Thread direction of a tote, why?

UKworkshop.co.uk

Help Support UKworkshop.co.uk:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
I went hunting again and my searching failed to find it. Got the link for the #4 and under totes or a link to the area they keep it in?

Pete
 
I can get these pdfs if I google "lee valley stanley plane tote"
(maybe CSIS has you on the restricted viewing list ):D
 
I must be on a restricted list then or at least when I search Lee Valley's site itself I am. 🤫

Thanks. Now I know how to get to them.

Pete
 
Earlier in this thread, plywood was suggested, apparently in jest.

However a laminated structure - 2 sides and a centre - with grain aligned at 90 degrees may provide a solution far more resistant to damage. Traditional designs and manufacturing techniques did not have the advantage of modern adhesives.

There was a thread a few weeks ago about how traditional tools could be improved. Mostly the opportunities were verry limited - this could be an exception.
 
We made all chair seats out of elm so as a kid I made new handles for my 5 1/2 from elm with particularly complex grain. It's seen much use in 50 years and has not suffered all all. Try it. Btw it's not a tote.. it's a handle
 
You'll lose the hook at the top of the handle and the foot could easily break off. It's best to stick with convention sometimes.
Fair point - (I'm with @Woodwork Journey Dean btw) in which case, how to minimise that weakness? Reduce the top hook, thicken the base hook? Are they essential (considering the number of broken handles?).
Prize of a pat on the back for a simpler design folks catering for these constraints.
 
More or less what Droogs said. The traditional grain direction for totes (& saw handles) was chosen as the least bad way to cater for the compromises needed to use wood for the job. I've repaired & replaced dozens of plane totes in my time & often wondered if I could orient them better, but short of finding a piece of wood that has some very peculiar grain directions, I long since decided we are stuck with the 'traditional' orientation as the least worst way.

The weak point, and the site of the vast majority of fractures I've seen, is across the 'short grain' of the grip. This is normally countered by being held in compression by the stud, but if the stud becomes loose (or the plane dropped!) they can & will break, typically at the ankle or just above it, as happened to this old rosewood tote:
View attachment 155105

It also needed a horn graft, as you can see. Broken horns are by far the most common lesion I've encountered on plane totes (& saw handles).

By orienting the grain running in the direction you've chosen, I think you are swapping one set of risks for a higher set, as already pointed out. If the stud gets loose (and it frequently does) a break across the "foot" is a near certainty. The entire horn is also going to be a very flimsy affair and you'll need to be very careful with that.

Accidents do happen, unfortunately. I've knocked planes off the bench at least twice in the 60 odd years I've been mucking about with them. One landed on the corner of its toe & all it took was a little bit of file work to clean up the burr on the metal. The other, my very favouritest 5 1/2 I got from my dad landed smack on the tote & broke the tip off the horn (but the rest of the tote remained intact):
View attachment 155106
As you can see, with the curve of the horn, you end up with some short-grain towards the tip, which is why so many old totes are found broken off near the tip anyway. Orienting the grain the way you want to is going to make this vulnerability even worse.

However, I believe in the old adage of "suck it & see" . Make a new tote the way you think is better & who knows? It may last for the rest of your lifetime (if you give up this dropping habit :D ), but there's a fair chance you'll discover why they've been doing it the "wrong" way for the last few centuries. A lesson learnt through experience is far more valuable & memorable than simply being told.....
;)
Cheers,
Ian
OK, so how to meld the two strengths?
Two glue lines (stronger than the wood?), change grain direction at the intersection of body and 'horns' and get the best of both worlds?
 
OK, so how to meld the two strengths?
Two glue lines (stronger than the wood?), change grain direction at the intersection of body and 'horns' and get the best of both worlds?
First thing I do when rescuing a car boot-bought plane is, remove the original handle and knob, label them with which plane they came from then make new fancy-shmancy ones. I will often glue two or more pieces together to make a new handle. I may even rip a piece, flip the faces then glue the back together to make an interesting pattern, disrupt the grain flow and have the bonus of a glue line to strengthen it.
 

Attachments

  • P1090498.jpg
    P1090498.jpg
    9.3 MB
  • P1090497.jpg
    P1090497.jpg
    9.4 MB
Fair point - (I'm with @Woodwork Journey Dean btw) in which case, how to minimise that weakness? Reduce the top hook, thicken the base hook? Are they essential (considering the number of broken handles?).
Prize of a pat on the back for a simpler design folks catering for these constraints.
Except that the foot has now broken off on the new handle, which goes to show that the manufacturers have indeed thought about the optimum way to orientate the grain direction and chosen to go with the best option like all other plane manufacturers.
 
Except that the foot has now broken off on the new handle, which goes to show that the manufacturers have indeed thought about the optimum way to orientate the grain direction and chosen to go with the best option like all other plane manufacturers.
To be fair, the foot broke off because I’ma heavy handed clumsy idiot in this case
 
Hmmm, I think this risks becoming another case of over-thinking a "problem" that doesn't really exist. I'm all for customising handles & tools to suit your own tastes & purposes - we've been doing it for thousands of years, but imo there is very little need to change the way plane handles are made as far as functionality is concerned.

The traditional orientation of the rear handle (or tote, depending on where you live) has evolved as the most practical compromise to using wood in a way nature never really intended & didn't design the material accordingly. She does oblige occasionally, at least partly, & I've found the odd piece where the grain almost follows the ideal directions for the thing I'm making, but that's a pretty rare occurrence. As usually done, rear plane handles serve the purpose remarkably well, all things considered. I figure breaking a couple of handles in a lifetime of woodworking (well, it's not quite a lifetime yet & I'm definitely getting clumsier, so maybe there's another breakage or two in store!) is a tolerable trade-off for handles made the simplest way.

I've seen quite a few laminated handles and no doubt they would be 'stronger' in the short term while the glue holds, and no doubt more decorative according to personal taste. But you can expect a very reasonable life from a handle made the traditional way from any wood that is suited to that application....

:)
Cheers,
 
Off the point altogether but if you want a tote that is really comfortable then make it elliptical in section rather than two flat faces connected by semi-circles. More work but so much more comfortable.

Jim
 
Off the point altogether but if you want a tote that is really comfortable then make it elliptical in section rather than two flat faces connected by semi-circles. More work but so much more comfortable.

Jim
Yep, the way they did them a couple of generations ago. This old (repaired) rosewood tote came off a post-WW1-pre WW2 model.
RepRosewood tote red.jpg

It was love at fist grasp & has become the model for any handle I make....

Cheers,
 
Back
Top