Where did the knowledge about the capiron get lost?

[D_W]

Like I said David, maybe video just isn't your medium. I don't know. Nobody is making you do any of this stuff. I don't for one moment think it's easy. Your videos are a reminder of this. It isn't easy and I doubt they show you in your best light. I applaud your courage.

I couldn't tell you what it takes to make a good video, either. It would require a separate plan, it's like a separate trade. You'd have to want to go a lot further with the videos than I want to to invest the time and money to learn it.

First off, you'd have to clean and organize your shop and do something as simple as plan what you're going to say above and beyond the general topic, and second I can't imagine that there are many good videos that don't involve editing. That's a time soak.

And you have to smile more and "sell" what you're talking about, I guess. Like I said, I don't know. I'm sure I could make and sell a few planes. i couldn't sell a video (or even muster the enthusiasm to figure what it would take), and won't even expect someone to sit through a google ad. I do expect that whoever asked me about the planing without following with scraping or sanding, they'll get that out of that video and that's as far as it needs to go. Perhaps that standard isn't met on other videos. I thought on one that I would be able to get a difference showing on planed vs. sanded surface on squirrely cherry, and the only thing I could tell from it was that it took twice as much shellac to seal the surface on the sanded take. If I was going to make a more specific video for that, I'd have gotten five subject pieces of wood and then picked the one that gave the results I wanted. That would be disingenuous.

Like I said above, I think the value in the videos for the average user is less in trying to make a video that will appeal to someone who didn't have a specific question, and more in addressing questions that aren't very easily demonstrated in text. The former requires a higher level of considering what the draw is - i'll leave that to natural salespeople.

It doesn't take that much courage to put stuff of yourself up where you're not in your best light. It just takes no interest in being seen as someone who makes well produced videos.

In the same note, if you put up videos and talked in monotone like me, but I could learn something from them, I'd be delighted to see them. Honestly. Something on layout or design for carving, moulding proportion, whatever it might be.

 

[thikone]

I said a number of times in the reviews I wrote that I suspect that most planes are overkill for most woodworkers. I wonder how many amateurs choose figured and interlocked wood for a furniture build? The fact that 50 degrees is considered a "high angle" in the USA forums suggests to me that the experience of interlocked wood is vastly different to the woods we have in Oz. And then would a professional woodworker choose such wood, or rather go with something less difficult and obstructionistic? In any event, how many pros rely on handplanes for dimensioning or finish?

I believe that bevel up planes or Stanley-minus-chipbreaker are still going to be the choice for most amateurs since they are easier to use, and will suffice unless there is a need to plane more interlocked grain. I still maintain that, for most, the performance of these planes exceeds the difficulty of the wood worked, and high angle planes offer an easier route than learning to set a chipbreaker. However for those willing to take the plunge, the chipbreaker is an old revolution made new.

Regards from Perth

Derek

Not sure if I'm qualified to say something here as I'm beginner internet woodworker, as I taught by internet completely. Thankfully to all that buzz and the people around chip breaker, it didn't take long to see advantages of chip breaker. Not without turning to BU planes at first, but in a few month of time.

Not sure about first statement that planes can be overkill. I didn't like sanding when I tried. And sometimes dimensions are a few mm out that has to be corrected. It is just more accurate and convenient way. Unfortunately or fortunately, I chose to start with European spruce with lots of knots. Probably bad choice, definitely bad for BU planes that I had, even with 50 degree cutting angle. In Europe we do a lot of things from it, it is cheapest wood here, Siberia is full of it

Thanks again for the buzz! Interesting read. Buzz more, since buzz from BU and no chip breaker still caught me and a lot of others like me I'm sure

So, amateurs, don't buy whole set of BU only planes first, buy one of each BU and BD, probably in this order.

Regards,
Advanced amateur.

 

[Trafalgar]

Like I said David, maybe video just isn't your medium. I don't know. Nobody is making you do any of this stuff. I don't for one moment think it's easy. Your videos are a reminder of this. It isn't easy and I doubt they show you in your best light. I applaud your courage.

I couldn't tell you what it takes to make a good video, either. It would require a separate plan, it's like a separate trade. You'd have to want to go a lot further with the videos than I want to to invest the time and money to learn it.

First off, you'd have to clean and organize your shop and do something as simple as plan what you're going to say above and beyond the general topic, and second I can't imagine that there are many good videos that don't involve editing. That's a time soak.

