G S Haydon
Established Member
- Joined
- 24 Apr 2013
- Messages
- 1,667
- Reaction score
- 222
Yeah, your sharpening! How dare you use a that method, it was so clearly inferior to method X lol!
Quangsheng Shoulder Plane Passaround
- Thread starter matthewwh
- Start date
Help Support UKworkshop.co.uk:
lurker
Le dullard de la commune
PS Liam did raise the question as to why woodworking tools were made to such fine tolerances when wood moves so much with humidity? I have to admit that I haven't tried to quantify the extent of movement but in the interests of father / son relationships, I blinded him with so many "woody" terms that he either acepted the need for the precision (or went away bored).
Does Jacob still post here?
I bet he is nodding at this with a smug look on his face if he does
Does Jacob still post here?
I bet he is nodding at this with a smug look on his face if he does
Glynne
Established Member
Catch 22 - unnecessary precision (?) vs use of a sharpening jig, difficult one for Jacob.
Anyway Mike S has confirmed he has the plane and so the pass around continues.
Anyway Mike S has confirmed he has the plane and so the pass around continues.
I'm a hobbyist woodworker and have never used a shoulder plane. I have plans to make some replacement doors and windows, using M&T joints, so asked to be included on this passaround to assess whether I should add a shoulder plane to my armoury and, if so, would the Luban 92 fit the bill?
Unwrapped the package (come on, which of you previous users popped most of the bubble wrap
- an addiction of mine) and was struck by the plane's aesthetics - I like the black/steel contrast and it looked and felt well engineered. I shall say no more on that front as Glynne covered it comprehensively.
I believe softwood is generally harder to plane than hardwood so for a test I decided to cut a tenon, rabbet and dado in a well seasoned (i.e. dry) 4"x2". Usually, I'd cut the tenon with.....a tenon saw and then clean up the shoulders and cheeks with a chisel (and, on a bad day, with a turnip file). The rabbet and dado would normally see me break out the Record 405 but I do find it a bit of a faff to set-up. My criteria was to judge if the plane would be an improvement - in ease of use and/or accuracy.
In brief, the plane performed as I hoped and expected. Shaving the end grain on the tenon shoulders was straightforward. I was particularly impressed with the ease of loosening the blade (quarter turn on the knurled knob) so that I could skew it ever so slightly to one side in order to get right into the corners. Similarly, the blade could be advanced and retracted easily - I usually loosened the lever cap but found this wasn't essential.
The edges of the rabbet and dado were established by saw and the plane quickly and easily removed material. I fiddled around with depth of cut and found ease of use at both shallow and medium depth. This was all cross grain work.
On ergonomics I did struggle a bit, finding it difficult at first to establish a comfortable and effective handhold. This was not due to the already documented sharp edges (not really a problem for the amount of use I'd envisage) but more the absence of an obvious place to grip it. This probably reflects my inexperience, rather than a plane deficiency.. I eventually settled on the traditional grip (as Geoff demonstrated in his video) and also tried the 'japanese style' described by Matthew. I actually preferred the latter - it enabled me to keep the weight more evenly over the blade.
In summary, I'm convinced that a shoulder plane would aid my planned woodworking. Though the advantage over my chisel/file method for tenons was not great the versatility it would offer is a marked advantage. Would I buy this one? Well, whilst waiting for this to arrive I had bid on a Clifton 410 and 420 but both went for c.£125, compared to the c.£95 cost of this plane (Cliffies are c.£180 new). So, on value/performance grounds yes - with just a slight reservation as to whether a smaller version would better suit me. I need to try another before I can decide!
My thanks to Matthew for the opportunity to try this Luban 92 plane out.
Mike
P.S. fluffflinger/Richard - plane will be posted (recorded) to you tomorrow (Tuesday).
