The Veritas Custom Planes - more than a review

[Cheshirechappie]

New planes ... meet saturated market.

Hellloooo.

That is a point. I wonder how saturated the market actually is? Is it still expanding, and if so, how much more will it expand?

When I started woodworking about 30 years ago, we had no decent new planes being manufactured, secondhand being available in local junkshops and from a very small handful of specialist dealers, and not many people really either knowing much about or actively persuing hand-tool work. Now we have a range of high-end plane makers (right up to Karl Holtey), decent quality imports, and a seemingly never-ending secondhand supply available at the click of a mouse from internet auctions and specialist dealers, to a seemingly expanding number of hand-tool users.

I suppose we'll know the market is saturated when somebody either ceases production of handplanes or goes out of business. At some point, the supply of secondhand tools must start to dry up, too. However, neither seem to be happening yet.

 

[Derek Cohen (Perth Oz)]

There is no such thing as a saturated market in amateur woodworking.

Do you believe that handplanes reached a zenith, say 100, 200 years ago? After all, a million Stanley planes were made, with little change to the shape of the handle, and the use of a double iron?

The fact that a plane will work because the blade is sharp and is bedded securely does not constitute, in my book, what defines a "good" plane. It defines an adequate plane. The question then is, do we accept adequate planes, or do we search for something more?

There are those who will accept adequate and there are those who do not. Upgrading is everywhere, not just woodwork.

Regards from Perth

Derek

 

[Cheshirechappie]

It's not just metal planes for which there's a market, either. Consider wooden planes. In the UK, there seems to be an almost never-ending supply of quite decent secondhand wooden planes (and a lot of firewood, too), often at near give-away prices (99p plus postage is not that uncommon). In other parts of the world, they're not quite so common, but you can certainly find most types without too much hunting. Nonetheless, there's a market for new wooden planes, and at quite significant prices, too. The makers of new wooden planes can't keep up with demand, despite the prices they must charge in order to make a living.

Nope. The market ain't saturated yet. Nor anywhere near.

 

[G S Haydon]

Very interesting point Derek. I think our needs have shifted a great deal as is to be expected. Being a boring person such as I am I have been reflecting on this idea. If we chose to be totally "unplugged" from any planing machine I'm not sure any of the modern metal planes would be part of the core of what we use. I think where they would be welcome would be for fine finishing or use as a panel plane. Due to the weight and friction of metal planes would the typical user 100 years ago or before deem our innovations to be at best a burden for many tasks or at worst a folly? Ergonomics of the planes that preceded what we have now would likely be at worst good otherwise workers would have demanded a significant change.
In reality, these days machines do most of the tough work for us so perhaps it is right to view these modern metal planes in respect of fine refinement tools only? On that basis it provides a very interesting topic to find out works best given the circumstances of today but what we lack is the perspective of the trade users of 100 and earlier making furniture and joinery for 5 to 6 days a week for long hours. Our perspective as passionate amateur woodworkers is perhaps creating a different standard to which things are judged and that's fine. It's just hard to be definitive with good/adequate beyond the typical qualities that anyone would expect in a plane.
And on saturation, not even close! Changing needs combined with whims, personal preference, high levels of finish, the human urge to have more stuff and a ton of other reasons ensure people will keep buying all kinds of things. Planes and tools included.

 

[Trafalgar]

There is no such thing as a saturated market in amateur woodworking.

Do you believe that handplanes reached a zenith, say 100, 200 years ago? After all, a million Stanley planes were made, with little change to the shape of the handle, and the use of a double iron?

The fact that a plane will work because the blade is sharp and is bedded securely does not constitute, in my book, what defines a "good" plane. It defines an adequate plane. The question then is, do we accept adequate planes, or do we search for something more?

There are those who will accept adequate and there are those who do not. Upgrading is everywhere, not just woodwork.

Regards from Perth

Derek

Cue Beyonce' : lemme, lemme, lemme upgrade 'ya.

 

[Trafalgar]

New planes ... meet saturated market.

Hellloooo.

That is a point. I wonder how saturated the market actually is? Is it still expanding, and if so, how much more will it expand?

When I started woodworking about 30 years ago, we had no decent new planes being manufactured, secondhand being available in local junkshops and from a very small handful of specialist dealers, and not many people really either knowing much about or actively persuing hand-tool work. Now we have a range of high-end plane makers (right up to Karl Holtey), decent quality imports, and a seemingly never-ending secondhand supply available at the click of a mouse from internet auctions and specialist dealers, to a seemingly expanding number of hand-tool users.

