My Clifton No 7

[Karl]

Hi All

I have been having a play with my Clifton No 7 in anticipation of a few projects i've got coming up.

I decided to have an experiment with a LN chipbreaker - replacing the Clifton 2 piece jobbie. Here are the results

That's right. 0.0005" full width, full length, glorious shavings, from a board of Oak. I re-calibrated the calipers several times to make sure there weren't any errors. Some of the shavings I was getting (which were about half width) wouldn't even register on the calipers.

I could not replicate the results using the original Clifton 2 piece chipbreaker - so the LN will be staying put !

I know that shavings this fine are of little use on a day to day basis, but at least it shows the plane to be in fine form.

Cheers

Karl

 

[ivan]

Very nice! But the Clifton will do best if tuned. Alas it is not as well made as the LN which does work quite well straight out of the box, as the Yanks say.

 

[Karl]

Hi Ivan

My Clifton performed superbly straight from the box - the only fettling required was to remove a small burr from around the mouth area.

I was very surprised at the difference the LN chipbreaker made.

My personal experience of LN products has been somewhat different than the norm. I find the build quality inferior to that of the Clifton, and have also been dissapointed with their performance. I speak from personal experience of both a LN 62 (which was returned) and a LN #6, which I am still trying to get to work! I think a lot of their products are sold on reputation - that was certainly a factor in my choices. I have been happy with my smaller LN planes.

Cheers

Karl

 

[Chris Knight]

Very nice! But the Clifton will do best if tuned. Alas it is not as well made as the LN which does work quite well straight out of the box, as the Yanks say.

Yep,
That shaving shows the plane is badly in need of tuning :lol:

 

[David C]

Karl,

Interesting results.

All planes that come through my workshop get tuned to some degree, at least 50 per year........ The amount of work needed is variable!

I find no chipbreakers ready to go, if you want a fine mouth, they all tend to have blunt or slightly square edges which need "sharpening" at about 45 degrees. (Maybe 43 degrees for the new improved L-N). I also check and refine the underside lip which mates with the blade.

All blades need back flattening and checking before honing. The concept of a plane, "ready to go out of the box" is ludicrous to me, like expecting a car to run without petrol.

Another standard tweak is to check sole flatness and improve if necessary.

We finish on blunt 240 grit w&d then ease edges, then scrub hard with 0000 wire wool and metal polish, before applying a couple of coats of wax.

The metal polish cuts friction massively.

I feel you have been very unlucky with L-Ns, the majority are excellent in my experience.

best wishes,
David

 

[tnimble]

Nice shaving.

I concur with David C that both new LN and LV planes do need a little bit of tuning before they are ready. The amount needed is not very much and you prob can get away without tuning. I have little experience with Clifton.

 

[Paul Chapman]

My Clifton performed superbly straight from the box

That's been my experience as well with a #7, #6, #4.5 and #3.

Cheers :wink:

Paul

 

[Argus]

My Clifton performed superbly straight from the box

That's been my experience as well with a #7, #6, #4.5 and #3.

Cheers :wink:

Paul

Me Too. That's my experience.

But I must admit that, impressive as it sounds, the thickness of a shaving is not the ultimate criterion for me. I prefer to examine the quality of the finished cut instead of what's lying on the workshop floor.

I bought my Clifton 7 in Axminster about 7 or 8 years ago - soon after they were first available.

Although I was prepared to buy a LN, I looked at the LN and the Clifton at the time, one in each hand, and I could not perceive £100 price difference between the two.

The Clifton had a basic clean up from the box, then equipped with a Clifton blade and a two-piece chip breaker has performed its basic task very well ever since which is preparing the final edges of Oak boards for rub joints - glue only no splines or biscuits.
I must add, though, that I have fettled the front section of the chip breaker to improve its contact with the back of the iron and polished the face.


I'm very satisfied with mine and it did perform well straight from the box.


.

 

[Paul Chapman]

One difference with the Clifton #7 over the LN #7 which I prefer is the weight. The Clifton #7 is about the same weight as the LN #8, and I do like heavy planes. In general, the Cliftons tend to be slightly heavier than the LNs throughout the range of sizes, which is one of the reasons that they are my planes of choice.

Cheers :wink:

Paul

 

[Anonymous]

One difference with the Clifton #7 over the LN #7 which I prefer is the weight. The Clifton #7 is about the same weight as the LN #8,
Paul

Exactly why I bought the Clifton over the LN too

 

[MarcW]

One difference with the Clifton #7 over the LN #7 which I prefer is the weight. The Clifton #7 is about the same weight as the LN #8, and I do like heavy planes. In general, the Cliftons tend to be slightly heavier than the LNs throughout the range of sizes, which is one of the reasons that they are my planes of choice.

Cheers :wink:

Paul

Hi Paul, Tony,

I like the Clifton too, I only have one though - a 5 1/2 - but the rest of my stock is mainly LNs. I conclude of your writing, that adding a #7 Clifton wouldn't be a mistake :lol: The only drawback I found on my model is its small scaled handle. So my question is: Is the handle on the #7 a tad bigger than that on the #5 1/2 which I suspect isn't the case. It woud help me much in purchasing my next jointer ( I love jointers )

Thanks,

 

[dunbarhamlin]

Hi Marc
All of the Clico 2 3/8" bladed planes (4.1/2, 5.1/2, 6, 7) have the same sized handle - or at least, I can't feel a difference (my calipers are a little inaccessible at the mo)
Cheers
Steve

 

[Paul Chapman]

Hi Marc,

Not easy to measure, but the handle and front knob on my #7, #6 and #4.5 feel much the same. I don't have the #5.5 but would guess it's similar. On my #3 the handle is fractionally smaller and more upright and the front knob is higher but it feels very good in the hand. I was discussing this with Mike Hudson recently at a woodworking show - Mike is their main designer. There is some slight difference in size between the handles and knobs on the #3 and #4 to provide more clearance for the hands and I get the impression that they put a lot of thought into it. The only problem is we all have different size hands

Cheers :wink:

Paul

 

[Derek Cohen (Perth Oz)]

I have just completed the re-build of a Stanley #51/52. In it I am using a Clifton cap iron and Smoothcut iron. I cannot say whether there is any different between the Clifton and a LN - I doubt that one would really notice much between two cap irons of their quality. Against a Stanley I have no doubt of the outcome - I did the first review and assessment of the LN cap irons shortly after they came on the market several years ago. So I know they are better than Stanley. But better than Clifton?

The problem with the Clifton is that removable foot. It keeps falling off. Unusually I manage to break its fall with my toes. It is heavier than it looks. My toes are not. (Please note the absence of expletives - I am being extra polite!). So I epoxied mine together into a single unit (the Clifton, that is, not my toes). And now it is a pleasure to use.

Regards from Perth

Derek

 

[Tony Zaffuto]

Derek,

I believe David Charlesworth advocated a bit of silicone caulking in the groove of the front piece of the Clifton cap iron to hold it together. I have yet to do it to my Clifton 3# (one of my most favored tools) but it will be done one of these days.

Tony Z.