New hand planes?

[Phil Pascoe]

I suspect it was another **** gag.

 

[sploo]

I suspect it was another **** gag.

It did occur to me, but I was being unusually mature :wink:

 

[shed9]

I suspect it was another **** gag.

Yup, I suspect that was very much another gag. I avoided the initial start of this as I knew the caliber would not get any better and would spiral quite quickly - that said, respect to those who took the mantle.

 

[Phil Pascoe]

Graham - my nephew and niece are Kiwis - I'll never forget my wife's face when she was invited to see 3 y. o. Jono's big ****. We used to sit on the **** to have our fush'n chups. Odd vowel shifts. They actually have trouble teaching children to spell because of it.

 

[John15]

Of the new planes, WoodRiver are worth considering. I used their No.5 1/2 while on a short course at Peter Seften's school. It planed beautifully.

John

 

[condeesteso]

Seeing the arrival of the Rider planes (had to look them up), and we have the QS / Wood River, the Faithfulls, the Stanley Sweetheart... Next time someone decides to make yet another Bailey why not do something interesting and smart - delete the frog (delete 'Bailey' in fact). There are 2 things wrong with a Bailey: the frog (it's existence) and the pitch. The majority of what we all do to get the most out of them is to work around those compromises. One solid cast body incorporating the iron bed, 50 pitch. For those who like to faff with mouths sell them an adjustable toe variant.

 

[D_W]

I can't imagine that anything made in the last hundred years is a functional improvement over the bailey design for anyone other than the possible exception of beginners. 45 degrees makes for a better plane in the full range of coarse to fine planing tasks.

I remember reading all of the supposed fixes to Stanley planes in the primus range, but buying one quickly showed why I could get an unused primus plane for 1/3rd the cost of new.

 

[Rhyolith]

The debate of what is the "best" plane make went on for ages at the wooden boatbuilding yard I used to be in. There was someone with at least one of every kind of plane imaginable too so real comparisons could be made.

This is all my opinion based on that experience.

First off, the only modern budget planes worth bothering with at all are the Quangsheng and new Stanley Premium Sweetheart and neither have anything on the older Record planes (the old records tend to be better then the Stanley's, unless the Stanley is really old). So I would personally go to a car boot or eBay over buying those.

Lie Nielsen: is the best hands down for quality across the board, closely followed by Veritas. If your buying a large plane new (No.5 or larger) , just get a Lie Nielsen. I got their No.8 plane after saving a considerable amount cash and have never looked back; its perfect which is what is needed from a big jointer plane (they are utterly useless with even the slightest flaws). Another thing worth Noting is that Lie Nielsen planes hold their value extremely well, with second hand ones on eBay going for barely under the cost of a new plane.

Clifton: Clifton's little planes are great, good design and pretty. I would highly recommend there shoulder and bull noses. However there larger planes (No.5 and up) are... unpredictable. It seems to be something of a roulette to whether you get and perfect plane or one with a sole resembling a double helix! I would not even think about getting a clifton any larger than a No.4, particularly when another £50 or so will get you a Lie Nielsen that will be perfect. Something else worth noting is that Clifton sell off there sub-standard planes (Rated "B") at considerable lower prices, I have a "B" rated small shoulder plane that works fine.

Veritas: Not many people I knew had these, the few I saw looked pretty good. If you don't want a Lie Nielsen, this is the alternative.

To sum up, if your on a budget, get a second hand plane. If you have a generous amount of cash to spend on your planes get a Lie Nielsen.

Thats my Opinion.

 

[G S Haydon]

It's a dreadful comparison to make but the Bailey is a bit like an AK-47. There is normally a good reason why something gets made by the thousand, or million in terms of the AK. Normally because it excels in real world use and it's normally affordable to Joe Bloggs. Douglas I can imagine the very high standards you work to but I think 98%of the time for 98% of people the Bailey is tough to beat.

Strangely I wish Axminster, Stanley etc would literally just made a good Bailey, 1960's style would be fine. Ductile iron is fine but if it adds to much to the cost don't worry about it, perhaps a solid yoke and a fabricated lateral adjustment lever rather than the pressed. Beyond that it was truly proven design.

