Veritas PMV-II Plane Blades

[matthewwh]

I have sharpened PMV11, but not used it to the point where it needed sharpening again. I have however spoken with Rob Stoakley, who has, and he confirms that it holds its edge for a remarkably long time.

It is certainly easy enough to hone using Aluminium Oxide and has the 'stone feel' of a plain carbon steel like T10 or O1 - you can feel a bit of bite and resistance so you know what's going on at the edge. The air hardening die steels A2 and D2 are like watching a video of yourself sharpening, it happened but you didn't feel a thing.

In short, the manufacturers claims about PMV11 are genuine and honest, so if that's what you want, and you are happy to pay for it, you won't be disappointed.

Personally I'm very happy with good quality, properly heat treated carbon steel.

 

[Trafalgar]

I have sharpened PMV11, but not used it to the point where it needed sharpening again. I have however spoken with Rob Stoakley, who has, and he confirms that it holds its edge for a remarkably long time.

It is certainly easy enough to hone using Aluminium Oxide and has the 'stone feel' of a plain carbon steel like T10 or O1 - you can feel a bit of bite and resistance so you know what's going on at the edge. The air hardening die steels A2 and D2 are like watching a video of yourself sharpening, it happened but you didn't feel a thing.

In short, the manufacturers claims about PMV11 are genuine and honest, so if that's what you want, and you are happy to pay for it, you won't be disappointed.

Personally I'm very happy with good quality, properly heat treated carbon steel.

Good and fair points. And one wonders when we hear that "PM VII holds its edge X times longer than carbon steel." Well, whose carbon steel? From what era? The best Sheffield had to offer? Stanley UK from the 1980s? I have not demo'd PMVII plane irons but I did demo a bench chisel. It was a beautifully made chisel but I found absolutely nothing at all remarkable about the steel. Nothing.

 

[Trafalgar]

I'd love to understand, with as much specificity as somebody can muster, exactly what a little extra time between honings does for their woodworking or their lives, in general, since it seems like such a big deal to hone a couple times less per day than the average bloke.

One of the problems with these sorts of things are the participants who gush with the arrival on the market of every single new thing having to do with woodworking. It's hard to be taken seriously when, over the years, every new "thing" that comes out is the neatest thing since sliced bread and one's upgrade path is essentially to infinity.

To respond to your first paragraph, probably not very much, but as far as spending your cash, whether hard earned or not, it is an individual's own decision. I could go sit at a bar/pub every afternoon/evening, but I don't. My vices are many, ranging from accumulations of books, Military & veteran memorabilia and tools (many vises).

My woodworking and implements to pursue it, are for my enjoyment. If I would have to adhere to a specific formula stating that to be a woodworking hobbyist would require me to walk and act as if I had a perpetual splinter in my sphincter, me thinks I would pursue some other hobby with less rigid requirements, such as becoming a politician.

Now, I'm wondering how long it will be before we see something akin to an O1 blade with PM-V11 sprayformed to one side or the other, giving us a modern bi-metal blade?

Buying replacement plane irons doesn't seem that particularly entertaining but I suppose there's always some bit of excitement in the anticipation, especially with all the internet sales puffery.

 

[iNewbie]

Well I agree.
But a certain level of disagreement should be possible without falling out. I've been disagreeing with Derek for years without exchanging a cross word!
The trouble is " a certain troll" makes a point of being really quite unpleasant, over and over again. He's obviously got a problem* and he spoils it for everybody else.

*personality problem; lack of one. Hey I could get into being insulting too!

PS and I don't think many people have left because of it - quite the opposite, this seems to be the busiest WW forum around and growing by the day. A healthy level of disagreement is a good thing - there's a big emphasis from some quarters to press a party line, which should be resisted.

Your point(s) when based on your opinion and not from any objective use of such items/materials is pure BS for the sake of starting a disagreement. Its you who has the issue. BB's providing an objective point where you contradict yourself and talk b0ll0cks.

I just wonder how much time the 'you shouldn't have/buy that' brigade spend on regurgitating the same old anti-tool/sharpening tripe when they could be doing something far more constructive with their own, time! - instead of ironically advising others how much time they can save on...... sharpening!

 

[Corneel]

Now, I'm wondering how long it will be before we see something akin to an O1 blade with PM-V11 sprayformed to one side or the other, giving us a modern bi-metal blade?

