Marples transitional planes

[tibi]

Hello,

I have found a nice transitional Marples plane. This kind of plane was produced in the sixties for just a short while, where hand planes were already on the decline. Does anyone have experience with it? It might be lighter than a no. 5 for a coarse and medium work.

Thank you.

 

[D_W]

Found or bought? I think you mentioned that it's hard to get english style all wood planes there. I have no experience with that type but put up a video series years ago about how to build a double iron plane and several people asked me to buy one of those and show the process of making one.

If you bought it already, give the iron a little camber and start on softwood and work up from there and see how it does. I'm guessing (and only guessing) that it will chatter a little under a heavy load (a stanley will in a really heavy jointer cut that's more like hogging, or jack work, but the tiny chatter is harmless and I have a theory that planes that chatter like a "zzzzzzzipppppppp" may actually take a little less energy to use.

the biggest asset that plane will have if it works well is you won't be making heat with the metal to wood contact like you would with a metal plane. that quietly steals about 35% of your effort and it's not evident until you do the same task twice - once with a metal plane and once with a wooden one and time it.

 

[tibi]

Found or bought? I think you mentioned that it's hard to get english style all wood planes there. I have no experience with that type but put up a video series years ago about how to build a double iron plane and several people asked me to buy one of those and show the process of making one.

If you bought it already, give the iron a little camber and start on softwood and work up from there and see how it does. I'm guessing (and only guessing) that it will chatter a little under a heavy load (a stanley will in a really heavy jointer cut that's more like hogging, or jack work, but the tiny chatter is harmless and I have a theory that planes that chatter like a "zzzzzzzipppppppp" may actually take a little less energy to use.

the biggest asset that plane will have if it works well is you won't be making heat with the metal to wood contact like you would with a metal plane. that quietly steals about 35% of your effort and it's not evident until you do the same task twice - once with a metal plane and once with a wooden one and time it.

I have found it on Ebay. Did not buy it, but have found that such a plane exists. I can only buy English-style wooden planes on ebay.co.uk or buy an ECE Primus English Pattern Jack Plane from fine-tools in Germany or make a wooden plane myself. I would definitely try to build one myself, so I was looking for some designs.

I have oak , beech and cherry at home right now, I know that maybe cherry is the least suitable one, but I would like to try cherry. I can make some planes from beech and oak in the future as well. I have heard today, that cherry attracts worms a lot. I do not know if it is true?

I have a no.5 Stanley, but I would try to use a wooden plane for coarse and medium work as it is lighter and use a no.4 smoother only for final smoothing.

There are not very many people left today, who are dimensioning wood all by hand. So I started to read some books in public domain that are 120+years old in search of some techniques how to flatten rough-sawn boards that are 2,5m long and 50 mm thick in an efficient way. Gurus on youtube either plane a rather short board and can get it S4S in 20 minutes, but no one shows how to plane longer boards in a quick manner. As people in 19th century could mostly use only wooden planes and Bailey planes were often frowned upon initially, they must have had some means how to produce furniture quicker in a high paced furniture workshop of that era.

 

[D_W]

nicholson's writing about working timber is probably the best there is. He talks about using the double iron, and also what direction you should plane.

When working by hand, the task is generally to work something in a different order than with power tools. If you'd consider making a whole long piece of stock (perhaps 10" wide by 12 feet long) 0.8" by running it through a face planer and then a thickness planer, you'd instead select the part of the board you want, handsaw it out and then dimension it. If you were making a panel, you'd generally match the edges, joint the panel based on preferable grain direction and then plane the panel as one, but planing long boards is usually prep only when doing something like prepping stock to strike moulding.

That said, when you do have to plane something long, you work sectionally - as much as you can comfortably work with a lean forward and arm extension, and then move backwards to continue down the board. This is for coarse stock removal, but the rule of removing the high spots applies first before this on the first face of a board. You work the board in sections progressing to a jointer (With the cap iron set) and then consolidate the work with overlapping through shavings in the length of the board.

I have seen exceptionally few youtube videos that show dimensioning and show it in a way that someone would do it if they worked a few hundred board feet before they made a video. It's agonizing to do it in a real project and do it slowly, herky jerky or roughly.

