always gets best results from a freshly run-in board)From the moment you reset the blades setting and that time on, your results will worsen naturally with that board, and you'll have to accept that little tearout and just clean it up after, or regularly afix a new backing board and re-run in.

So, if your worried about tearout, I'd put more concern into that, rather than skewing the blade. Maybe a quick system for quickly re-surfacing and running in the backing board ?????

Since it appears your "very best" plane is configurable for angle, would it be possibly for you to try some experiments in this respect?

Bugbear !!! stop saying "very best". They work, but just look at them. Really, they resemble pieces of junk.

Cards on the table; I want to build (*) a heavy, laminated (Steve Knight/Krenov) plane, with a long nose, and skewed blade, for shooting.

The less skew I use, the less metal I have to grind off a good vintage blade, and the easier the geometry will be.

So I would dearly like to know the minimum skew to gain the benefit I refer to.

I don't know what the minimum skew is, I'm sorry. Its just not an obvious thing to me. All my planes whether square bedded, lightly skewed, or heavily skewed work similarly. The only difference (to my disappointment...cause I was expecting more) is that subtle feeling of easing into and out of a cut, that I like.

Rip into that vintage blade and give it a go, I reakon. Their dime a dozern around here. Find them at the markets...everywhere.

Another idea I had once, that your welcome to, is running the plane on wheels and rails such that it can't lift, due to that skewing action.....ie. could help to control shooting thick timbers with a heavily skewed blade...but who knows how that work.

But, hey, goodluck with it. Love to see it when your done. Here's a link that may interest.......This guy made a stanley 51 lookalike.
http://www.woodworkforums.ubeaut.com.au ... hp?t=16508
Could pick his brain....

 

[bugbear]

First,,,, in practise, I feel, this 'slicing out nicely' due to a skewed blade plays little significance. The run-in of the backing board determines the amount of tearout. IMO.

I mean the only time you can be really shore that the piece your shooting is backed perfectly, is the first day you 'run in' your board and use it. From the moment you reset the blades setting and that time on, your results will worsen naturally with that board, and you'll have to accept that little tearout and just clean it up after, or regularly afix a new backing board and re-run in.

So, if your worried about tearout, I'd put more concern into that, rather than skewing the blade. Maybe a quick system for quickly re-surfacing and running in the backing board ?????

OK. Good points, backed by observation and clear logic.

Here's a couple more; mitre trimmers, those totally dedicated tools use a 45 degree skew (WOW) and have no back for the cut AT ALL. And they work.

So I suspect that spelching can be reduced by "backing the cut", or skew, of both.

Your comment on the backing stop wearing out is well made. I suggest using this design of backing board.

http://www.fineboxes.com/ShootingBoard.htm

Note the "fixed" stop, and additional (screwed on) face.

Derek Cohen's mighty adjustable board could have the same benefits, but is more work to make.

Derek comemented that the ramp design did soften the start and end cut, which is interesting, because that's equivalent to a very small amount of skew.

http://www.oldtoolsshop.com/inTheShop/s ... /index.asp

BugBear

 

[Anonymous]

Here's a couple more; mitre trimmers, those totally dedicated tools use a 45 degree skew (WOW) and have no back for the cut AT ALL. And they work.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I'm pretty sure mitre trimmers cut differently. The blade is connected to a lever, and the lever is connected back into the board,,,,,,so you wouldn't have to personally keep the thing down as the cut is made, like what can happen with shooting planes when shooting difficult thicknesses and hardwoods etc.

Thats the jist behind that idea I had about rolling the shooting plane on wheels and rails.......Could make the thing as heavy as a brick, yet it would move very freely cause its on wheels, but never lift, cause its held down by the rails.

So I suspect that spelching can be reduced by "backing the cut", or skew, of both.

backing the cut properly will solve the problem mostly IMO.....but in practise, it can be a little tiresome to watch. Often more important things to keep on top of.

Your comment on the backing stop wearing out is well made. I suggest using this design of backing board.

http://www.fineboxes.com/ShootingBoard.htm

Note the "fixed" stop, and additional (screwed on) face.

