Low VS standard angle planes

[Duncumb.fc]

If it really was an issue I suppose you could hold back on the candle wax for the last few passes of the plane, but I think it's a bit of a rumour and never actually a problem. And what about those oily old wooden planes? Only to be followed by linseed oil I suppose.

1. I've had a problem myself with waxy wood from a plane (I've never done it since) and while you could argue that you could switch plane for the last pass, that sounds like a bit of a waste of time...
2. I've never had a problem with sweating from my linseed oiled planes once they have been left to settle and wiped clean. Plus, linseed is a hardening oil and therefore becomes thicker and less likely to sweat during use.

Amusingly, a carpenter I spoke to enquired why the machining quality on new Stanley planes is so poor. The Stanley representative who got back suggested that perhaps it could be seen as a design feature, seeing as it could be filled with wax. Poppycock! :mrgreen:

Fraser

 

[woodbrains]

........ But if you are going to plane ornery timber, I bet you will opt for something with some heft to do the job; out of experience, not theory.

Mike.

Not so. Fastest material remover I have is a little light wooden scrubber . Next fastest is a similar but
slightly wider scrubber. This is experience, not theory. I was using one only yesterday (though Doug did more of it).
The heavier the plane, the harder the work. But steel planes are better for finer finishes, which is why they are chosen - for finer work and precision/control/adjustability etc.

A scrub plane reduces the effort required to push it, by reducing the depth of the shaving with its radiused blade, which is also narrow. You have just verified what I said about the biggest effort is due to lifting the shaving, not the mass of the plane. And the scrub is designed to minimise this. It is clear from your past posts on the subject, that you do not know what a scrub is for, anyway. Or have you changed your mind about these also?

Mike.

 

[G S Haydon]

Hello Mike

A scrub plane is quite new to me (I don't own one yet as I have not had the need for on). From what I have been able to make out I would think a scrub plane is for very rapid stock removal. I think I read that they are used for reducing the width of a board or establishing a straight edge or am I wide of the mark?

Regards

Graham

 

[Corneel]

Weight, that's an interesting concept.

When you look at the history of the plane, the time when machines weren't available, you see that the wooden plane was king. And they made the most extraordinary things back then , so the lightness of their planes didn't seem to be a problem. When Stanley introduced their metal planes they made the castings thin as possible. Woodworkers didn't like the metal planes because they were heavy, but because they didn't wear out so quickly and they were easier to adjust.

Heavy planes are tiring. On the return stroke you have to lift the plane at least a bit. That's tiring with a metal plane. When you really need a heavier plane you can lean a bit on it. The plane will still be light on the return. Also, not all planing was done at the bench, and a heavy plane on a ladder is no fun.

An advantage of wooden planes is, you can make them longer without making them too heavy. Try a 90 cm jointer for example in metal.

Probably the best planes in this world, the Japanese planes are very light. They even have lower bodies then western planes. That should tell you something.

You can work very well with light planes, because a sharp blade trumps heavyness everytime.

 

[Jacob]

......
A scrub plane reduces the effort required to push it, by reducing the depth of the shaving with its radiused blade, which is also narrow. You have just verified what I said about the biggest effort is due to lifting the shaving, not the mass of the plane.

Unless of course it's a heavy plane, where the weight then becomes an issue

And the scrub is designed to minimise this.

Hmm, sort of, it's more that a cambered blade will remove more material for the same effort, all other things being equal. Similarly with an adze or gouge.

.
A scrub plane is quite new to me

Me too, until recently. They were recently rediscovered by American manufacturers of novelty planes, but it seems that the light wooden version never went away, in Europe at least

(I don't own one yet as I have not had the need for on). From what I have been able to make out I would think a scrub plane is for very rapid stock removal.

I didn't need one either but yes they do come in handy for rapid stock removal - particularly handy for cleaning up bad surfaces such as old reclaimed timbers - hence the name "scrub" perhaps. Now I've got one I think I do need one!
They come somewhere between greenwood tools (axe, gouge, adze, drawknife) and bench tools and I imagine would be useful for timber framers wanting to trim meeting surfaces, amongst other uses.

.......Also, not all planing was done at the bench, and a heavy plane on a ladder is no fun..........

Yes.

