Quick review of new Veritas cap irons/back irons/chipbreaker

UKworkshop.co.uk

Help Support UKworkshop.co.uk:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.

Jack in Nepean

Established Member
Joined
31 Mar 2008
Messages
23
Reaction score
0
Location
Ottawa, Ontario
I have read in a number of places that an improved cap iron/chip breaker will greatly improve the performance of many planes. Noted were the LN and Clifton cap irons, neither of which were readily available to me. I was glad to see that LV is now producing improved cap irons just down the road from me and for less than the LN's (no shipping or border hassles).

After trying out the new Veritas cap iron extensively on an old #3 (1930 ish type 15) at the plane event, I bought three of them for my #3, #4 (Type 13) and #5 (Type 11) Stanleys. Installed on the sweetheart blades in #3 and #4, there was an instant and significant, not huge, but noticeable improvement in performance and a change in the feel of the plane. Impossible to quantify, but the planes seemed tighter (?) and more stable and I was able take very very thin shavings with little effort. They just worked better overall. I don't think they will ever match the performance of the Veritas BU planes on gnarly grain, but on reasonable grain in red oak, cherry or maple the result is very good.

I was, however, disappointed in the effect on the Type 11 #5 - no improvement noticeable. Given the foregoing, I was very surprised. I bought the plane several years ago at an estate sale and it came with a ruler tricked blade (dated, I think Feb., 1910). The back bevel has since been removed and the blade reground to 25 degrees with a 30 or so degree secondary bevel.

I also have a fairly modern (post war) Rapier (sentimental value) that had already retrofitted with a Hock replacement blade, which improved the performance a lot. Before returning the cap iron, I thought I would try it on the Rapier - wow - it went from an adequate site user to at least the equivalent of the Stanley #5.

I should note that all of these planes have been fettled to the best of my ability - general cleanup and lubrication, sole flattened on a surface plate (not perfectly, but enough), frog seated with grinding compound, frog flattened and set square, blade flattened, polished and well sharpened and cap irons fitted and polished. I'm a bit fussy but not fanatic. Nor do I profess to be an expert at any of the foregoing.

Are they worth the money? Since I had less than $100 invested in these 4 planes, I think they are rather inexpensive way greatly improve the performance of those yard sale (boot sale) finds. YMMV

Please note that the references to Stanley types is based on Patrick Leach's information, which is for US manufactured planes. Mine are made in Canada so while the type seems accurate, the dates may not be.

Nepean is now part of Ottawa, Ontario, Canada
 
Jack....

Great review and thank you for your findings!

I found that the Clifton SS caps did wonders to my Records/Stanleys....and your words "tightened up" are spot on...excellent definition of the improvement.

I shall be making my own irons once I get together...as I now enjoy making these....and once tested I intend to do a "before" and "after" review.

Thanks again my friend! =D>

Jim
 
Thanks Jack.

Interesting that you got mixed results (no improvement to your Stanley No.5). Any suggestions why?

Being intrigued (and seeing as you didn't give a description) I went to the Lee Valley website. These cap-irons are ⅛" thick A2 steel, similar in shape to the Lie-Nielsen and Quangsheng cap-irons, and cost nearly as much as Lee Valley's Stanley replacement cutting irons.

Also interesting that Lee Valley chose A2 steel. I presume that's for rust resistance. I note Matthew recently posted about the advantages of surrounding hard steel irons with soft steel to dampen vibration. A2 being fairly hard.

Cheers, Vann.
 
After having tried the Hock blade with the big cap iron in the Stanley #5, there was a slight improvement, however not to the extent that was evident in the #3 and #4. When time permits, I will rexamine the frog seating and placement - it doesn't take much of a misalignment to affect performance.
 

Latest posts

Back
Top