Lust after infill planes?

[mr]

I posted some similar thoughts on the other thread and received a few strongly worded replies, four letters, the ole f word etc. But the point is that they may look fantastic but if they're supposed to be tools then the most effective tool is surely the one that does the job as well as any example of that particular tool at the best price in the best time. If its a work of art or a collectible thats a whole different thing. There is a case for form meeting function. Obviously some peoples wallets will allow them to upgrade the prettiness of their tools, there's nothing wrong with that but the defense of a tools cost on the grounds that its cost per se makes it a better tool is daft.

 

[Mirboo]

I don't really lust after infill planes at all.

I'm with Alice on this one. I don't lust after infills either. I think some of them look nice, in fact the Holtey's pictured earlier in this thread look fantastic, but I don't want one. Lie-Nielsen planes on the other hand, well that is a different matter. Even if the Holtey planes pictured earlier were priced the same as their Lie-Nielsen equivalents (equivalent from the point of view of desired function) I'd choose the Lie-Nielsen every time.

 

[Derek Cohen (Perth Oz)]

Do I get another chance to show off my Spier? Y-e-s!

And only cost $75 (Aussie of course) .... OK, there were a few hours of renovation time involved.

With respect to the thread, I have only a little experience of infill planes. I find this one to be a very nice, balanced smoother. It is a small plane (7 1/2"), but does not feel dainty. I used it to finish a Jarrah table top, and it worked effortlessly. I was quite surprised. It did the job as well as I would hope and expect from either LV or LN.

Given that I already have modern smoothers and panel planes that will do just about anything I could ask of them, an infill is not really about doing it better but about the pleasure in doing it with pomp and circumstance.

Regards from Perth

Derek

 

[Alf]

Do I get another chance to show off my Spier?

Noooo!

Rats. Too late.

:wink:

Cheers, Alf

 

[GEPPETTO]

Hi,
I don't know well the pros and cons, I haven't infill's, but it's a pleasure to look
at

Cheers
Gabriele

 

[Mirboo]

I reckon your Spier looks fantastic Derek, and I enjoyed reading the story of its refurbishment. You did a great job.

I have a preference for metal bodied planes though, like old Stanley's and Records, Lie-Nielsen's and Veritas. To me they look more like 'tools' than infills do.

 

[Anonymous]

Now, this has been an interesting thread. Thanks for the thoughtful and thought provoking replies.

I'm afraid the reason for the thread was really because I sit in Alf's camp:

Aesthetics are something different, but to be honest only the occasional infill really makes me think "wow, that's beautiful"

Except, I don't think I've seen an infill that moves me at all. For me, the most beautiful of planes are the LN bench planes - functionally perfect and designed by someone with an eye for proportion and shape. They move me.

If we all liked infills, it'd be a boring ole world

 

[Alf]

If we all liked infills, it'd be a boring ole world

No, no. If we all liked braces and hand drills it'd be a boring ole world... If we were in Spain it'd presumably be a boring olé world?

Good heavens, is that my coat I have in my hand? 8-[

Cheers, Alf