 

[MIGNAL]

Oil won't add much weight at all to a wooden Plane. It simply cannot penetrate very deep into the wood. We must be talking a few grams at maximum.
The real advantage of the wooden Plane has already been highlighted: it's less tiring and it's actually quicker in use. On reasonably well behaved wood and when there is a lot of wood to plane it becomes a very distinct advantage. I switch between wooden and metal Planes frequently. I virtually always reach for a woodie first. If the wood happens to be a little difficult I'll switch to a metal bodied Plane where are I perceive the extra weight to be an advantage.
Most people who are accustomed to using metal bodied Planes give up on woodies pretty quickly. I did. Strange that I saw videos of people using them and their wooden planes seemed to glide over the surface, planing wood without much effort. Mine just didn't seem to give the same response despite being very well set up. The answer lies in the technique or rather the weight distribution. If you are accustomed to using a metal Plane you can't transfer that method over to the woodie without some sort of adjustment in your technique and the way you distribute the weight. That factor is much more important with the smaller wooden smoothing type Planes. The longer and heavier jointers are a bit more easy to switch over to.

 

[Corneel]

Some people close up the mouth with a bit of putty and then fill up the cavity of the plane with raw linseed oil for a few days. The oil will drain through the canals up to both ends of the plane and quite a bit of oil fits inside the wood making the plane noticably heavier. Of course, like always with these things, some people promote this method while others despise it. In the end it doesn't really matter, the plane will work both ways.

When my wooden smoother and I are "in the zone", I get something like a surfy feeling, like riding some very wide skis through bottomless powder snow. Effortless, and invincable. Sorry I can't describe it another way.

 

[AndyT]

I know it's a bit late in the discussion, and I don't expect to change anyone's opinions, but I'll just add a little bit of observed evidence on the weight of wooden planes.

There has been some discussion on this in recent TATHS newsletters. I won't repeat it all (Join TATHS for the full story!) but the nub of it is this:

Looking at common C19th beech tryplanes, of similar dimensions, a wide range of weights was found - the lightest one (at 2650g) was 700 grams less than another plane of the same size. (The weights exclude the iron and wedge.)

Some more planes of similar type were weighed; adjusting for slightly different dimensions gave a range of densities from about 0.5 grams per cc up to about 0.8 grams.

The researchers' conclusion was that some of the variation must be down to the natural difference in density of beech from different parts of the tree but a significant amount was due to the practice of soaking a plane in linseed oil (not just wiping over its surface).

[Another obvious conclusion is that the wise woodworker will make sure he has a "wide selection" of different planes to use! ;-)]

 

[MIGNAL]

You could do a simple test. Try soaking a piece of Beech in an oil based dye. With side grain it won't penetrate much above 0.2 mm's! and that's soaking the stuff in it for weeks. I know because I've done it, trying to stain a standard 0.6 mm's veneer. Obviously end grain will wick it in much more deeper but I'd be surprised if it went all the way through a Plane body. Anyway, if it's weight they were after why not stick a bit of lead at either end of the Plane. Wouldn't take days of soaking, about 10 minutes work to drill a couple of stopped holes and plug them with lead.

 

[Corneel]

Yes it soaks right through to the end. The users probably hope(d) that it would help preservate the wood and stop any movement of the wood through the seasons. Both in vain I guess, but it does make the plane heavier like Andy reports.

 

[Dangermouse]

The only wooden plane is have is a toothing plane and it does a good job. But for other work I'd go for metal planes every time. For me they are easy to set, you don't waste a lot of time faffing about with a hammer setting the blade, if you go to deep its a pain getting the blade back etc etc. As to weight, I've just flattened a workbench top of solid beech with a no6 Record and no7Stanley, took a few breaks for a cup of tea, but REALLY I don't think an extra few ounces will kill me.

 

[Corneel]

Yes, I think weight is quite a mood point. There has been way too much credit given to heavy planes in the recent past, even being used as a selling point. Some planes are really too heavy. I am a rather skinny guy, not very strong, and I don't like to use my infill plane for longer time because it is just too damned heavy. A Stanley plane usually is no problem, but neither is a wooden plane. When doing lots and lots of planing a woodie is nice.

 

[Jacob]

if a plane 75x75x600mm was 100% linseed oil it'd weigh 1.5kg approx according to my calculations.
Say a plane absorbed 10% of this it'd add 0.15 kg to the weight. Not a lot?

 

[MIGNAL]

The only wooden plane is have is a toothing plane and it does a good job. But for other work I'd go for metal planes every time. For me they are easy to set, you don't waste a lot of time faffing about with a hammer setting the blade, if you go to deep its a pain getting the blade back etc etc. As to weight, I've just flattened a workbench top of solid beech with a no6 Record and no7Stanley, took a few breaks for a cup of tea, but REALLY I don't think an extra few ounces will kill me.