 

[Orraloon]

I should have snapped up the first one I saw on ebay about 10 years ago as the price of them have gone through the roof thanks to online woodworkers shining a light on them. I kind of just like the look of them. That said some of those same woodworkers show how to make one.

Build an Adjustable Jointer Plane! // Affordable handtool woodworking. - YouTube
So if you have a broken old stanley laying about there is nothing to loose.
Regards
John

 

[tibi]

nicholson's writing about working timber is probably the best there is. He talks about using the double iron, and also what direction you should plane.

When working by hand, the task is generally to work something in a different order than with power tools. If you'd consider making a whole long piece of stock (perhaps 10" wide by 12 feet long) 0.8" by running it through a face planer and then a thickness planer, you'd instead select the part of the board you want, handsaw it out and then dimension it. If you were making a panel, you'd generally match the edges, joint the panel based on preferable grain direction and then plane the panel as one, but planing long boards is usually prep only when doing something like prepping stock to strike moulding.

That said, when you do have to plane something long, you work sectionally - as much as you can comfortably work with a lean forward and arm extension, and then move backwards to continue down the board. This is for coarse stock removal, but the rule of removing the high spots applies first before this on the first face of a board. You work the board in sections progressing to a jointer (With the cap iron set) and then consolidate the work with overlapping through shavings in the length of the board.

I have seen exceptionally few youtube videos that show dimensioning and show it in a way that someone would do it if they worked a few hundred board feet before they made a video. It's agonizing to do it in a real project and do it slowly, herky jerky or roughly.

David, do you mean Mechanics Companion by Peter Nicholson or some other book?

I have bought some 3m long, 30 - 60 cm wide and 50 mm thick boards of beech with live edges, that I would like to make a workbench from. My workbench will be 2.2 m long and the rest will be used for legs.Top and legs will be 12 cm thick (5"). I need to make parallel boards out of those big boards and there is no way I would be willing to rip saw them by hand. So I will use a circular saw that I have. Then I will need to flatten the first face and edge by hand. so I need to plane 12-13 boards for top lamination that will be 2.2m long, 12 cm wide and 5 cm thick . Then I will probably send them through a thickness planer. This is why I asked the question how to plane long boards. I wanted a light wooden plane for coarse work, because there will be a lot of planing involved. It is not just the usual one 80 cm board that appears in those youtube how to dimension by hand videos.

If I get some experience and speed, then I would sell the thicknesser after some time. I would probably keep the circular saw only, as sometimes it is too much to rip long and thick pieces by hand (or I will buy a band saw in the future).

As in the 18th and 19th century, most people could use no machines. Maybe there were some steam powered planing and cutting machines, but they were not available to general public. That is why those craftsmen had to have some means how to work quickly (either by not planing all the surfaces to the finish level) or some any other shortcuts to build a decent quality furniture in reasonable time.

I want to use as much hand tools as possible, because I have noise and space limitations as well as I am not very concentrated person, so I can make myself an injury with a high spinning blade very easily, so I use power tools only when absolutely necessary.

 

[Jameshow]

Found or bought? I think you mentioned that it's hard to get english style all wood planes there. I have no experience with that type but put up a video series years ago about how to build a double iron plane and several people asked me to buy one of those and show the process of making one.

If you bought it already, give the iron a little camber and start on softwood and work up from there and see how it does. I'm guessing (and only guessing) that it will chatter a little under a heavy load (a stanley will in a really heavy jointer cut that's more like hogging, or jack work, but the tiny chatter is harmless and I have a theory that planes that chatter like a "zzzzzzzipppppppp" may actually take a little less energy to use.

the biggest asset that plane will have if it works well is you won't be making heat with the metal to wood contact like you would with a metal plane. that quietly steals about 35% of your effort and it's not evident until you do the same task twice - once with a metal plane and once with a wooden one and time it.

D_W do you not find a metal plane has more momentum which carries it through difficult wood? I haven't flattened massive pieces but I have flattened 6x1 regularly.

I find a no5 ideal for scrubbing at 45°

Then a coursely set plane followed by a fine cut.

