Sharpening

[mark w]

The "fine" tolerances are what draws people in to modern sharpening. You have to ask yourself how people managed for thousands of years without all the modern kit making their tools look so perfect.

OK looked it up. You mean T&G planing. No prob. Not something I do often but if I do I use a Stanley 13-050. Unfashionable because it's a bit ugly but actually a very good tool. Hand done T&G not used in fine woodworking anyway.

No I did not advocate them, but if it happens accidentally it's not going to make the slightest difference in use

No not true. If a straight edge essential I'd use another stone, though you can work them straight on a worn stone anyway, with care.

Nobody complained so far! Very few clues of sharpening techniques would be visible anyway.
Interesting to look at old stuff and sometimes find the tool marks by casting a torch beam over the surface, which gives a clue as to how and what they were doing/using

Sorry you don't understand anything much, it is difficult to describe.
But if you ever found yourself in a situation where you only had one or two stones and an urgent job in hand, you might slowly discover how to sharpen things without all the modern kit!

Modern sharpening techniques are no guarantee of fine workmanship!

No I don't mean t&g planing, match planing Jacob, deary me, a basic joinery skill and he doesn't know what it is.

 

[mark w]

I just looked it up again. You get different definitions!
You mean the process whereby you plane two edges of boards clamped together in the hopes that the angle will be complementary and hence producing a flat face.
Somewhat theoretical in my opinion and yes it would not work with a cambered blade. I've always seen it as just another "good idea" which works out not as easily as hoped.
My method of matching board edges works fine for me and is spot on. I have done a lot of table tops. I'd expect to do the same procedure to check and correct the errors, even if I did "match plane" in that way.

Got there in the end, you either know or you don't.

 

[Jacob]

You've probably seen the disdain that the resident troll shows for any technique that differs from his own biases and what he calls 'trad' so it is quite a revelation that the grand high priest of 'trad' woodworking hasn't heard of match planing.
It basically a way of planing the edges of two boards to ensure they match perfectly when you glue them together, possibly with a rub joint.

A quick google will give a number of links and videos, this one https://confusedwoodworker.wordpress.com/tag/match-planing/ comes out near the top. It doesn't really explain the process but there are other.
Interestingly this https://www.ukworkshop.co.uk/threads/match-planeing.21283/ is also near the top and is a short discussion from the early days (probably pre-Grim as he didn't weigh in on it). An interesting point is made by Paul Sellers about the plane sole that I hadn't considered before.

HTH

Actually the term "match planing" doesn't crop up in the older books at all. It's newish.
Joyce and Ellis talk of "matched joints" or "match boarding " as used in joinery, not in furniture making, though match boarding would be found on the backs of chest of drawers etc.
Joyce's description of joining boards is much the same as my method. He refers to "try planing" board edges or "straight shot" with or without the often recommended slight hollow lengthways.
I think your "match planing" is just one of the many "good ideas" which get kicked around a lot in woodworking, with vague terminology and not necessarily as good as it sounds!

 

[mark w]

Instead of telling Jacob to look it up why not tell those of us who have never heard the term 'match planning'. It never came up in school woodworking classes when my tiny hands where trying to cope with a wooden jack plane some seventy plus years ago.

That would have spoiled all the fun

 

[Jacob]

Got there in the end, you either know or you don't.

I now know but am not impressed. It might work for small stuff but I'm sure it wouldn't on anything like table top sized boards.

 

[mudman]

Got there in the end, you either know or you don't.

Not so sure about his contention that there are different definitions. Maybe he's getting confused with the Google results for "match planes" that pop up and thinks they are the same thing? Either that or he's thinking of "match planning"?

 

[mudman]

Actually the term "match planing" doesn't crop up in the older books at all. It's newish.
Joyce and Ellis talk of "matched joints" or "match boarding " as used in joinery, not in furniture making, though match boarding would be found on the backs of chest of drawers etc.
Joyce's description of joining boards is much the same as my method. He refers to "try planing" board edges or "straight shot" with or without the often recommended slight hollow lengthways.
I think your "match planing" is just one of the many "good ideas" which get kicked around a lot in woodworking, with vague terminology and not necessarily as good as it sounds!

Well perhaps the older books need some new updated editions producing.

 

[mark w]

I now know but am not impressed. It might work for small stuff but I'm sure it wouldn't on anything like table top sized boards.

It does and I do it, the only restriction is on the thickness of the boards that can be planed with this technique.

 

[Jacob]

It does and I do it, the only restriction is on the thickness of the boards that can be planed with this technique.

So I have an old table in front of me about 6ft long with boards about 5/8" thick. Would you have "match planed" these successfully in one operation, without then having to adjust fit?
The kitchen tables I make have thicker sycamore tops say 7/8" which doubled up to "match plane" would give you about 45mm. Would that be "match" planeable?

 

[JSW]

I now know but am not impressed. It might work for small stuff but I'm sure it wouldn't on anything like table top sized boards.

Exactly. Post # 22 on Finewoodworking.com from 2008 describes the pitfalls

 

[Jacob]

Well perhaps the older books need some new updated editions producing.

More that they were experienced in a big tradition of hand tool use and better at it than the new boys today.

 

[Jacob]

Exactly. Post # 22 on Finewoodworking.com from 2008 describes the pitfalls

Interesting chit-chat amongst people with very varied skills. I spotted this quote "I haven't seen a single old text suggest match planing except for very thin stock like veneers and then it was suggested the planing be done on a shooting board. " which makes sense to me.
I have no problems with "my" method it's quick and effective. Shoot edges as best I can then sit one board in the vice and next one on top and adjust the fit as necessary. Including the flatness checked with a straightedge - adjusting very easily with a cambered blade..
An emphasis on getting the face edges to close up nicely, the back edges can have the odd deviation and gap, as long as it doesn't upset the flatness when clamped up.
I've spent a lot of time undoing/mending/replicating old joinery mostly, and bits of furniture, and it can be very revealing to look behind and underneath see what was left unfinished.

 

[JSW]

I spotted this quote "I haven't seen a single old text suggest match planing except for very thin stock like veneers and then it was suggested the planing be done on a shooting board. "

Thought you'd like that bit lol

 

[mudman]

More that they were experienced in a big tradition of hand tool use and better at it than the new boys today.

Or more like that they could have learnt a thing or two from developments in techniques and equipment that took place after their time.
My father always used to tell me that you can learn something from anybody, you just need to listen. Maybe you should start listening?

 

[Jacob]

Or more like that they could have learnt a thing or two from developments in techniques and equipment that took place after their time.
My father always used to tell me that you can learn something from anybody, you just need to listen. Maybe you should start listening?

So you use your "match planing" technique a lot then? No problems? What was the last thing you made?

 

[mudman]

So you use your "match planing" technique a lot then? No problems? What was the last thing you made?

Oh yawn.

 

[Jacob]

Oh yawn.

That's a "nothing" then!

 

[mudman]

That's a "nothing" then!

No that's a 'I can't be arsed playing your games that you play when you are losing an argument' yawn. Very tedious and very predictable.

 

[JSW]

Seems like a perfectly reasonable question to me?

 

[mudman]

Seems like a perfectly reasonable question to me?

Does it? Seems completely spurious to me. He's demonstrated he hasn't a clue and is now trying some deflection. Does it all the time.