Yes. Thats the additional face I was going on about. To keep the thing well run-in probably a good idea to replace these on occation.

I've drawn up a picture of that adjustable face I was talking about above somewhere. Actually haven't tried it yet, but I don't see why it shouldn't work in an attempt to keep the shooting board run-in at all times....ie. run-in to the current blade depth setting of your shooting plane.

The process be something like this.......

1. you set your planes depth somehow in advance...testing it with grain maybe....uno, so its set to take a shaving thickness you like.

2. plane back on the shooting board, and release the bolt that binds the adjustable fence and slide the fence hard up to the nose of your plane.

3. Lock the bolt at that point. And make your first pass to run in the fence perfectly to the current depth setting of your plane.

Simple process.....but I'm guessing that, if you got into the habit of quickly running in a backing board prior to using the plane (even between sharpenings) you'd reduce spleching (where'd you get that word from anyway?) to near zip.

The adjustable fence would be just a sunken groove routed into the fence so that the head of the bolt is flush to the surface.....could use a threaded insert into the main fence to take the bolt. Something like that.

Here's the picture. What you think ?
http://i33.photobucket.com/albums/d74/apricotripper/shootingboardidea.jpg
So, over time the length of this adjustable face will shorten, with all that runing in going on.

Derek Cohen's mighty adjustable board could have the same benefits, but is more work to make.

Derek comemented that the ramp design did soften the start and end cut, which is interesting, because that's equivalent to a very small amount of skew.

I'd say that softening on the ramp would be similar to what I feel when I use that butchered stanley of mine,,,,the one with the plate added, with a slightly skewed blade.

Have a good week bugbear

 

[bugbear]

Here's a couple more; mitre trimmers, those totally dedicated tools use a 45 degree skew (WOW) and have no back for the cut AT ALL. And they work.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I'm pretty sure mitre trimmers cut differently. The blade is connected to a lever, and the lever is connected back into the board,,,,,,so you wouldn't have to personally keep the thing down as the cut is made, like what can happen with shooting planes when shooting difficult thicknesses and hardwoods etc.

Thats the jist behind that idea I had about rolling the shooting plane on wheels and rails.......Could make the thing as heavy as a brick, yet it would move very freely cause its on wheels, but never lift, cause its held down by the rails.

I think we're talking past each other. The point I was making with regards to trimmers is that the workpiece has no support from the stop to reduce or prevent spelching. And yet spelching isn't a problem.

I agree with what you say about the constrained motion of the blade BTW, but it wasn't what I was trying to talk about.

BugBear

 

[Anonymous]

I think we're talking past each other. The point I was making with regards to trimmers is that the workpiece has no support from the stop to reduce or prevent spelching. And yet spelching isn't a problem.

I agree with what you say about the constrained motion of the blade BTW, but it wasn't what I was trying to talk about.

BugBear

oh,,, but its still a very different acting machine .. yes ? ...you have enough power through that lever to take it slow which would reduce tear naturally I'd say....also, it has a chomping down action doesn't it ?.....meaning the supporting table would provide a deal of support....the blade of your shooting plane moves from side to side....not down...regardless as to its skewed or not.....

....thats why I was having trouble in understanding how it would support your point in anyway. I think its a totally different action. Can't really compare I would have thought. thats all. no big deal in anycase..



Anyhow, what do you think of the adjustable face idea ? I drew a picture uno. :lol: Like to hear what you think

 

[bugbear]

I think we're talking past each other. The point I was making with regards to trimmers is that the workpiece has no support from the stop to reduce or prevent spelching. And yet spelching isn't a problem.

I agree with what you say about the constrained motion of the blade BTW, but it wasn't what I was trying to talk about.

BugBear

oh,,, but its still a very different acting machine .. yes ? ...you have enough power through that lever to take it slow which would reduce tear naturally I'd say....also, it has a chomping down action doesn't it ?.....meaning the supporting table would provide a deal of support....the blade of your shooting plane moves from side to side....not down...regardless as to its skewed or not.....