 

[Rhyolith]

Strangely I wish Axminster, Stanley etc literally just made a good Bailey, 1960's style would be fine. Ductile iron is fine but if it adds to much to the cost don't worry about it, perhaps a solid yoke and a fabricated lateral adjustment lever rather than the pressed. Beyond that it was truly proven design.

I am not entirely sure these sort of planes were cheap. Its easy to think that now they are littering many car boot going for between £1-10 a piece, but several old boys I have spoken with say they cost not much less than a Lie Nielsen does today (relative) at the time they were being sold new.

In sort can a good plane be made cheaply? (genuine question)

 

[Trafalgar]

"I remember reading all of the supposed fixes to Stanley planes in the primus range, but buying one quickly showed why I could get an unused primus plane for 1/3rd the cost of new."

If anybody has a Primus plane in good shape (or unused) that they want to sell at 1/3rd of retail I'm a buyer for every one I can lay my hands on.

 

[shed9]

The debate of what is the "best" plane make went on for ages at the wooden boatbuilding yard I used to be in. There was someone with at least one of every kind of plane imaginable too so real comparisons could be made...................................................................................................................................................................................................................................To sum up, if your on a budget, get a second hand plane. If you have a generous amount of cash to spend on your planes get a Lie Nielsen.

Thats my Opinion.

Totally agree with all of Rhyolith's post.

 

[Paddy Roxburgh]

Strangely I wish Axminster, Stanley etc literally just made a good Bailey, 1960's style would be fine. Ductile iron is fine but if it adds to much to the cost don't worry about it, perhaps a solid yoke and a fabricated lateral adjustment lever rather than the pressed. Beyond that it was truly proven design.

I am not entirely sure these sort of planes were cheap. Its easy to think that now they are littering many car boot going for between £1-10 a piece, but several old boys I have spoken with say they cost not much less than a Lie Nielsen does today (relative) at the time they were being sold new.

In sort can a good plane be made cheaply? (genuine question)

I asked a similar question in this thread comparison-of-tool-prices-over-time-t91056.html. Conclusion if I remember rightly was that very roughly old stanleys and records cost about the same as Quangshengs or woodrivers do today (in comparison to earnings).

 

[Rhyolith]

Strangely I wish Axminster, Stanley etc literally just made a good Bailey, 1960's style would be fine. Ductile iron is fine but if it adds to much to the cost don't worry about it, perhaps a solid yoke and a fabricated lateral adjustment lever rather than the pressed. Beyond that it was truly proven design.

I am not entirely sure these sort of planes were cheap. Its easy to think that now they are littering many car boot going for between £1-10 a piece, but several old boys I have spoken with say they cost not much less than a Lie Nielsen does today (relative) at the time they were being sold new.

In sort can a good plane be made cheaply? (genuine question)

I asked a similar question in this thread comparison-of-tool-prices-over-time-t91056.html. Conclusion if I remember rightly was that very roughly old stanleys and records cost about the same as Quangshengs or woodrivers do today (in comparison to earnings).

Thats useful, thanks

So thats about £100 in todays money for an No.4? Which is not what I would call cheap (obviously relative), therefore it seems like it is probably not possible to produce a good metal soled plane cheaply.

 

[deema]

The Record and Stanley planes that are at least circa 50 years old are good pieces of kit. However, over the years many have suffered abuse, neglect and alteration by 'expert' fetlers which can make them very difficult to buy secondhand unless you either know the person your buying it off, or indeed know what a good plane should look like and feel like. I was gifted my fathers planes which were all excellent Record and Stanley's, however, they had had their plane blades renewed as he was a cabinet maker / joiner and used his tools daily. The replacement irons were OK for their day, however since they were not the older cast steel blades, and the rather more modern versions they let down significantly the performance of the plane compared to a well setup plane with a decent plane iron. (In my fathers hands they could do anything, and suggested that my skills were inadequate not the tool.....he was absolutely right.....and I compensate with better tools!)

