Plane - Sole Contact Points

[raffo]

Who cares if he's here or not. You have exactly what he said, it's got his name on it. If he's full of sh*t, it'd only take a few plane shavings to prove him wrong, no one is stopping you or Jacob.

 

[tibi]

why won't he come here and say it himself? seriously, why is he no longer here?

He left silently the forums on the 1st of January and he seems to be consistent with this New Year's resolution.

 

[thetyreman]

Who cares if he's here or not. You have exactly what he said, it's got his name on it. If he's full of sh*t, it'd only take a few plane shavings to prove him wrong, no one is stopping you or Jacob.

doesn't answer the question though, why did he leave?

 

[Ttrees]

Who cares if he's here or not. You have exactly what he said, it's got his name on it. If he's full of sh*t, it'd only take a few plane shavings to prove him wrong, no one is stopping you or Jacob.

And find out it works for real, surely not!

 

[Jacob]

I've talked to David many times about this, he's never said that. If you disagree with him, refute him with something that it's actually true.

Here's his 2012 article. After 11 years you could at least have taken a look at it and actually critizied it in an honest way.

https://www.woodcentral.com/articles/index.php?page=673

Another Dave. I thought it was Charlesworth going on about 50º? I don't follow either of them closely.

 

[thetyreman]

Nope. The proof is in the finished surface. You are supposed to bin the shavings!

I burn mine in an incinerator lol so it goes in a metal bin.

 

[mark w]

I have found Rob Cosman on YouTube some of the best learning resources for sharpening and setting up hand planes

He copies David Charlesworths methods but without the finesse.

 

[Jacob]

I'm told that this video was not actually about the “Influence of the Cap-iron on Hand Plane” but was research into the development of the spectacular Marunaka Super Surfacer Super Meca, but somebody added a made-up title in English.
I don't know how true this is but it makes sense - not least because there is no hand planing going on, no sign of a hand plane, or any parts thereof, not even a sole plate, and the wood is moved by a machine.



Presumably this machine was an idea derived from the traditional straight-shaving hand planing competitions.
In other words, nothing to do with normal hand planing at all - and you needn't bother trying desperately to produce straight shavings from your little ordinary Stanley 5 1/2.
Phew that's a relief! Imagine those 2 metre lunges in just one second each!
Straight shavings are red herrings; just guru nonsense from the usual suspects.
In any case a cambered edge is preferred for most hand-planing ops and those perfect shavings would be impossible.

 

[pgrbff]

Flat shavings, a good advert for Clifton.

 

[Jacob]

Flat shavings, a good advert for Clifton.

They don't look very straight to me!
Full width yes, with a heavy plane, carefully prepared, on a board of easy material previously flattened.
He's got all the fashionable gear hasn't he! Even the hat and the beard!
Theres a lot of this "expertise" on you tube but any fool can set it up if they really want to.
PS it's a very neat design but I can't help feeling that those drawers would seize solid at the slightest change of humidity, or the placement of a few books!

 

[thetyreman]

I've found that if the shaving is not 0.009" to 0.013" of an inch I have an existential crisis and want to stop woodworking halfway through a job

 

[paulrbarnard]

I've found that if the shaving is not 0.009" to 0.013" of an inch I have an existential crisis and want to stop woodworking halfway through a job

0.009”. I thought we were talking smoothing planes not scrub planes.

 

[pgrbff]

do you think masters like stradivarius and chippendale cared about how the shavings looked? looking at everything through microscopes in laboratories, ooh look at that 425 year old tree best not use it because DW told me that if you don't have the cap iron set to precisely 50.4 degrees it won't work properly, they'd have got nothing done if they were alive in today's society.

I think they probably did care about their work. Or they wouldn't have left us the instruments they did. Is it that difficult to understand that we are all different and see things in different ways?

 

[Jacob]

I think they probably did care about their work.

Of course they did.

Or they wouldn't have left us the instruments they did. Is it that difficult to understand that we are all different and see things in different ways?