....thats why I was having trouble in understanding how it would support your point in anyway. I think its a totally different action. Can't really compare I would have thought. thats all. no big deal in anycase..

Ah! You're thinking of the downward acting Morso style:

http://www.morso-guillotines.dk/mitre_f.htm

I was talking about the Lion style:

http://www.lionmitertrimmer.com/

Which is much more analogous to a skew plane on a shooting board (hence my point)

Anyhow, what do you think of the adjustable face idea ? I drew a picture uno. :lol: Like to hear what you think

I liked it when White Mountain did it, and I still like it.

BugBear

 

[Anonymous]

Ah! You're thinking of the downward acting Morso style:

http://www.morso-guillotines.dk/mitre_f.htm

I was talking about the Lion style:

http://www.lionmitertrimmer.com/

Which is much more analogous to a skew plane on a shooting board (hence my point)
BugBear

:lol: Finally, I see now where you coming from. Honestly never seen one of those lion machines before.

I must sound negitive. I don't wont to be bugbear.......but, you see time and time again I see tearout problems from old shooting boards with bad run-in's,,,,,,and it happens also with that woodie of mine as well thats skewed heavily(angled closely to that lions angle). Not so much with shooting mitres, but definetly there when shooting square.

So, one can't really dispute that it doesn't happen with shooting boards....yes ?

Have you tried shooting a plane with a heavily skewed blade ? I feel that if you had, we wouldn't be having this discussion. not that I don't won't to talk about this sort of stuff. Its interesting.

So, why does that lions plane shoot well with little back support ?....thats the question eh ?

First thing that came to mind when I saw a picture of that lions machine is the angle that blade beds at. Hard to tell, but it looked like there was little bed at all, if any.......Well maybe thats the reason it cuts without need for backing....very low effective pitch ..the effective pitch of shooting planes I doubt can get that low....something like 45 degrees bevel up, and about 40 degrees bevel down...hard to get much lower than that.

And of course, the lions machines blade is heavily skewed.....reduces tearout even further probably (liiiike you've been saying :wink: ).....but taking that principle and using it in a shooting plane is not so simple......because, more skew means more uppward force, which means YOU have to keep the bloody thing down with your hand.......and that can be hard work. (hence my rollers and rails idea)

but, also I'd guess the machine, with all that controlled leverage allows you to take a slice very gradually,,,,especailly right at the exit of the cut where tearout occurs (uno, you can be careful at that point).......You really don't have that sort of control with a shooting plane. I mean, you can ease into and out of a cut more than a square bedded plane....but not like the machine would I'd say....as you exit no doubt, even with a skewed shooting blade, the last few fibres would feel a fair bit of speed, as the force from your punching arm converts to speed.... and speed at that point = tear. If that makes sense.

So I can see where your coming from, but the machine really isn't similar in function is it ?..... it mustn't be, else I wouldn't be getting tear off my boards.

So, I think we should just throwout our shooting planes, and just go buy a lions wizbang mitre trimmer. What do ya say !? :lol: :shock: (jooooooking, only joking)

I liked it when White Mountain did it, and I still like it.

:shock: Who ?!!!........who ever it is, looks like the prick stole my idea :x :wink:

 

[Alf]

more skew means more uppward force

But doesn't that depend which way its skewed though? Skewed for a downwards slicing action, it'll need less force to keep the work down, won't it? As well as slicing into the supported edge underneath. Mind you, all this is way over my head so disregard if I'm talking more drivel than usual...

Cheers, Alf

 

[MikeW]

A couple observations...

A lion trimmer cannot take but a fairly fine cut well. A miter better than a butt cut. Very "thick" and it can spelch and or compress the end grain. A piece can twist away from the fence and or roll, especially if one tries a heavier cut. Firm contact must be maintained, firmer the thicker one tries.

What it does have over a shooting board is the contrallability of cut as oppossed to the impact of a shooting board/plane. It is the impact of a plane, especially as it dulls, that causes most people problems. The problems generally are related to too thick a cut and creep of the work piece.

