Shoulder planes - Advice new vs seconhand

[TonyW]

I have been considering adding a shoulder plane to my collection. Thinking that a good quality secondhand tool should save me money I have been looking on the bay. I must say that I have been suprised at the prices here - recent examples Record 311 at nearly £70 and £90 for a Record 073.

I have also seen Record 073 at £125 and 311 at £75 at one tool dealer

Some of these prices are getting very close to a shiny new Veritas medium (£125) and I was wondering if the older Record tools (or Stanley) really offered any advantages?

In comparison new Stanley N0 92 and No 93 are available at around £60 and £73. I am aware that some of the newer Stanley's are not considered to be particularly good in comparison to the older models. My question is how good or bad are the new 92 and 93 ?

Cheers
Tony

 

[Chris Knight]

A shiny new Veritas would get my vote any time. I don't think that even in the halcyon days of yore, Record produced tools as good as the new Veritas stuff. The latter scores on design and production quality.

 

[Racers]

Hi,
I have handled a Veritas and didn't like it at all it didn't seem to fit my hand, but I have made my own shoulder planes so I might be a little biased. I have a Record 73 (unused) that is better to handle, you really need to have a play with them see what fits.

Pete

 

[wayne]

Hi,
I have handled a Veritas and didn't like it at all it didn't seem to fit my hand, but I have made my own shoulder planes so I might be a little biased. I have a Record 73 (unused) that is better to handle, you really need to have a play with them see what fits.

Pete

I too have made my own. If you are undecided about the proper size, just make a set to suit your needs. These range from 1/2" to 1-1/2" in width. -wayne anderson

 

[Karl]

Wayne - "Holy dung" - that was my spoken word when I saw your planes. V Nice.

Cheers

Karl

 

[Derek Cohen (Perth Oz)]

They look a bit lumpy to me, Wayne. Keep up the practice and I'm sure that you'll get it right one of these days.

Stunning work, as usual.

Regards from Perth

Derek

 

[TonyW]

waterhead37 - Shiny and new gets my vote most of the time I wonder if SWMBO is open to Christmas hints

Pete Your comments very interesting about how the tools fit your hand. I certainly need a play to find what fits! If you are interested in parting with your 73 please pm me

wayne - I am totally dumbstruck - Karl is correct "Holy dung". What a lovely family of planes.
BTW. Thanks for thinking that I may have the skill to "just make a set to suit your needs" Think it will be a good while before I am there!!

Derek - You obviously know Wayne . Have been reading a lot of your posts here and in Oz. Finding them very useful.

Cheers
Tony

 

[Ace Karner]

I bought a new 92 when I first started working with hand tools. After much frustration, I got the LV large plane and I have to tell you that about the only thing I would use the 92 for now would be as a anode for electrolysis.

I agonized about whether I should get the medium or large and posted the question on line and the general consensus was that larger is better. So far I have been extremely happy with the large.

Hope this helps

Ace

 

[Philly]

Wow! Stunning Wayne! :shock:
Any more pics?
Philly

 

[David C]

Later 073s were awful.

As you say the price gets very close to L-N or Veritas, no contest.

David

 

[tnimble]

I wiould prefer "Om namah Wayne" or "Jai guru Wayne, yaya" over holy dung but very appropriate!

What a nice view. Not only I like the planes but also their display.

About which plane to buy. I think its very important, especially for a shoulder plane that it fits you. Go out and try them in your hands, feel their weight and balance.

By the way I'm on the verge to go out and measure a couple of shoulder planes to my hand. And select one for bonding with.

 

[cwroy]

Hi,

Don't skimp on a shoulder plane if you can...

I have a Stanley 92, it does the job when tuned up nicely. The adjuster is good to gave. But boy this plane a lightweight and small, therefore it gives my hand cramps!

It's the poor mans shoulder plane, but I never could turn myself around buying a 250$ shoulder plane.