You can do it with one plane it just takes time to set up between each process. If doing alot of timber then that becomes less of an issue.

Cheers James

 

[Jimmy69]

David, do you mean Mechanics Companion by Peter Nicholson or some other book?

I have bought some 3m long, 30 - 60 cm wide and 50 mm thick boards of beech with live edges, that I would like to make a workbench from. My workbench will be 2.2 m long and the rest will be used for legs.Top and legs will be 12 cm thick (5"). I need to make parallel boards out of those big boards and there is no way I would be willing to rip saw them by hand. So I will use a circular saw that I have. Then I will need to flatten the first face and edge by hand. so I need to plane 12-13 boards for top lamination that will be 2.2m long, 12 cm wide and 5 cm thick . Then I will probably send them through a thickness planer. This is why I asked the question how to plane long boards. I wanted a light wooden plane for coarse work, because there will be a lot of planing involved. It is not just the usual one 80 cm board that appears in those youtube how to dimension by hand videos.

If I get some experience and speed, then I would sell the thicknesser after some time. I would probably keep the circular saw only, as sometimes it is too much to rip long and thick pieces by hand (or I will buy a band saw in the future).

As in the 18th and 19th century, most people could use no machines. Maybe there were some steam powered planing and cutting machines, but they were not available to general public. That is why those craftsmen had to have some means how to work quickly (either by not planing all the surfaces to the finish level) or some any other shortcuts to build a decent quality furniture in reasonable time.

I want to use as much hand tools as possible, because I have noise and space limitations as well as I am not very concentrated person, so I can make myself an injury with a high spinning blade very easily, so I use power tools only when absolutely necessary.

I'm sure you've seen this if you're making a bench. Has some planing techniques at around the 32.30 mark

 

[tibi]

I'm sure you've seen this if you're making a bench. Has some planing techniques at around the 32.30 mark

Yes I have seen it in the past, but it is a good reminder to watch. I have read his Anarchist Workbench book, too.

 

[D_W]

David, do you mean Mechanics Companion by Peter Nicholson or some other book?

I have bought some 3m long, 30 - 60 cm wide and 50 mm thick boards of beech with live edges, that I would like to make a workbench from. My workbench will be 2.2 m long and the rest will be used for legs.Top and legs will be 12 cm thick (5"). I need to make parallel boards out of those big boards and there is no way I would be willing to rip saw them by hand. So I will use a circular saw that I have. Then I will need to flatten the first face and edge by hand. so I need to plane 12-13 boards for top lamination that will be 2.2m long, 12 cm wide and 5 cm thick . Then I will probably send them through a thickness planer. This is why I asked the question how to plane long boards. I wanted a light wooden plane for coarse work, because there will be a lot of planing involved. It is not just the usual one 80 cm board that appears in those youtube how to dimension by hand videos.

If I get some experience and speed, then I would sell the thicknesser after some time. I would probably keep the circular saw only, as sometimes it is too much to rip long and thick pieces by hand (or I will buy a band saw in the future).

As in the 18th and 19th century, most people could use no machines. Maybe there were some steam powered planing and cutting machines, but they were not available to general public. That is why those craftsmen had to have some means how to work quickly (either by not planing all the surfaces to the finish level) or some any other shortcuts to build a decent quality furniture in reasonable time.

I want to use as much hand tools as possible, because I have noise and space limitations as well as I am not very concentrated person, so I can make myself an injury with a high spinning blade very easily, so I use power tools only when absolutely necessary.

I think it's practical carpentry, cabinetmaking and joinery or something similar.

 

[Phil Pascoe]

You do not need a five inch top. Three is enough in hardwood. Mine is a little under that and there's no bounce whatsoever (even though it's supported only at both ends), bearing in mind heavy morticing etc. is done over the legs anyway. That thickness will make it difficult to use holdfasts and necessitate huge clamps to hold anything down to it.

 

[D_W]

I think it's practical carpentry, cabinetmaking and joinery or something similar.

I have this volume in PDF, as google published it in google books. But I have to admit that I don't know for sure which text the planing commentary is in, but you can consider it definitive and superior to advice from any of the current popular woodworking teachers.