And you have to smile more and "sell" what you're talking about, I guess. Like I said, I don't know. I'm sure I could make and sell a few planes. i couldn't sell a video (or even muster the enthusiasm to figure what it would take), and won't even expect someone to sit through a google ad. I do expect that whoever asked me about the planing without following with scraping or sanding, they'll get that out of that video and that's as far as it needs to go. Perhaps that standard isn't met on other videos. I thought on one that I would be able to get a difference showing on planed vs. sanded surface on squirrely cherry, and the only thing I could tell from it was that it took twice as much shellac to seal the surface on the sanded take. If I was going to make a more specific video for that, I'd have gotten five subject pieces of wood and then picked the one that gave the results I wanted. That would be disingenuous.

Like I said above, I think the value in the videos for the average user is less in trying to make a video that will appeal to someone who didn't have a specific question, and more in addressing questions that aren't very easily demonstrated in text. The former requires a higher level of considering what the draw is - i'll leave that to natural salespeople.

It doesn't take that much courage to put stuff of yourself up where you're not in your best light. It just takes no interest in being seen as someone who makes well produced videos.

In the same note, if you put up videos and talked in monotone like me, but I could learn something from them, I'd be delighted to see them. Honestly. Something on layout or design for carving, moulding proportion, whatever it might be.

I'm actually more qualified, from a pure professional perspective, to post a video on actuarial mathematics and financial engineering than I am woodworking. Maybe one day I'll get around to it. Maybe something scintillating on bordered hessians to put one to sleep. Maybe I could somehow relate constrained optimization to the setting of a cap iron. Might win a Nobel Prize for that one...

 

[thikone]

I'm actually more qualified, from a pure professional perspective, to post a video on actuarial mathematics and financial engineering than I am woodworking. Maybe one day I'll get around to it. Maybe something scintillating on bordered hessians to put one to sleep. Maybe I could somehow relate constrained optimization to the setting of a cap iron. Might win a Nobel Prize for that one...

That might give absolutely correct answer but so absolutely useless. I have a friend he is mathematician. Solving live problems as min-max problems leads to answers like alpine skiing is not is not effective fun activity - you spend more time waiting for lift and getting up!

 

[Trafalgar]

Some folks find math useful every now and then. Hard to put a man on the moon or price an exotic financial derivative without it.

 

[D_W]

Some folks find math useful every now and then. Hard to put a man on the moon or price an exotic financial derivative without it.

I would have some difficulty working without it. You may not be able to work as a CPA without it, either.

 

[swagman]

If you are still in analysis paralysis mode, you simply have extra energy that’s not being channeled into more meaningful areas!

 

[swagman]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l1LoYrmsW6k

 

[D_W]

The decision is easy, Stewie!! Common pitch plane with cap iron for everything!

 

[thikone]

Some folks find math useful every now and then. Hard to put a man on the moon or price an exotic financial derivative without it.

True, it is useful. When it's proven to be useful. I merely remind that it has limitations. It requires a model and should have predictive power. It might be difficult to put numbers on everything, especially on how fibers go in the piece of wood that you are holding.

Speaking of a man on the moon (if that ever happened), when space ship is docking ISS it uses fuzzy logic (google for "spacecraft docking fuzzy logic"). It doesn't use strict numbers and calculations. Which basically means "to get less tear out take shavings of lesser thickness". Does match what is written in woodworking books, conceptually. The only thing is left is to collect such rules and roughly calibrate it. Which is done brilliantly by David (D_W). I just had to see border cases when shavings curl, straighten up and form accordion to grasp it. And that brings warm glow of joy and gratitude to my heart! =D>

 

[JohnPW]

Just for interest, here's a section from Hayward's Complete Book of Woodwork, 1970s edition but originally published in 1955.

In some of the books I've seen on setting the cap iron, they usually say for a finer finish, set it closer etc, but here there is actual mention of tearout, saying that the back iron/cap iron is there purely to reduce tearout when planing against the grain.

I don't have the book on me at the moment but I think in the section on setting up a plane, it said 1.5mm for a jack plane and "somewhat closer" for a smoothing plane.

 

[AndyT]

I don't have the book on me at the moment but I think in the section on setting up a plane, it said 1.5mm for a jack plane and "somewhat closer" for a smoothing plane.