CWR

 

[Derek Cohen (Perth Oz)]

CWR's post reminds me to suggest reading a comparison I made between the Veritas Medium, Stanley #92, and HNT Gordon 3/4" shoulder planes:

http://www.wkfinetools.com/contrib/dCohen/z_art/LVShoulder/index.asp

This may help with decisions.

Regards from Perth

Derek

 

[cwroy]

Good review Derek,

I usually use my shoulder plane one handed and the piece held with my shooting board. I'll give the two handed technique a try.

By the way, I forgot something. I use my Stanley 92 to plane down wide tenons, I hog a lot of material and it tends to clog up. You then need to remove the shavings with a pen or dowel.

CWR

 

[Wiley Horne]

Tony,

This is just to reiterate what a couple of other people have already said. You can get the Stanley 92 or 93 to work, but it does not represent economy because they just don't fit the human hand. You'll regret every penny you spent on them from now on. Save up your money in a piggy bank and then get an LV, an LN, or a vintage Record. Or an infill, vintage or new! By the way, if you have acquaintances travelling to the US or Canada, they might be willing to bring you back a plane in their luggage and save you some money.

Wiley

 

[Racers]

Hi,

Here are my shoulder planes etc.

The top right is my adjustable mouth shoulder plane it is the one I reach for usually, but the small rebate plane in the middle bottom is a nice plane for small jobs.


Pete

 

[TonyW]

Thank you all for your thoughts and suggestions.

From the consensus I think it will have to be a LV or LN. Although I will need to try and find somewhere where I can at least handle it to "see how it fits me". At least with a quality tool I will stand a fighting chance. There speaks someone who bought a Groz block plane (I am keeping it just to see how well I can fettle it!!)

What I still cannot understand is why the new Stanley's are so poor. Surely it cannot be a major job to ensure that plane soles are flat and sides run at 90 degrees. It just seems to me that some tools are being sold "not fit for purpose"

Thanks again
Cheers
Tony

ps. Pete those planes of yours look really great

 

[David C]

Tony,

What I still cannot understand is why the new Stanley's are so poor. Surely it cannot be a major job to ensure that plane soles are flat and sides run at 90 degrees. It just seems to me that some tools are being sold "not fit for purpose"

I have been wondering the same thing since 1972, and never really came up with a satisfactory answer, other than creeping cost cutting, due to shrinking markets and complete ignorance of tool use.

Though grinding a plane sole true with square sides is not as easy as one might think.

Unfortunately arguing this sort of thing in court might be rather expensive?

David Charlesworth

 

[tnimble]

To sum up what I find to be different between old (pre 1930) and new (post 1960) and brand new (current) is the following:

The new the tool is:
- thinner casting
- slight hollow casting on the inside
- courcer casting
- thinning and removal of casting for blade, frog and handle seats.

Each and every of those points result is:
- less maching
- less raw materials
- less manufacturing waste
- lighter tool
- more tendency for the metal to move and bend
- more vibration
- less momentum
- less balance

Also I have the feeling but this is hard to check:
- lesser quality of iron
- impurer raw material or process
- lesser or no heat threatening the increase hardness.

This results in
- more prune of rusting, pitting and nicking the tool
- more wear on the sole,
- more prune to schratching and damaging the mouth
- blade does hold edge less longer (than an old blade)

Whe I check the flattness and squareness of the sole, sides, skates etc, the levelness of frogsupports, blade support area etc. I find the old tools even trhough their wear and age are move consistent than new ones. To sum up:
- convex soles and sides
- hollow and recessed mouths
- horizontally skewed frog supports
- rocking frogs (no pun intended)
- rocking blades
- blades forced in an odd shape by the presure again the blade support area.

Does a new stanley (for instance an no 4) work out of the box? No it does not at all, its non-functional. Can it be made functional yes with some little work you can make it to hog out some wood to fettle an old sticking door.

With a complete redo of all machining already done and an after market blade it can be made to make fine shavings. But its still has:
- no momentum
- odd balance
- forms slighty to the wood it presented on
- vibrates

 

[David C]

Splendid summary!

Fortunately there are some manufacturers where current production is virtually spot on.

David