As far as the prior question (didn't look up to see who asked it) about dimensioning really hard woods - I think if you're working entirely by hand, you're not going to do certain woods. For example, rosewood is harder than maple, but it works wonderfully if you can modify a plane edge to be immune to silica. Hard maple is less hard, considerably so, but for some reason, doesn't plane as nicely, so it wouldn't be out of the question to saw and plane good quality rosewood, but you'll quickly realize that the payoff isn't there for maple because it's boring and rotten to work.

Beech would be about as hard, but more durable (and you can color it if you don't like the way it works) and it works nicely by hand.

If there is anything that's so rotten that it needs something like a metal plane or an infill, it's probably to be avoided (or can be with a ballasted wooden plane).

...or you can just use machines for it.

 

[D_W]

D_W do you not find a metal plane has more momentum which carries it through difficult wood? I haven't flattened massive pieces but I have flattened 6x1 regularly.

I find a no5 ideal for scrubbing at 45°

Then a coursely set plane followed by a fine cut.

You can do it with one plane it just takes time to set up between each process. If doing alot of timber then that becomes less of an issue.

Cheers James

I shouldn't have been so lazy - generally, no, there's nothing that's worth working by hand that can't be worked more easily with a wooden plane. But, I don't like coffin smoothers in hardwoods - I think a wooden jack plane, wooden try plane and stanley bailey type pattern is unbeatable for productivity.

I've tried everything:
* premium (LN/LV)
* BU
* continental (continental planes are a good choice if you like that style - productive, but skip the weirdo adjusters), and their smoothers are the exception as you have two hands on them and don't batter elbows and shoulders on hardwood like you might with a coffin smoother
* infills (love infills - they're so pleasing to look at and use, but lacking in productivity aside from ability to please)
* japanese planes
* english wooden types (both double and single type)
* stanley style planes

And dimensioned everything from softwood to rosewood, and at one point decided that it would be a good idea to measure volume of wood removed per effort. Use of the cap iron and a plane with low friction the differentiator (considering using dried wood - I don't do much wet wood work, but you can find downgrain and rough without a double iron more easily and probably use a less heavy plane).

Metal plane vs. wooden is generally a 35-50% difference in heavy work, and if you're going to have a go for more than 20 minutes or so, you will feel it in your bones.

 

[D_W]

oh, I forgot - I also tried the chinese planes. There's a something for nothing kind of draw to those as at one point, they were rosewood with high speed steel irons for less than a high speed steel iron costs over here, but they only make sense to use if you're going to use the cross bar and stand behind them and push them And the ones with normal pitch and cap irons are far more practical than the really steep ones (the latter being part of the something for nothing gimmick - purchasing something that won't tear out. But the hidden problem is it will be so difficult to push for anything other than wafer thin shavings that you'll never use it).

 

[tibi]

You do not need a five inch top. Three is enough in hardwood. Mine is a little under that and there's no bounce whatsoever (even though it's supported only at both ends), bearing in mind heavy morticing etc. is done over the legs anyway. That thickness will make it difficult to use holdfasts and necessitate huge clamps to hold anything down to it.

I wanted to build a really heavy roubo - style bench with two quick release vices. Because I will be doing all dimensioning by hand and I do not want my bench to move during heavy planing and I do not want to anchor it to the floor either. Something like this one ,but without the expensive Benchcrafted vices. I think that both legs and top might be 4-5 inches thick on this one. Also Frank Strazza makes beautiful benches of similar design. I do not know if holdfasts are being used on the top of the bench in this type or only for the sliding deadman.

I can make the bench thinnier if it will not move during scrub planing, jack planing, etc. I am not experienced how thick is thick enough, so I have chosen the most sturdy bench that I could find.

 

[tibi]

I have this volume in PDF, as google published it in google books. But I have to admit that I don't know for sure which text the planing commentary is in, but you can consider it definitive and superior to advice from any of the current popular woodworking teachers.

