Try-plane with lead in its nose
- Thread starter Dr W
- Start date
Help Support UKworkshop.co.uk:
Hah...I was thinking more like the hump. Richard gets enough goodness out of the forum and stores it in the hump for a couple of weeks before coming back for water...i mean, posts.
In my younger days, I worked at a consulting firm and just loved it and worked all the time. After an internship, they asked why I'd be a good candidate. The firm had long work hours and a whole series of professional exams to go through (about 5000 hours worth of study time needed over half a decade or so) and they asked me why I would be a good candidate.
Being young and literal, I said "because I can go for periods of time without needing to stop and have fun and be relatively fine with that".
I got hired. Unfortunately, they also named me (while I was away at my last year of college) the "fun camel". As I got older, my hump couldn't store as much, apparently, and I left the place after 8 years. I still get the reference once in a while.
Sgian Dubh
Established Member
Neither moniker would in any way give me the hump (sic). Anyway, the evidence of my lackadaisical or intermittent approach to posting is in my Message count. I see that over roughly seventeen years I've managed to spout my ill-informed and ill-considered waffle in less than 2,400 messages, an average of <140 per year, or about an average of ~2.7 messages per week. I'm fairly sure I've noticed some newly registered forum participants post that number of messages or maybe more in just a few weeks or months, then it's as if they burn out and disparoo forever. So, intermittent, slowish and steady seems to have kept me reasonably engaged for all that time, and I'm aware of quite a number of contributors that have come and gone, and some that come back again. Slainte.
PS. I was about to post this, and I happened to look up and spotted your posting numbers. I'd say you're, well ... er, prolific, and over a relatively short time too, i.e., 6,000+ messages in less than five years! That's going it a bit I'd say, ha ha.
what's the SIC for, hump?
I do post a fair amount - this is kind of my hobby, especially when I can't get in the shop and saw, plane or grind things.
On most forums I've been on, prolific posters try to curate everyone to agree (YMMV, all of these methods work the same!, etc). Not into that.
I do post a fair amount - this is kind of my hobby, especially when I can't get in the shop and saw, plane or grind things.
On most forums I've been on, prolific posters try to curate everyone to agree (YMMV, all of these methods work the same!, etc). Not into that.
Last edited:
Droogs
Not the Sharpest Moderator in the box
to show you he is quoting you verbatim, ie using it with the exact same meaning and in the same way you did. In this instance enforcing the idea that he is talking to you tongue in cheek
it is how you point out you are being a bit cheeky in that way most Americans don't seem to get
it is how you point out you are being a bit cheeky in that way most Americans don't seem to get
sic is usually used here when something is being repeated verbatim but with spelling or serious usage errors (to let readers know that the errors were left in and not missed in edit). Generally dropped in after the misspelled word, and much of the time used to make the quoted person look bad by drawing attention to their errors.
I thought for a second "jeez, I get it that there are plenty of words spelled differently over there, but hump?"
I thought for a second "jeez, I get it that there are plenty of words spelled differently over there, but hump?"
Sgian Dubh
Established Member
Yes, to show I intended to use the word or phrasing, but not there to indicate a previous misuse quoted verbatim. It was used in this case because 'give me the hump' is a quite common alternative means of expressing upset caused. It crossed my mind when typing that you, being American, may not be familiar with this quite common British usage, meaning you might need to think a bit to get the joke with its reference back to camels that you'd introduced - perhaps you'd have got the wee joke easier if I'd typed (pun intended) instead of (sic).
It was prompted by the fact that when I lived in the US I found that many Britishisms were unintelligible to Americans, but it didn't stop me using them because I quite enjoyed sometimes leaving my hosts completely mystified for a minute or two, ha ha. Slainte.
Adam W.
A Major Clanger
"Said in context" innit.
Cheshirechappie
Established Member
My humble apologies for interrupting the general conversation, but I'd like to ask a question, if I may.
