Scraper planes

[woodbrains]

Hello,

If the Rider version of the 80 really does have a blade hardened to Rc 63, then how can it be burnished? Do Axminster really just expect the user to hone the blade like a plane?

I have the Veritas version of the 112, which has an extra knob to put a bow in the blade, which the LN and original Stanley ones do not. I like the Veritas.

Mike.

 

[cowfoot]

Funnily enough, I was given a Lie-Nielsen 85 scraper plane for my birthday yesterday.
Tried it out for the first time this afternoon on some pretty wild European Cherry...
First thoughts - it’s slightly more of a faff to set up than Veritas version of the Stanley 80, but hot damn it’s foxy looking! Not sure I’d actually shell out the money for one, though.

 

[ED65]

If anybody is interested in scraping softwoods I think you'll have much better luck with a very fine burr on a conventional scraper, or using a sharp edge with no burr.

 

[ED65]

If the Rider version of the 80 really does have a blade hardened to Rc 63, then how can it be burnished?

Carbide?

 

[Ttrees]

If anybody is interested in scraping softwoods I think you'll have much better luck with a very fine burr on a conventional scraper, or using a sharp edge with no burr.

Thanks for that wee snippet ED65
Maybe someday I'll run out of iroko, hopefully not though!

 

[thetyreman]

my veritas no80 is one of my favourite tools, I had a stanley no80 before that, it was good, but the handles on the veritas feels a bit nicer and it is heavier, I also had the no85 by LN and whilst it was extremely well made and nice, it rarely got used though, so it had to go.

 

[David C]

Sorry, meant 112 of course !!

David

 

[bugbear]

my veritas no80 is one of my favourite tools, I had a stanley no80 before that, it was good, but the handles on the veritas feels a bit nicer and it is heavier, I also had the no85 by LN and whilst it was extremely well made and nice, it rarely got used though, so it had to go.

Did you notice any benefit/change from the longer sole of the Veritas over the Stanley.

BugBear

 

[David C]

The Stanley 80 had an alarming tendency to tip at the end of a stroke. This would cause a gouge in the surface, (if the work was to length).

For a similar reason, the short sole made starting a shaving a little difficult. Lots of serious fingertip pressure required.

Less wear on the fingers is a significant reason for seeking a 112.

David Charlesworth

 

[thetyreman]

my veritas no80 is one of my favourite tools, I had a stanley no80 before that, it was good, but the handles on the veritas feels a bit nicer and it is heavier, I also had the no85 by LN and whilst it was extremely well made and nice, it rarely got used though, so it had to go.

Did you notice any benefit/change from the longer sole of the Veritas over the Stanley.

BugBear

it does make a slight difference yes, the weight is a definite improvement and the angles of the handles are also an improvement, better quality casting, and the veritas blade is better in terms of how long it holds an edge, can't really say anything bad about it.

 

[shed9]

To update this thread, I took the collective advice and bagged me a no 80 scraper today.

Been watching them on Ebay and either missed auctions or got sniped at last minute. Not been in a big rush so just waited for a decent one to come along.

Anyhow, went to a local woodworking event today predominantly to see if any local wood suppliers turned up and came across a used tool stand. Grabbed a No 80 scraper Sweetheart along with a No 81 scraper. Also bagged a No 18 B-casting block plane and a No 18 sliding bevel. Real happy with the prices.

Thanks for the input everyone

 

[swagman]

If anybody is interested in scraping softwoods I think you'll have much better luck with a very fine burr on a conventional scraper, or using a sharp edge with no burr.

Eds comment is worth noting, and falls within my own findings. The following shows Australian Cedar after being worked with a scraper plane that's had a hooked burr applied . The surface remaining feels lightly torn to the feel of the finger tips with the heavier concentration of raised grain localised to the outer edges of the surface. Note; the wood surface has been lightly chalked to highlight the heavier concentration of raised grain.



The surface was then reworked without using a hooked burr. That surface felt very smooth to the finger tips, with no visible concentration of raised grain along the outer edges of the board.



The point being, some timbers will respond better when not worked with a hooked burr.

Is that message any different to what LN are advising the user within their range of scraper planes; https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bHcgZiEOWPU

 

[swagman]

At 12.00min within the following video, the presenter shows the use of the pointed end of a Burnisher to govern the final angle of the turned hook. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f7DflhyGFDU

 

[D_W]

We don't generally scrape softwoods.

 

[David C]

I have never seen a burnisher with that conical tip in UK.

If one pays attention to the burnishing angle it will not be necessary.

Best wishes,
David

 

[D_W]

I have never seen a burnisher with that conical tip in UK.

If one pays attention to the burnishing angle it will not be necessary.

Best wishes,
David

agreed - if the burnisher is polished and hard where it contacts the iron, it's up to the user to learn the touch needed by the profile (e.g., more is needed for a larger more broad contact point).

David - I'll bet you are surprised to see how glowing my thoughts were about your instruction DVD on setting a scraper!! While we don't always agree, I'll bet I've sold dozens of that DVD for you over the years, but it alleviates the talk of scrapers as if they're a black box (they are, of course, no such thing - but if you don't set them up right, you fall back into LN's advice of just taking the easy way and leaving a sharp unrolled edge on them, and that's like driving a 6 cylinder car on two cylinders on purpose).

 

[David C]

David,
I was delighted by your comments. Thank you. I agree.

Please keep on selling the dvds, I need all the sales I can get.

It is frustrating to see the same problems turning up year after year when I know that answers and tips are available in my dvd.
Best wishes,
David

 

[Derek Cohen (Perth Oz)]

Phil Lowe is an excellent furniture maker and first class teacher (OK, second to David C). I have followed all his videos and would recommend them to everyone (his one on mortice and tenon joints is superb!). I have seen that video on preparing scrapers before, and support all he does except the inclusion of the pointy burnisher (at the end). I have never needed to do that. His results are as desired, but I do not believe that the pointy burnisher was a part of this.

Regards from Perth

Derek

 

[David C]

Derek,
Thank you.
My favorite is Brian Boggs. There are a couple of videos on You Tube made by Fine Woodworking.

Best wishes,
David

 

[swagman]

David W, David C, Derek C.

Phil Lowe makes reference and use of the conical tip on the Stanley type burnisher to control the angle of the turned hook. Scraper Planes such as the Stanley #80 and #81 have a fixed bed that does not allow the user to tilt the blade further forward to compensate for an overly turned hook. Refer to the following Stanley Tool Guide; bottom of page 12 for further instruction on the use of the conical tip to control the hook angle. If you then move to page 13, which deals with a hand held scraper blade, there is no mention of using the conical tip of the burnisher, as a hand scraper can be titled further forward to compensate for an overly turned hook. The decision on whether one chooses to take advantage of this conical tip feature on a Stanley type burnisher should be left for every user to decide upon. http://www.woodworkinghistory.com/stanl ... e_1941.pdf