As far as the prior question (didn't look up to see who asked it) about dimensioning really hard woods - I think if you're working entirely by hand, you're not going to do certain woods. For example, rosewood is harder than maple, but it works wonderfully if you can modify a plane edge to be immune to silica. Hard maple is less hard, considerably so, but for some reason, doesn't plane as nicely, so it wouldn't be out of the question to saw and plane good quality rosewood, but you'll quickly realize that the payoff isn't there for maple because it's boring and rotten to work.

Beech would be about as hard, but more durable (and you can color it if you don't like the way it works) and it works nicely by hand.

If there is anything that's so rotten that it needs something like a metal plane or an infill, it's probably to be avoided (or can be with a ballasted wooden plane).

...or you can just use machines for it.

Thank you David,

I have a lot of beech wood to plane for my workbench now. I probably will not be able to do it accurately enough by hand, but I can at least flatten first face + edge and then run the other side and edge through the thicknesser. I would like to use cherry as a front board on the top and the front board on the front legs, and cherry as far as I know planes nicely.

 

[D_W]

Cherry planes nicely - probably 3 units of wood for every 2 you'll get out of beech. You'll appreciate using the cap iron properly with beech on the try and smoothing steps. Jack planing, you'll want to make sure you're going downgrain.

The same is really true for cherry, but it's not as dense, so you can get away with a little more. Uncontrolled bits in planing, though (shavings coming apart, etc, are a real waste of energy, and it's sneaky - it looks like lots of stuff is coming out of the plane, but if the cut isn't controlled, not nearly as much is coming out and the surface being left behind isn't being planed the same thickness in different torn areas.

 

[Jacob]

....

There are not very many people left today, who are dimensioning wood all by hand. So I started to read some books in public domain that are 120+years old in search of some techniques how to flatten rough-sawn boards that are 2,5m long and 50 mm thick in an efficient way. Gurus on youtube either plane a rather short board and can get it S4S in 20 minutes, but no one shows how to plane longer boards in a quick manner. As people in 19th century could mostly use only wooden planes and Bailey planes were often frowned upon initially, they must have had some means how to produce furniture quicker in a high paced furniture workshop of that era.

Plenty of dimensioning goes on by hand it's very basic and one of the first things you get trained to do.
You are right about shorter lengths being easier - that's what everybody does, not just gurus. Basically before starting any planing everything needs cutting to length, ripping to width, as per design drawings and cutting list.
If the design demands it there is no particular problem with longer pieces - you need winding sticks for twist and you need to eyeball the length for straightness.
Depends on the piece but if it's bowed it's sometimes easier to start on the convex side from roughly the middle, and extend the flat until it reaches the ends. It sits better on the bench with concave side down.
Another trick with very long pieces is to establish a dead straight arris on one corner, as this is easy to judge by eye, and then to work the face and edge from the arris. A long plane is handy here and woodies come into their own - longer and lighter than the biggest steel planes. But for most purposes steel planes are a lot easier and more productive.
You don't need 5" beech worktops unless you are building heavy engineering steam engines or something! 2 to 3" is plenty.
PS I don't think "Bailey planes were often frowned upon" - they were just much more expensive.
PPS if you only had one the most preferred plane of all is the 5 1/2

 

[D_W]

PS I don't think "Bailey planes were often frowned upon" - they were just much more expensive.

I haven't looked at a turn of the century catalog for wooden planes (by then, they were ohio brand in the US and those aren't great - the wooden planes were dead here).

A stanley bailey jointer cost about one day's pay for a skilled man and perhaps some fraction of two for an apprentice. Not exactly out of reach.

For someone dimensioning wood (and not flushing house parts, but actually dimensioning wood from rough to make something in situ), the desire for a long metal plane would be lost quickly as they'd know how much they could get done in a day and getting half or 2/3rds of that done with a "better" plane wouldn't amount to much. By 1900 here, that kind of work was done. It wasn't long after that even carvers were working in factories to get paid and by the mid 20s or so, you could mail order trim and millwork cheaper than you could get it done and all was over. Around 1935, the circular saw became commercially available and the market for good hand saws ended.

 

[D_W]

(I get the sense that a skilled man in England would've been paid less, and perhaps the imported stanley planes cost more there).