Dr W posted pictures of a fairly standard wooden try plane with a gob of lead stuffed up it's nose. A few posts later, John PW posted pictures of an unusual looking shortish wooden plane with a very high angle double iron, a ludicrously tight escapement and stuffed with gobs of lead front and back. My personal suspicion is that the latter plane wouldn't function very well, if at all; but, nonetheless, somebody went to some trouble making it, including the added lead.
Erm - I'm curious, and don't know why - what's the added lead there for? More weight, presumably - but why?
Dr W posted pictures of a fairly standard wooden try plane with a gob of lead stuffed up it's nose. A few posts later, John PW posted pictures of an unusual looking shortish wooden plane with a very high angle double iron, a ludicrously tight escapement and stuffed with gobs of lead front and back. My personal suspicion is that the latter plane wouldn't function very well, if at all; but, nonetheless, somebody went to some trouble making it, including the added lead.
Erm - I'm curious, and don't know why - what's the added lead there for? More weight, presumably - but why?
Jacob
What goes around comes around.
I think John PW's plane was either a tooly's experiment gone wrong, or deliberately converted into a picturesque door stop. One clue is the added door knob screwed on which surely be ripped off in no time under normal use.
Cheshirechappie
Established Member
Why the added lead, though?
Adam W.
A Major Clanger
Looks like a home made scraper plane to me.
Jacob
What goes around comes around.
Heavier doorstop?
scooby
Established Member
Hold my Beer as the younger generation would say, I've got an average of 42 messages a year.
I enjoy reading your messages (and DW's).
I'm going to chuck in that I dont think its anything to do with weight as the amount looks to be a couple of grams worth. I think its maybe more to do with a split/crack or hole to stop it spreading.
Could be wrong, frequently am.
Cheshirechappie
Established Member
I see the logic, but Dr W's try plane seems not to have any cracks of substance, and JohnPW's plane shows minor cracks at the toe end, but not where the lead is.
That said, since we don't have a definite reason, might not be wise to rule the idea out completely.
My guess is the previous onwer had some sort of weakness in their left hand and/or arm and couldn't press down the front of the plane hard enough at the start of a cut. Therefore the added weight at the front end which makes the plane front heavy helps to keep the plane horizontal when starting a cut.
Or they had a problem with the right arm/hand and couldn't hold up the plane at the beginning of a cut!
Maybe it doesn't make the plane front heavy, but evens out the weight in front of the blade edge and behind it, ie the balance point would be the mouth.
Or they had a problem with the right arm/hand and couldn't hold up the plane at the beginning of a cut!
Maybe it doesn't make the plane front heavy, but evens out the weight in front of the blade edge and behind it, ie the balance point would be the mouth.
Last edited:
Cheshirechappie
Established Member
Maybe - again, let's not completely discount the possibility; but it doesn't really explain the example JohnPW found, though.
There have always been fashions in woodworking, just as in every other walk of life. Heavier planes and lighter planes being two such fashions. Could it be that someone wrote in a magazine some decades ago that heavier planes are better; they hold better to the wood - and some people took it a bit too literally, like they did fairly recently with plane sole flattening? Always the odd one or two who go too far with things.
There have always been fashions in woodworking, just as in every other walk of life. Heavier planes and lighter planes being two such fashions. Could it be that someone wrote in a magazine some decades ago that heavier planes are better; they hold better to the wood - and some people took it a bit too literally, like they did fairly recently with plane sole flattening? Always the odd one or two who go too far with things.
When posting I only noticed the two parallel holes on top. The larger hole now i see it I suspect was for adjusting the plane blade.
Im sure weve all seen a striking knob on old planes and thats possibly what was originally there. seems too coincidental otherwise.
Maybe the two on top was where a plate was fitted to stop a strike damaging the body. Normally advancing the blade thats where you hit it. I dont know if you can advance the blade by striking the front, as normally you struck the back, but I know ive seen a knob on other old planes in that area right at the front.
info here.
