Record 044 page

[Alf]

After promises some months ago I've finally finished (what'll probably turn out to be the first version :roll: ) the 044 page. Anyone pointing out mistakes, anomalies and plain simple ****-ups will be sighed at but ultimately welcome. The 044C is barely mentioned, so if someone with a lot of time on their hands, a reasonable ability with a camera and an example of said plane in good nick would like to offer up their services that'd be excellent.

Cheers, Alf

 

[Nick W]

My you've been busy. Must be spring or summat.

 

[Paul Chapman]

Very interesting and helpful write-up, Alf.

Cheers :wink:

Paul

 

[Chris Knight]

Alf,

Since you published you combi opus I keep getting out my Record 43 and 50 and looking at them. Any more links to this kind of thing and I shall start using them soon..

 

[Philly]

Good work, Alf!
Philly

 

[Evergreen]

Alf

My 044C is in pristine condition. It has a set of ten cutters (as opposed to the minimum issue of three) and its box is in pretty good shape too. Unfortunately, I'm a newbie when it comes to digital photography and I'd struggle to match the standard of your other pictures. What's more, I haven't posted recently because I moved house at the end of February and I'm still in a bit of a pickle. Er, that should read one helluva pickle, actually.

I guess what I'm saying is that if you don't get any better offers of pictures, I'd be willing to give it my best shot.

Regards.

 

[Alf]

Evergreen, that's a great offer, thank you. I'm in no rush so we'll see if someone comes bustling along to complain "why no pictures of the 044C, you plastic-handle-hating swine?!" and I can get them to do some pics. :twisted: :wink: :lol:

Chris, you're starting to worry me now. Step slowly away from the planes and towards the tablesaw, p/t or router table for your own safety... :shock:

Naturally, folks, if any of you feel the urge to rush out and study your 044s and find any of the early features like the registered number, missing depth adjustment etc, you'll let me know? [-o< Not that I'm getting obsessed or nuffink, it's just seems to me we have the glimmer of a type study for the 044 emerging here.

Cheers, Alf

 

[pam niedermayer]

Thanks, Alf, especially for the manual, now I can finally figure out how to use these honeys.

Pam

 

[Chris Knight]

Alf,
It's no use, I am using the P/T at the moment for a small maple cupboard but I am pretty sure a groove or a bead or summat is needed (at least that's what the planes are telling me..)

 

[bugbear]

Anyone pointing out mistakes, anomalies and plain simple ****-ups will be sighed at but ultimately welcome.

Reading your page carefully, it's fully possible that the depth-adjuster-less #44 I saw was the first OR second version - I didn't know enough at the time to know that the presence/absence of a bridged fence was a factor.

On the depth adjuster thing

As with the 778 rebate plane, Record opted for the greater control of a threaded adjustment instead of the lever Stanley frequently favoured.

If I'm reading/remembering my history right, I think that's the Preston "patent" adjuster - Record were just exploiting their ownership of it, which I'm guessing they acquired along with Preston itself.

I've checked my (tiny!) catalogue collection, and can't add anything to the dates you already have.

BugBear

 

[Alf]

Reading your page carefully, it's fully possible that the depth-adjuster-less #44 I saw was the first OR second version - I didn't know enough at the time to know that the presence/absence of a bridged fence was a factor.

Yeah, that crossed my mind (and hung around a bit admiring the empty space) but I decided to go with the wild speculation option figuring three things:
1. It's possible
2. I have, I hope, made it clear it wasn't definite fact
3. It might conceivably flush out some aforementioned fact 'cos everyone likes to correct somebody else whereas they wouldn't necessarily bother to supplement already correct info. Cunning, eh?

On the depth adjuster thing

As with the 778 rebate plane, Record opted for the greater control of a threaded adjustment instead of the lever Stanley frequently favoured.

If I'm reading/remembering my history right, I think that's the Preston "patent" adjuster - Record were just exploiting their ownership of it, which I'm guessing they acquired along with Preston itself.

Ack, my lack of Preston info keeps catching me out - dunno if I dare rectify that state of affairs though... Well we could look at it this way; they could still have gone with the lever if they'd wanted to. I think I'll let that go for the moment 'cos I really don't want to start down the Preston road too.

I've checked my (tiny!) catalogue collection, and can't add anything to the dates you already have.

Ta muchly for having a look.

Cheers, Alf

 

[Neil]

This is all I have of mine , but at least now I know what should be there! Thanks, Alf.

So just to make absolutely sure - do the Marples always have a red lever cap? I don't think I could have missed it in all the piles of rust if thats the case. I'll have to try making one to Bugbears plan...

Cheers,
Neil

 

[bugbear]

At least you've got the depth stop - that gets lots a LOT.

BugBear

 

[Derek Cohen (Perth Oz)]

BB wrote:

At least you've got the depth stop - that gets lost a LOT.

My #044 was sans depth stop. Looked around for a while but could not find another. So what I did was to use a spare one from a Stanley #45. The shaft of the #45 is a tad thicker, so I just widened the hole in the #044 by drilling it out. Works fine.

Come to think of it, it had only one blade at the start. I did have a bunch of early #45 blades (bought as spares) and cut slots in the rear to match the #044 design. Wa-la!

Regards from Perth

Derek

 

[Geoff]

Hello. I'm new here and I have a problem.
I found this site thru Alf's site and I have a #44 Marples with a broken fence.
Now, for the life of me I can't remember the name of the epoxy Alf recomended for fixing said broken bits!!! It's pot metal and quite frankly I'm stumped!!!
I just dug th' ol bugger up after giving up power tools...[well, not my band saw or my thickness planer, but you get the idea.]


Alf? HEEEEEEEEELLLLLPPPPPP!!!!!!!!!

Thanks.

 

[Newbie_Neil]

Hi Geoff

Welcome to the forum.

Sorry I can't help, but I'm sure Alf will be along soon.

Cheers
Neil

 

[Geoff]

Whoohoo!!! It's around 11:00pm here in Vancouver and I'm outta beer!!!
No seriously, thanks!!! I think I'm gonna be pestering you folks fer a while.
Hope ya' don't mind.

 

[Alf]

Hah, I wondered why I'd woken up at 6am this morning - must've been the cry of help echoing across the Pond! :lol: Welcome to the forum, Geoff.

Possibly you mean JB Weld? Mixed results to be honest but certainly worth a try. On the other hand if you made up a nice wooden fence facing and epoxied that on as well to act as a sort of splint you might get away with it. Not a lot to lose anyway. Let us know how it goes if you give it a try.

Cheers, Alf

 

[MikeW]

Welcome, Geoff!

You might want to check the product JB Weld. At least in the US it is available via auto parts stores, etc.

If the fence is broke in half, you may also stiffen it with an additional wood fence after the repair.

Silver solder is the best repair. With just clean surfaces and good brazing technique it will seep right through the crack. There's also a low-temp welding rod called Super Alloy 1 available from Muggy Weld which works very well.

Take care, Mike

 

[Geoff]

Thanks Alf!!! I've been nursing my last beer hoping to hear your opinion!!! :lol:
I've got some stuff called DevCon. It's nasty s*** but I always go to it when I need a "stupid strong" hold.
The splint thing just might hold the whole she-bang t'gether!!!

Cheers...