I decided to buy a replacement plane iron to see why improvement I could make, and selected the LV drop in replacement for the Stanley / Bailey planes and added one of their Caps as well. This was a few years ago when I had to order directly from the USA (now available from Axi). The plane worked beautifully, however I'd added circa £90+ of value to a plane that would sell for circa £10. The math simply did not add up. For the other planes, rather than upgrade I started to buy Lie Nielson as funds allowed, and then changed to Lie Valley. The cost of the planes was high, but this time I could buy a plane that in a few years I was confident I could should I wish sell for the same price as I paid for it. A much better bet in the long run, I therefore sold virtually all of my father planes as I got a replacement.

Why did I change from LN compared to LV? Well I started off with LN because it was familiar, it looked and felt like a Stanley / Bailey. It also had a No8 in its range which I wanted. However, in the last few years the price I could buy a LV for from Europe meant that I could buy two LV to one LN. I had to give it a try. I bought a No 6 and found that I actually preferred the feel of the plane, the tote fits my hand better and my fingers have room to spare without fighting for room with the adjuster. I also like the Norris style blade adjuster with the two grub screws guiding the plane iron near the mouth. The support near the mouth significantly reduces the number of times the blade is knocked aside by a hard knott requiring the blade to be reset. I also find the blade depth adjustment to have far less backlash than the LN, and once you've git used to it its as easy to adjust on the fly.

The LV planes are about the same price as the Quangsseng and the Ryder if you shop around, haggle, and look out for promotions which occur regularly. Axi will match any price you find (except eBay) and are birth I have found very helpful, and resolve any problems I've had quickly.

 

[bugbear]

One solid cast body incorporating the iron bed, 50 pitch.

That would probably increase the difficulty (and hence cost) of manufacture; the separate frog means that the main
sole casting is a nice, simple, fairly uniform shape, which reduces stresses and bending during (and after) the casting process, whilst the frog
is a nice simple blob.

Most of the early (non Bailey) metal planes had separate frogs for this reason.

BugBear

 

[G S Haydon]

Rhyolith, totally get your point. My angle was "Joe Bloggs". £100.00 for an excellent Bailey #4? Seems fair, I think it could be done for around £80.00. For those that want an Clifton or similar can spend £250.

Also, I'll support the quality of the WoodRiver via Peter Sefton and the QS range from Matthew at WSH. The trump card for those two planes is the use of T10 plane irons and good value. If I were to buy an LN I'd need to spend an extra to replace the A2 iron.

 

[D_W]

"I remember reading all of the supposed fixes to Stanley planes in the primus range, but buying one quickly showed why I could get an unused primus plane for 1/3rd the cost of new."

If anybody has a Primus plane in good shape (or unused) that they want to sell at 1/3rd of retail I'm a buyer for every one I can lay my hands on.

I put mine in the listings of the woodworking forums for a while at $75, it didn't sell, and I had to list it on ebay where it ultimately found a foreign buyer. It was one of the better older types with lignum sole and beech top parts, whoever had it before me had not gotten the factory grind off of the iron yet over a couple of decades and it was spotless.

Worth a try. I've bought other things I didn't like for a lot more than $75.

 

[ED65]

Grinding stuff like that by hand, even with an ultra coarse grit diamond stone, is just a marathon dispiriting slog that will take at least 30 minutes of constant hard work

Can I just check, are you talking about if you have to reshape the edge or create a new bevel because of a chip?

 

[condeesteso]

I can't imagine that anything made in the last hundred years is a functional improvement over the bailey design for anyone other than the possible exception of beginners. 45 degrees makes for a better plane in the full range of coarse to fine planing tasks.

May I check please - functional improvement meaning works better? I can. And is it your opinion that 45 degrees makes for a better plane in the full range of coarse to fine planing tasks. I don't think that is a fact. That would render virtually all woodies, infills and others inferior. And what are the beginner planes you refer to please?

I accept what BB says re production process and cost driving the engineering design. But I would never accept that the separate frog improves the fundamental functionality - at very best it might just about not get worse. Re pitch, before the Bailey, 45 was not 'common pitch'. If you take away all planes designed for end grain, planes for face work are 48 - 55 degrees. I believe the 45 is a compromise. We should remind ourselves that mass-produced Baileys are just one type of plane, there are others and the Bailey does not define the category. It is no more than a decent mass-produced compromise.