If they cared about the shavings would they have saved them too?

 

[M_Chavez]

By far the best way to get a stanley plane working really well is to stick it on ebay, then add a few £ to the proceeds and buy yourself a Quangsheng.

If you want to spend time doing woodwork, do woodwork.
If you want to spend time trying to set up old poorly made plane-shaped objects, then you can fanny with an old stanley I guess.

Last time I've tried entering the local BDSM club with a Stanley plane, I was not allowed in - got told that the stanley is such a brutal torture instrument, that it's too extreme, even for complete masochists.

When you decide to get something more refined, treat yourself to a Ron Hock blade and make your own Krenov-style plane.

 

[aet1]

By far the best way to get a stanley plane working really well is to stick it on ebay, then add a few £ to the proceeds and buy yourself a Quangsheng.

If you want to spend time doing woodwork, do woodwork.
If you want to spend time trying to set up old poorly made plane-shaped objects, then you can fanny with an old stanley I guess.

That's all well and good, but not everyone has the extra £100 to add to the few quid selling a Stanley when there are things like food to buy.

This tends to give the impression I should give up woodwork because I have my old Stanley that has served me well for the last 50 odd years.

I have a marked difference of opinion with many on here - early career choices did not lead me into a pure woodworking career. I love working in wood, I enjoy working in wood, it is not my number 1 priority with my pension, and even when I had a reasonably well paid job I was quite happy using the tools I have. Strangely I also get pleasure setting up my old plane, or sharpening my cheap chisels (my oddments were augmented last year with my wife buying me a set of 6 Von Haus bevel edged chisels (£25 I think) and getting results that can end up with a good outcome, there is a great feeling of satisfaction just being able to use them and see my skills develop year on year.

That video of the bookshelf with drawers was interesting, but I can't remember ever starting off with such a flat piece of timber, it did not even need planing and could have been finished with a hand scraper, but perhaps that's because I can't afford such wood. Perhpas someone can explain why he scribbled on it first - when it already was flat and true?

I wonder if Stanley would like to pay me to buy a good piece of wood, give me a hand- picked Bailey and send a camera crew to show it being used - although they would also have to supply a workshop as a camera crew, me and a piece of wood won't all fit in my garage.

 

[pgrbff]

That's all well and good, but not everyone has the extra £100 to add to the few quid selling a Stanley when there are things like food to buy.

This tends to give the impression I should give up woodwork because I have my old Stanley that has served me well for the last 50 odd years.

I have a marked difference of opinion with many on here - early career choices did not lead me into a pure woodworking career. I love working in wood, I enjoy working in wood, it is not my number 1 priority with my pension, and even when I had a reasonably well paid job I was quite happy using the tools I have. Strangely I also get pleasure setting up my old plane, or sharpening my cheap chisels (my oddments were augmented last year with my wife buying me a set of 6 Von Haus bevel edged chisels (£25 I think) and getting results that can end up with a good outcome, there is a great feeling of satisfaction just being able to use them and see my skills develop year on year.

That video of the bookshelf with drawers was interesting, but I can't remember ever starting off with such a flat piece of timber, it did not even need planing and could have been finished with a hand scraper, but perhaps that's because I can't afford such wood. Perhpas someone can explain why he scribbled on it first - when it already was flat and true?

I don't know why he scribbled, except maybe to aid in taking off a uniform layer. The finish from a hand plane is so much nicer than sanded or machine planed, I guess it could be a purely cosmetic pass of the plane, to improve the finish.

 

[Jacob]

By far the best way to get a stanley plane working really well is to stick it on ebay, then add a few £ to the proceeds and buy yourself a Quangsheng.

If you want to spend time doing woodwork, do woodwork.
If you want to spend time trying to set up old poorly made plane-shaped objects, then you can fanny with an old stanley I guess.

Last time I've tried entering the local BDSM club with a Stanley plane, I was not allowed in - got told that the stanley is such a brutal torture instrument, that it's too extreme, even for complete masochists.