I suppose we'll know the market is saturated when somebody either ceases production of handplanes or goes out of business. At some point, the supply of secondhand tools must start to dry up, too. However, neither seem to be happening yet.

Plane makers having been going into and out of business, both large, medium, and boutique makers, continuously for at least 200 years all the way up to the present day.

 

[Cheshirechappie]

I can't think of many that have either withdrawn from the market or gone out of business recently. Several new entrants in the last couple of decades, though - LN, LV, Clifton, several quite decent offerings from China (maybe from the same maker), even Stanley have launched a premium line. Not to mention any number of small-volume high-end makers.

It's true that the 'bulk' makers - Record and Stanley - have changed significantly, but the brands are still out there. Not what they were, but still available.

 

[Jacob]

The relationship between "brand" and "maker" has always been loose. Even in the good old days a lot of different tool makers could all be using components from the same source. The "brand" would be in the label, the handle, finish etc.
A foundry (such as Qualcast in Derby) would be making plane bodies for several different brands - just like Quansheng today.

 

[ali27]

Q: Where did the idea to make Custom Bench Planes come from and why did we decide to offer them?

A: Historically, Veritas has always offered customers a choice of blade metals for their planes. We began with O1 and were an early provider of A2 in a commercially available plane. Our introduction of PM-V11® gave customers yet another choice, so we have a history of offering customers some (albeit limited) ability to customize their planes.

When we embarked on the Custom Bench Planes project, one of the benchmarks we looked at was our own line of bevel-up planes. One of the features of the bevel-up planes is the ability to change the cutting angle by merely changing the blade to one with a different bevel angle. Thinking "how could we provide this functionality in a bevel-down configuration?" resulted in the design requirement to have user-replaceable frogs, and the ability for the user to specify the exact angle. (An important note is that this is not a Veritas innovation. Removeable frogs are not new, and we didn't come up with the idea. Being able to specify the exact angle you want, however, is quite innovative and no one else does this in a production-scale product.)

Guess they don't know about putting a back bevel on a plane iron.

The roundness of the plane blades is not my cup of tea. Great functionality, but design......

Rob, if you are reading this thread, how about giving buyers the option of choosing a bailey design adjuster. I like to adjust the depth on the fly.

Ali

 

[MIGNAL]

All well and good, but I think it's hard to beat a horned plane for sheer comfort. Turned front knobs are no match for German horned planes or planes with front 'buns' for that matter. Accordingly, it's all an exercise in making the most comfortable version of a design that will always be less comfortable when compared to certain others.

I have one as well, Charles, and they can be good planes.

I know you are probably referring to the ECE smoother you have (still, after the fire?). However here is another, made by Kari Hultman a few years ago. Link to her site: http://villagecarpenter.blogspot.com.au ... art-x.html

What I find important, in the context of this thread on plane ergonomics, is how she uses it. Below is a video she made. In it it seems to me that her backhand pushes on the heel on the horizontal, while the front hand (on the horn) does not grasp it for grip or forward thrust, but stabilises her hand and then pushes down on the toe. What do you think?

And how do you use your horned smoother?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9AqI6P12uGg

Regards from Perth

Derek

It's hard to argue with the craftsmanship on exhibit with the Hultman plane but I prefer the completely rounded back of the ECE, plus the adjustable mouth and positive adjusting mechanism. She's made a pretty plane but I'm not sure she's made one better than she could have bought but of course that isn't always the point and I understand that.

There's is little not to like with the ECE. It can be used essentially as a single-iron, tight mouthed high angle smoother if one wishes, or as a high angle, close capiron, slightly wider mouthed smoother as seems to be the fashion post Kato and Kawai (but admittedly with a higher angle). The adjustable mouth, rather than a moveable frog, makes all the sense in the world doesn't it? I certainly think so. The bottom can of course be easily kept flat over the years and the adjustable mouth takes up the wear from this as well.

The horn on the front of the Hultman is a far cry away from that of the ECE, at least in ergonomic terms. The ECE is very tactile, rounded and beautifully shaped. I'm afraid the horn on the Hultman appears to be square with hard edges and awkward (to hold) corners.
One is a design in function and ergonomics, the other has been designed to display some very attractive carving (which it does).

 

[Trafalgar]

Yep, ECE have been quietly making planes for as long, if not longer, than Stanley did. They've certainly figured out their style.