Stanley Bailey No 4: To far gone?

[tooooools]

Wow! What a transformation.

Heading down the supermarket tomorrow to buy some vinegar and elbow grease.

 

[Vann]

A couple of questions on finishes:
What do I paint the inner body with? I was thinking of Hammerite or something like Humbrol enamel?

There is a school of thought that says take a minimalist approach (i.e. don't stamp out all traces of the previous users). I was looking at the pictures of your plane after de-rusting, and thought it looked good as it is. On the other hand - a Stanley No.4 has no rarity value whatsoever - so it's not a crime against humanity if you do repaint it.

Personally, I fluctuate between keeping patina, and repainting, with no apparent logic (although I'm slipping closer to the 'patina' camp)

Secondly I have done some prep and sanding on the handles, what do I finish them with to bring out the colour?

Here I'm in the "feel the wood" camp. I don't polyureathane/varnish handles anymore. Sand, BLO (many coatings) and wax for me. Others who are more particular, use more expensive waxes and buff to a shine.

Your plane has the tops of the sides ground - which makes it an early model (1940s/early 1950s?) and therefore it's from an era before the quality had dropped too far. It should be a good plane.

Cheers, Vann.

 

[Phil Pascoe]

I've never understood the faffing about with the woodwork, for the last 40 years I've soaked mine in linseed. I haven't even thought about which linseed, I just dump it all in a bucket every couple of years. It seems to work OK, just comfortable with no high gloss.

 

[n0legs]

Brilliant result, you gotta' be pleased with that =D>

 

[AndyT]

Like Vann said. I wouldn't rush to paint it. If you do paint it but wish you hadn't, you'll need more than vinegar to try and undo your work.

 

[ED65]

I have some osmo Polyx-oil 3032 Satin-matt. I like this product, it goes on easily and most times only needs one coat, will that do the job? After all I'm only going to use this plane myself, not display it in a show .

I don't know what the Osmo product actually is (because they're doing their utmost to hide what it's actually made from) but to be honest I think virtually anything can be used on tool handles. It really doesn't matter much at the end of the day, in the sense that the handles themselves don't care, it's really more about how the user likes the touch and how it looks.

It surprises me but I've become very catholic in my tastes with tool handle finishes, equally happy with matt handles on some things that were only oiled or had an oil/wax blend applied all the way to a high gloss from varnish or lacquer.

 

[tooooools]

Timbo are you looking to..

- return the plane to the original appearance
- return it to a good working state that has the feel of a plane with history

I would say the finishing of the plane depends on which of these you are looking to achieve.

 

[timbo614]

@ tooooools & all,

Yes, I'm really pleased with it especially as it is my first attempt at a refurb.

I am only looking to be able to use it and it working well. It's a bonus if it looks nice but I have no problem with things that look well used and have history.

On the "looks nice" front I like the idea of painting/finishing the metalwork in black and making the handles look like wood hopefully dark-ish so I will probably use the Polyx-Oil that I have (Make do and mend eh?). At this early stage of woodworking I don't have any other finishes except ordinary clear varnish.

I realise that now I am informed that the plane is maybe from the late 1940/50s that may be a crime but it was made to be used, not admired (even though I hve been admiring it a bit at the moment) and it is already a hybrid. Used it will be and in use it will gain a bit more historic patina no doubt

P.S. I won't get back to this project now for a while because we are going on our hols in a few days and I still have mountain of work with a deadline of Thursday evening

 

[Vann]

Enjoy your holiday.

Cheers, Vann.

 

[timbo614]

Quick update (No photo yet weather raining and is as dull as ditchwater here and Photos are so much easier/better in good daylight). I have the plane completely re-assembled so I could try it out It still needs the woodwork finishing off.
But here is the wierd thing: To pick up and use it is "nice" hard to explain, I have 70/80s Record No. 4 which (like most of my tools up to now) has been used for DIY stuff, so I put the two side by side. The Stanley is a good 1/4 inch shorter than the Record, The swept body sides are also about 1/16 lower, The casting on the Stanley seems finer, slightly more refined even tho' it is apparently of older manufacture. These combined make it lighter, in fact much lighter.

Picking up the Record after my test of the Stanley it now feels somehow clumsy or unbalanced the Stanley just feels nicer it maybe simply because it is lighter but I don't think that really explains it.