When you decide to get something more refined, treat yourself to a Ron Hock blade and make your own Krenov-style plane.

I've got a Ron Hock blade. It cuts well. It holds an edge for longer but takes longer to sharpen. In other words slightly pointless and a waste of money.
These modern thick blades are well suited to modern sharpening and the heavy use of powered grindstones, which you don't need with a trad thin blade, especially if laminated.

 

[steve355]

That's all well and good, but not everyone has the extra £100 to add to the few quid selling a Stanley when there are things like food to buy.

This tends to give the impression I should give up woodwork because I have my old Stanley that has served me well for the last 50 odd years.

I have a marked difference of opinion with many on here - early career choices did not lead me into a pure woodworking career. I love working in wood, I enjoy working in wood, it is not my number 1 priority with my pension, and even when I had a reasonably well paid job I was quite happy using the tools I have. Strangely I also get pleasure setting up my old plane, or sharpening my cheap chisels (my oddments were augmented last year with my wife buying me a set of 6 Von Haus bevel edged chisels (£25 I think) and getting results that can end up with a good outcome, there is a great feeling of satisfaction just being able to use them and see my skills develop year on year.

That video of the bookshelf with drawers was interesting, but I can't remember ever starting off with such a flat piece of timber, it did not even need planing and could have been finished with a hand scraper, but perhaps that's because I can't afford such wood. Perhpas someone can explain why he scribbled on it first - when it already was flat and true?

I wonder if Stanley would like to pay me to buy a good piece of wood, give me a hand- picked Bailey and send a camera crew to show it being used - although they would also have to supply a workshop as a camera crew, me and a piece of wood won't all fit in my garage.

Well, I can’t justify or afford fancy new planes, so I refurb car boot sale Stanleys and Records and they seem fine to me.

I was always sceptical about Charlesworth’s methods, partly because Paul Sellers and Rob Cosman both seem to be advocates of not being keen on a close chip breaker, and whenever I’ve tried it in the past I’ve just achieved a lot of clogging. But recently I’ve been unhappy with my surface finish, having made a couple of moulding planes and got a small amount of tearout due to reversing grain.

So this morning I did exactly what Charlesworth recommended, 1.5 deg on the contact surface of the chip breaker and 45 deg grind on the edge facing the shaving. I have to say I was stunned at the result. It didn’t come immediately, I had to lap the contact edge to stop it clogging still.

Here‘s a piece of Wickes construction pine that my usual setup would have torn to pieces (and did before I got it right). Gliding over reversing grain and knots. And lovely full width shavings too (not that it matters).

Great advice for a relative beginner like me. I shall be doing this with all my metal planes. (Edit - yes there are a few track marks but that’s a different problem)

 

[raffo]

I was always sceptical about Charlesworth’s methods, partly because Paul Sellers and Rob Cosman both seem to be advocates of not being keen on a close chip breaker, and whenever I’ve tried it in the past I’ve just achieved a lot of clogging. But recently I’ve been unhappy with my surface finish, having made a couple of moulding planes and got a small amount of tearout due to reversing grain.

So this morning I did exactly what Charlesworth recommended, 1.5 deg on the contact surface of the chip breaker and 45 deg grind on the edge facing the shaving. I have to say I was stunned at the result. It didn’t come immediately, I had to lap the contact edge to stop it clogging still.

Here‘s a piece of Wickes construction pine that my usual setup would have torn to pieces (and did before I got it right). Gliding over reversing grain and knots. And lovely full width shavings too (not that it matters).

Great advice for a relative beginner like me. I shall be doing this with all my metal planes. (Edit - yes there are a few track marks but that’s a different problem)

The sooner you leave behind Sellers and Cosman's marketing schemes the more you will advance in your woodworking skills. Refurbishing an old Stanley plane takes very little effort and setting up the chipbreaker is not that difficult, but fundamental as you just realized. The frequently parroted nonsense "I'm too busy woodworking to learn how to setup my tools" is tiresome.