This reminds me of some research from the Japanese professors. I don't remember the details exactly, but they coated the clearance side of the edge (the bevel) with something very hard. The result was that the wear bevel on the clearance side developed only very reluctantly. The other side, the face side, is where the woodshavings curl over the steel, creating a hollow wearbevel. This effectively self sharpens the blade. The blade does get shorter, but the very tip keeps a narrow radius, while the convex wearbevel on the clearance side didn't grow too much. They measured the edge life in a handplane in kilometers, instead of the 100 to 200 meters of a normal planeblade.

Of course, it would be a throw away blade, because sharpening the bevel would remove the coating.

(just some kind of interesting trivia).

 

[matthewwh]

Good and fair points. And one wonders when we hear that "PM VII holds its edge X times longer than carbon steel." Well, whose carbon steel? From what era? The best Sheffield had to offer? Stanley UK from the 1980s? I have not demo'd PMVII plane irons but I did demo a bench chisel. It was a beautifully made chisel but I found absolutely nothing at all remarkable about the steel. Nothing.[/quote]

Exactly! It behaves just like good carbon steel but the edge lasts longer, that's what it's meant to do and it does.

I agree that broad comparisons with 'carbon steel' are fairly meaningless, but when you look at the 'age defying beauty creams' being foisted on women, we don't have it all that bad.

Self sharpening pro-retinol plane irons with shellac applying lubra strip - because you're worth it!

 

[Trafalgar]

Well that's the obvious next step. Buy the new PMV -11 now and get hit with the new thicker version in a couple of years time - the current offering is a bit thin. Someone has already complained! Two years after that will be the new, new PMV-III. First in thin, then in thick again!
I jumped off the ride a few years ago but if you still wish to jump on, what can I say? Enjoy it while it lasts, if you'll forgive the expression.

Rest assured that the product release pipeline is being well-managed. And it should be. Whiplash from being whipsawn is somebody else's problem, and a lot of people are surprisingly immune. Consumer psychology. A wonderful field for sure.

"Everybody's getting these," "it's what all the serious woodworkers are doing." "A-2? Oh my, so YESTERDAY" (cue a Lindsay Lohan Mean Girls giggle here) Last season's Prada, and so on and so forth. Sixty year old men aren't even immune. Not only that but more susceptible if anything.

98% of the heavy lifting is done with power equipment and somebody is sweating how long the edge on their No. 4 is going to last.

It's fascinating.

 

[ali27]

Derek do you know if LV will make these replacement blades for stanley thicker or offer
an option for thicker blades?

I wish LV would make these blades like laminated japanese blades. Just glue the softer
iron on the pmv11. This way we could use thick blades that are very easy to sharpen.

If you really wanted a slightly thicker iron with a PMV-11 cutting edge, you could make your own 'laminated' iron by taking a factory blade and gluing a piece of mild steel sheet to the back. Mild steel sheet can be obtained in a huge range of thicknesses, so you can easily choose your own finished thickness. Use an engineering adhesive such as one of those by Loctite, degrease thoroughly before gluing, and trim the mild steel back to the blade profile after the glue has cured by filing.

Personally, I wouldn't bother; but it could be done.

Hi,

I hae already thought about that, but how do I cut the
slot. I have no fancy equipment. My thoughts were to
use a thick blade so there would be no need for a cap iron.
I wish LV or LN would offer such an option.

 

[matthewwh]

Hmmmm.

The cap iron isn't just there to make up the thickness.

I would grind up a cheap old fat woodie blade and test your concept first.

 

[ali27]

Hmmmm.

The cap iron isn't just there to make up the thickness.

I would grind up a cheap old fat woodie blade and test your concept first.

Hi Matthew,

I understand the function of the cap iron. When I
see infill planes with thick irons, but without a
chipbreaker making beautiful shaving, I dont see
see the need for it. It's function is primarily to stiffen
the iron.

Would Ray Iles make such a custom blade? Thick
woodie blade you say? Good idea, but aren't those
tapered? Is that no problem?

Ali

 

[G S Haydon]

The modern single iron infills work just fine but I would hazard a guess that they are used for very light cuts only? There is a "Mr Cap Iron" of sorts on this forum and I'm no expert on this however the first recorded introduction into western woodworking was in 1767 and it was designed for limiting tear out. If a stiffer Iron was needed more thickenss could of been added to the blade. Also (and I'm risking looking a fool here) some japanese planes also have cap irons, I think also it was not to add rigidity but to control tearout. The cap iron concept did catch on for sure, single iron bench planes generally became roughing tools. Although not always heavily described in books from the past it's clear that people were aware that a close setting would control surface finish. From experience I have found this to be the case.

 

[Trafalgar]

Exactly! It behaves just like good carbon steel but the edge lasts longer, that's what it's meant to do and it does.