Remember this Dangermouse:



Superb little Plane, after a bit of work. The potential was always there, with it's lignum sole. After a few mods it sits in the hand and is a joy to use. I don't have the problems you describe in setting wooden Planes. It's just a matter of practice and the aquisition of another skill. Don't forget that your experience of 'faffing about' just might not be the same experience of other users. Same with the weight issue. Flattening a workbench complete with tea breaks is fine. You have no time pressure, it can be a leisurely experience. Doing 3 or 4 hours of planing in a professional capacity and you might start to realise the benefits of a lighter Plane.

 

[Dangermouse]

You've done a great job to that French plane Mignal, hats off to you. I just put forward my personal likes concerning planes. But I realise others love wooden planes and that's no problem. I don't want to change anyone's mind, just saying I prefer metal planes. But must say if I had three or four hours planning to do in one go, wood or metal, I'd get out the planer / thicknesser.

 

[Corneel]

I think you made an error Jacob. 0.75dm x 0.75dm x 6dm = 3.375 liter. 1 liter of linseedoil is 0.94 gram, so you get around 3kg of weight if the plane would be 100% oil.

 

[woodbrains]

Hello,

Guessing weights and measures is daft as it proves nothing. The point is, more weight to a plane WILL give it more momentum. There is no point arguing the age honoured Newtonion physics. Whether you like heavy planes or light ones is your preferences, but preference does not alter physics. One of the reasons lots of people prefer metal panes, is due to increased momentum helping the plane through the wood. I make and own wooden planes and I love them, so I have no reason to promote metal planes unless there was a good reason. But experience tells me that for some jobs extra heft is what is called for. Removing lts of stock with a jack, smoothing ornery stuff with a heavy infill, all good.

Mike.

 

[Jacob]

I think you made an error Jacob. 0.75dm x 0.75dm x 6dm = 3.375 liter. 1 liter of linseedoil is 0.94 gram, so you get around 3kg of weight if the plane would be 100% oil.

Oh yes. I blame my calculator. Still not a lot though.

Hello,

Hello

.....The point is, more weight to a plane WILL give it more momentum.

No it won't won't. Your physics is not very good woodbrain :lol: :lol:
Momentum is the product of mass and velocity. Only you can give it more momentum - by moving it faster. Harder to do the heavier it is. You don't get owt fer nowt, as Newton often said. You also have to reverse it which also is harder to do the heavier it is and the more momentum you have given it. Then you have to resist the momentum to send it forwards again. It's a hard life , especially if you are struggling with a heavy plane.

There is no point arguing the age honoured Newtonion physics.

Well stop doing it then!

 

[G S Haydon]

FWIW, a very prominent plane marker, to the best of my knowledge, does not fill the mouth and treat with linseed oil in the traditional way. The reason for that is to prevent rot (i think, or I might be talking rot). The planes are instead treated with a wipe coat of Danish Oil. This was really interesting as most old books suggest the oil preserves the wood. I have not read anything about the addition of mass. I'm far from an expert on wooden planes so please don't think I'm trying to be clever, just though it was an interesting point.

 

[Corneel]

I don't know if I completely subscribe to Jacob's physics, but he does have a point. The energy to slice the blade through the wood doesn't come from the weight of the plane. It is provided by the user. The only way to improve matters is to sharpen the blade. (and reduce friction between plane and wood).

The momentum of a heavy plane moving at a certain velocity works a bit like a flywheel. It helps to overcome sudden changes in resitance of the wood. So for example when you start a planing stroke with the blade still hanging in free air, and you can give it plenty of speed before it hits the edge of the board, a heavy plane will help more on the first part of the planing stroke. The rest is still just a matter of pushing. So it might feel like the heavy weight helps, because the initial jerk of the blade hitting the wood is smoothed out. But it is still the same amount of energy neccessary to plow the blade through the fibers. And because the return stroke costs more energy with a heavy plane, the total balance is in favor of a lighter plane.

Mike how would you plane the endgrain of a long, wide and thick board of wallnut? You can't clamp the board vertically because it is too long. So you have to plane with the board horizontal in the vise. I choose my lightest plane, a Krenov model of only 600 gram. Sharpened the blade first. I was kind of surprised how easy it was, having always heard that endgrain needs heavy planes.

Sharp beats weight any day of the week. And like you say, weight is only a matter of preference.