Also, with a lion trimmer, too thick a cut can break out the far corner--the bottom fenced corner--of the piece if too thick a cut is attempted.

As was mentioned by someone, the extremely low effective cutting angle combined with a very fine shaving is how a lion trimmer can accomplish its nice cut without backing the cut. As it begins to dull, it produces a lousy cut.

Most of the commercial shops around here which make frames and other mitered work use machines which have in essence two small circular saw blades in order to cut both mating pieces at the same time and avoid needing to trim to "rough" length first. The ends look nearly burnished. Very nice. And fast. And accurate.

And as a bit of conjecture...seems to me the more skewed a plane blade for a shooting board, the heavier it ought to be. Seems to me that too light a plane would have a tendency to slide up and off the work, especially as the blade dulls. The whole shear-plane thing. This effect can be experienced with a skewed smoother--ever try one? Not many made. Probably for a reason. One needs to keep the nose from trying to go off the desired path. One could, in conjunction with additional weight run the plane in tracks or on linear rails in order to keep the plane on track, so to speak.

Well, my brain is tired now...my coffee to thinking ratio is off.

Take care, Mike

 

[Anonymous]

Thanks Mike. Confirms some of my suspicions.

Have you had a coffee ?..... (like to pick your brain :wink: )

..... have you ever heard of anyone adding a backing board, for close support of the trailing edge, to this lions trimmer ?......uno, like shooting boards, to improve that problem you mentioned about twist or roll of the workpiece, and to maybe eliminate tearout should it occur, albeit rarely.

Why haven't they included that in the design in the first place ?

****

Alf,,,,,if your talking drivel, I'M talkin it too.

It looking to be one of those things whose significance is only really understood once you've tried it, uno ? .....

The problem of keep the skewed plane down, that I was talking about, was when the blades skewed like my planes are ...or like that lions trimmer Bugbear showed.....slicing down, where the surface under the workpiece and the backing board supports the work to the very very edge
(I think ? )

If the blade was slicing the other way, the blade would be lifting the workpiece instead of the plane body, and I'm guessing (cause I've never tried it) there'd be a point where too thick or dense a workpiece would get too hard to hold down.......but at least the plane wouldn't jump.....and holding the workpiece down be easier, maybe with a pressuring board clamped on top ??? .........may have tearout running along the top of workpiece though,,,but there may be an idea in that Alf. :wink:

 

[Alf]

Jake,

Okay, we're obviously both on the same page with which way the skew's going, just looking at it in different ways, or something... My experience of a skewed effect on a shooting board is twofold, but limited. Firstly, a ramped board (the ramp going downhill), and secondly the ickle #140 skew block. In neither case can I recall pushing the plane through the work causing the plane to lift (and the block isn't exactly heavy). So I'm wondering if you're being over-generous in how thick a cut you're taking? Being a weedy female I naturally only take thin cuts and thus avoid any problem of that sort.

Cheers, Alf

Still way over her head - you've been warned.

 

[Anonymous]

Jake,

. So I'm wondering if you're being over-generous in how thick a cut you're taking? Being a weedy female I naturally only take thin cuts and thus avoid any problem of that sort.

.

I am prone to doing that....too much testossterone (us blokes can't even spell either !).your right. But after I've thinned up the shaving it can still happen. I do that reluctantly though,,,,,I do like to take a thick shaving and keep the process quick.

Maybe, my expectations on what the shooting plane can do are too high.

The main problem for me is when the timber gets too thick or too hard....... a point where the whole shed shakes in order for me to make a shaving even if the cuts thin......just hard work.....a point where the skewed blade starts to want to jump for the ceiling. Makes the issue of an ideal skewed angle seem insignificant, especially when they will belch like a square bedded plane if not backed well.

:roll: bloody men, we're ALLLLL the same tut tut. :wink:

 

[Alf]

Now, now, Jake, I'm sure you're a sensitive fellow who'd take to flower arranging like a duck to cement, er, water... :wink: :lol: Even as I read your post it dawned on me I'd failed to take into account the Aussie timbers again #-o - I imagine they don't exactly ease the process.

Cheers, Alf