I agree that broad comparisons with 'carbon steel' are fairly meaningless, but when you look at the 'age defying beauty creams' being foisted on women, we don't have it all that bad.

Self sharpening pro-retinol plane irons with shellac applying lubra strip - because you're worth it![/quote]


Matthew, I tend to think that people make the mental comparison in these situations to the worst plane iron they ever owned. I think that there is an abundance of good Sheffield steel still around that will not be outlasted by 3 to 1 if at all.

On the other hand Konrad Sauer said he still loves his carbon steel in the blog post that started this brouhaha, and one can only wonder why if PMVII will outlast it by a factor of 3 to 1. If this is truly the case (I think that was another poster's statistic and not actually Sauer's) then it would border on the irrational not to fully adopt the PMVII. Maybe he will in time. We'll have to see. But, fresh of what he described as a good experience with PMVII he still felt the love for his O1.

 

[Corneel]

The modern single iron infills work just fine but I would hazard a guess that they are used for very light cuts only? There is a "Mr Cap Iron" of sorts on this forum and I'm no expert on this however the first recorded introduction into western woodworking was in 1767 and it was designed for limiting tear out. If a stiffer Iron was needed more thickenss could of been added to the blade. Also (and I'm risking looking a fool here) some japanese planes also have cap irons, I think also it was not to add rigidity but to control tearout. The cap iron concept did catch on for sure, single iron bench planes generally became roughing tools. Although not always heavily described in books from the past it's clear that people were aware that a close setting would control surface finish. From experience I have found this to be the case.

Mr. Haydon explained it perfectly well. The modern day infill makers don't rely solely on a thick blade, they also use high bedding angles and very tight mouths. That makes a very dedicated smoother. Which doesn't do anything better then a versatile double iron plane. The classic infill planes, the Norisses and Spiers etc were almost always made with reasonable bedding angles close to 45 degrees and a capiron. Maybe they were on to something....

 

[Jacob]

.....
I understand the function of the cap iron. When I
see infill planes with thick irons, but without a
chipbreaker making beautiful shaving, I dont see
see the need for it. It's function is primarily to stiffen
the iron.....

With the Bailey design the function of the whole blade unit including cap iron is to make a thin blade viable - thin blades are easier to sharpen - and to facilitate quick removal/replacement/adjustment, which also speeds up sharpening.

 

[Cheshirechappie]

The cap-iron on a woodie or infill plane acts to break the lifting shaving and reduce it's tendency to break out ahead of the iron. (It's one of several strategies to control or prevent tearout, along with high bedding angles, very narrow mouths or a combination of those.)

The cap-iron in a Bailey-type plane does three things - the above, plus it also stiffens the rather thin, flappy blades many of the less premium planes are provided with, and it also has the small slot near the top that engages the depth adjustment mechanism. Without the cap-iron fitted, the depth adjuster won't work, and the plane would have to be set in the same way as a woodie or non-adjuster infill. (Providing a blade with a depth adjuster slot won't work in the long term - as the blade shortens due to sharpening, the slot will move downwards, shortening the adjustment mechanism range and eventually missing it altogether.)

 

[Jacob]

it doesn't work on it's own - it's the whole "blade unit" which does it - combination of cap iron, lever cap, frog, which turns a thin blade into a premium performer. Thicker blades then have no great advantage and take longer to sharpen.

 

[Derek Cohen (Perth Oz)]

it doesn't work on it's own - it's the whole "blade unit" which does it - combination of cap iron, lever cap, frog, which turns a thin blade into a premium performer. Thicker blades then have no great advantage and take longer to sharpen.

.... and you know this for certain .... and how?

Regards from Perth

Derek

 

[Jacob]

Part 1
it doesn't work on it's own - it's the whole "blade unit" which does it - combination of cap iron, lever cap, frog, which turns a thin blade into a premium performer.
Part 2
Thicker blades then have no great advantage and take longer to sharpen.

.... and you know this for certain .... and how?

Regards from Perth

Derek

First part is the whole rationale of the Bailey design. The whole point. Odd that it gets overlooked so readily. Odder still that people imagine that Bailey etc would skimp on the detail of blade thickness, having invested so much in the design and development over such a long period.
Second part - everyone knows this.

 

[Trafalgar]

The entire Bailey design REVOLVES AROUND a thinner iron for exactly the reasons Jacob stated. It's obvious on its face.

 

[Derek Cohen (Perth Oz)]

You have empirical evidence to support your statement?

Otherwise it is supposition .... just more blather.

Regards from Perth

Derek