Indeed it did - on page 34 - "For the Jack plane which takes coarse shavings it might be about 1½mm (1/16 in) or more; for the fore plane which takes fine shavings rather less. For the smoothing plane when set for cleaning up difficult wood with twisted grain it should be as close as it is possible to get it."

Good spot!

 

[JohnPW]

Indeed it did - on page 34 - "For the Jack plane which takes coarse shavings it might be about 1½mm (1/16 in) or more; for the fore plane which takes fine shavings rather less. For the smoothing plane when set for cleaning up difficult wood with twisted grain it should be as close as it is possible to get it."

My bold.

Well, that's just about as unequivocal as you can get!

As for the question of why people didn't say that (as close as it is possible) when answering a question on how to reduce tearout, my feeling is that people already assume the plane is already set like that, because it's just a very basic set up for a plane. So people will suggest other things like scraping, toothed blades etc.

 

[thikone]

Indeed it did - on page 34 - "For the smoothing plane when set for cleaning up difficult wood with twisted grain it should be as close as it is possible to get it."

Good spot!

That's the problem. It doesn't say how to test the result and which direction to adjust depending on it. I assume, that left for the practice to find out

So, it was not taught and knowledge was not lost. Everybody had to discover that in practice or apprenticeship. Looks like we are all cheaters now and stealing someones' secrets.

 

[condeesteso]

Excuse me heading sideways for a moment - just wondered about getting a new chipbreaker for my old LN No3. They do make them, but why don't Axi do them?? After all Axi and Brimark (UK distributor for LN) are one. Rubbish. Reminds me years ago when I got my 62, and Axi didn't even think to stock the irons for them (for a very long time). Double-rubbish.

p.s. just ordered a Quangsheng from WH, no patience. If it doesn't fit I'll put it on my other No3 anyway.

 

[iNewbie]

Axminster are a dealer - no longer a distributor afaik.

https://www.lie-nielsen.com/dealers/GB


LN missing in action...

http://www.brimarc.com/products

 

[D_W]

As for the question of why people didn't say that (as close as it is possible) when answering a question on how to reduce tearout, my feeling is that people already assume the plane is already set like that, because it's just a very basic set up for a plane. So people will suggest other things like scraping, toothed blades etc.

Seriously? I doubt it. There are gloms of people saying "make sure your plane is sharp and the mouth is closed tight". You'd assume that people see the cap iron being set close as an assumption, but they wouldn't assume that the plane is sharp or any of the other myriad of things that are mentioned hundreds of times?

So far, in digging through the archives, there are three people who said to set the cap iron close, and one of them answered defensively saying they wouldn't debate it.

A betting man would say so far that:
* a fair number of people know that you can set the cap iron close and reduce tearout
* a far greater number is either not aware of it or not skilled enough (skill referring exclusively to setting the cap iron) to use it to its full potential and uses other things that take more time and require more money
* the instant overwhelming reflex of the group advising here in historical posts is still to increase angle, close mouth, sharpen (all of those lost out badly in history to a double iron, and for good reason).

 

[D_W]

Excuse me heading sideways for a moment - just wondered about getting a new chipbreaker for my old LN No3. They do make them, but why don't Axi do them?? After all Axi and Brimark (UK distributor for LN) are one. Rubbish. Reminds me years ago when I got my 62, and Axi didn't even think to stock the irons for them (for a very long time). Double-rubbish.

p.s. just ordered a Quangsheng from WH, no patience. If it doesn't fit I'll put it on my other No3 anyway.

Is the old cap iron broken or something that it can't be used, or maybe a prior design? You may find that other caps don't have the adjuster hole in the right place for an LN plane, and if that's the case, you might want to enlist someone from the states to buy one for you and have it sent to the UK. That's a fairly expensive option, though, as it will involve two shipping charges, and an already fairly steep price for what is a piece of mild steel.

 

[condeesteso]

D_W - my #3 is an early bronze with the thin pressed cap. It was some time later they introduced the current heftier design and I do fancy trying that, my LN3 is a real day-to-day basic so i'm not chasing rainbows with it. You are right, I can get an LN one over there and have someone I know bring it back. As for the QS if it doesn't fit it'll go on my Record 3 so not wasted.

 

[D_W]

I have had many of the new type, and in my opinion it's not an improvement, but I would've wanted to try it out to find that for sure, too.

As is always the case, when you're spending money, your opinion is more important than mine by a mile.