So to a point, mission accomplished! It is a useable tool once again. It's not pretty by any standard, it definitely looks like a working tool which is really the right effect I think.

 

[Benchwayze]

Crikey Tim!

I have a 5 and half, that needs restoring and it's way better than that. You can have it for a donation to your fave charity. (It's a Record, but some clown painted it green. Hoi, where's me red nose? :lol: :lol: :lol:

PS. Genuine offer BTW.

 

[timbo614]

Crikey Tim!

I have a 5 and half, that needs restoring and it's way better than that. You can have it for a donation to your fave charity. (It's a Record, but some clown painted it green. Hoi, where's me red nose? :lol: :lol: :lol:

PS. Genuine offer BTW.

Hi, and thanks for the offer and vote of confidence! Trouble is tho' it would probabaly cost as much to post it as buying one (Generally a reasonable on is a tenner at my regular car boot). Plus I have lots of stuff I should sell and two ebay accounts, but I never get around to it recently. I think I'm a budding "true" hoarder!

Out of curiosity tho' - weigh it, add a bit, and we'll look up what the post would be...

 

[Benchwayze]

Will do, when I get into the shop tomorrow.

But I doubt if via P4D.co.uk it would cost more than a tenner. Way less than it's worth when it's been fettled.
It's a good old 'un. The sole probably needs truing, the tote needs attention, as it's loose and won't tighten right home. Probably needs a small washer to take up slack. A bit of a clean-up to the front knob, and a proper sharpening and job's a good 'un. You could even repaint it blue if you don't like the green.

I did sharpen it, and took a few test cuts, which considering it was painted green, were not too bad at all!

I'll get my camera batteries recharged and pm you a few pics.

 

[Bm101]

=D>
I know the post on a number 7 with royal mail, packaged, tracked and a 100 quid insurance came to £12.98
Even among those with a competitive edge regarding tool prices on here that's a fantastic price for getting a tool you know is basically sound, free, from someone you can trust.
Another time this forum restored my faith.

 

[Benchwayze]

Tim,

I think I solved the reason the plane was painted green. I seem to recall a chap where I used to work in the 60's, who painted his planes white, just abaft the handle, so he knew his plane, if it 'walked'! So maybe someone chose green for the same reason!

I have had a closer look at this plane, and I find that the lever cap tension screw is worn, and wobbles about like a kid's loose tooth. It is possible to tighten it, but the blade is too stiff to adjust easily. I think the plane needs a replacement frog. If I can find one sculling around my shop I'll change it. If not, then I have a search on my hands, because I wouldn't feel right passing on the plane as it is; at least not without revealing the fault.

 

[Phil Pascoe]

I had a large carpenter's tool box for many years - tastefully painted vivid pink.

 

[Phil Pascoe]

If it comes to a replacement frog, just put a dollop of JB weld or epoxy in the cap screw hole and adjust the screw til right and leave it set. If it's knackered anyway, there's nothing to lose.

 

[custard]

Check the pitting on the back of the blade first, any pitting there, then it's scrap or new blade.

Pitting isn't an automatic dealbreaker on the flat of the blade. How much of an issue they represent is down to how many there are and how deep they are, and of course their location in relation to the edge.

Even if there are pits at the edge whether they matter at all depends on the type of plane. Almost nobody does it, but you can leave pits on some plane irons, on a jack or roughing plane for example.

Pitting on the flat of the iron should be a deal breaker, "almost nobody does it" for a good reason.

It's not just because of the rough finish that pitting produces. It's also because the pitted section in the edge is extremely blunt, so there's the effort involved in driving a mill or two of extremely blunt blade through the workpiece. And the deeper you are into the workpiece (i.e. as with a jack or scrub plane), the harder it becomes. That's why no craftsman worth his salt will tolerate a chip in the edge of their iron; it's a faff to grind it out, but it's even more of a faff forcing it through the timber.

For the trivial cost of a replacement Stanley or Record iron it's just not worth the muscle power.

 

[Benchwayze]

If it comes to a replacement frog, just put a dollop of BB weld or epoxy in the cap screw hole and adjust the screw til right and leave it set. If it's knackered anyway, there's nothing to lose.

Except my personal pride and integrity! :mrgreen: :mrgreen: :mrgreen: (hammer)
Cheers Phil, What is BB weld please?

 

[Phil Pascoe]

Sorry - meant to be JB.