Unwrapped the package (come on, which of you previous users popped most of the bubble wrap
- an addiction of mine) and was struck by the plane's aesthetics - I like the black/steel contrast and it looked and felt well engineered. I shall say no more on that front as Glynne covered it comprehensively. I believe softwood is generally harder to plane than hardwood so for a test I decided to cut a tenon, rabbet and dado in a well seasoned (i.e. dry) 4"x2". Usually, I'd cut the tenon with.....a tenon saw and then clean up the shoulders and cheeks with a chisel (and, on a bad day, with a turnip file). The rabbet and dado would normally see me break out the Record 405 but I do find it a bit of a faff to set-up. My criteria was to judge if the plane would be an improvement - in ease of use and/or accuracy.
In brief, the plane performed as I hoped and expected. Shaving the end grain on the tenon shoulders was straightforward. I was particularly impressed with the ease of loosening the blade (quarter turn on the knurled knob) so that I could skew it ever so slightly to one side in order to get right into the corners. Similarly, the blade could be advanced and retracted easily - I usually loosened the lever cap but found this wasn't essential.
The edges of the rabbet and dado were established by saw and the plane quickly and easily removed material. I fiddled around with depth of cut and found ease of use at both shallow and medium depth. This was all cross grain work.
On ergonomics I did struggle a bit, finding it difficult at first to establish a comfortable and effective handhold. This was not due to the already documented sharp edges (not really a problem for the amount of use I'd envisage) but more the absence of an obvious place to grip it. This probably reflects my inexperience, rather than a plane deficiency.. I eventually settled on the traditional grip (as Geoff demonstrated in his video) and also tried the 'japanese style' described by Matthew. I actually preferred the latter - it enabled me to keep the weight more evenly over the blade.
In summary, I'm convinced that a shoulder plane would aid my planned woodworking. Though the advantage over my chisel/file method for tenons was not great the versatility it would offer is a marked advantage. Would I buy this one? Well, whilst waiting for this to arrive I had bid on a Clifton 410 and 420 but both went for c.£125, compared to the c.£95 cost of this plane (Cliffies are c.£180 new). So, on value/performance grounds yes - with just a slight reservation as to whether a smaller version would better suit me. I need to try another before I can decide!
My thanks to Matthew for the opportunity to try this Luban 92 plane out.
Mike
P.S. fluffflinger/Richard - plane will be posted (recorded) to you tomorrow (Tuesday).
fluffflinger
Established Member
Plane rec'd and will be forwarded to Noggsy on Monday.
Full review to come but it is of the same high quality that I've come to expect from all Matthew's stable.
Have some time tomorrow to give it a full examination.
Thanks Matthew.
Regards
Richard
Full review to come but it is of the same high quality that I've come to expect from all Matthew's stable.
Have some time tomorrow to give it a full examination.
Thanks Matthew.
Regards
Richard
Glynne
Established Member
Guys - apologies for a slight diversion in this thread but I thought 1 or 2 people might be interested in another of Matthew's products.
As several people mentioned, myself included, the Quangsheng whilst a nice bit of kit it was too large for the type of projects they undertook. Macros mentioned both the Veritas and Clifton detail planes and after having used the Quansheng, I decided to splash out and buy the Clifton 400 from Matthew as this was on offer. So for anyone else thinking of a detail or small shoulder plane, here are some brief views on the Clifton.
As you can see the plane comes sealed in a box (there is a point to this as you'll see later).
The plane is a lot smaller than the QS
but does fit really nicely in the hand
The finish is excellent as is the balance and I really couldn't wait to use it. However on taking the blade out
You can clearly see the mess the back was in! I was really disappointed with this as I tend to associate Clifton with quality and whilst I didn't expect to be able to use the plane out of the box, I didn't expect to have to clean up the back to this extent. The front bevel also seemed to be at an angle and a few laps on a diamond stone showed the extent this was out.
As the plane came sealed in the box, there is no criticism of Matthew or Workshop Heaven whatsoever as I wouldn't expect them to have to check products from a supplier such as Clfton.
I did think of returning the blade for a replacement but as I was wanting to use the plane, I bit the bullet and flattened / polished the back which I had to start on a 400 grit diamond stone, then a 1000 before hitting the scary sharp. I did rush this a bit so the finish isn't what I would normally aim for but the blade does polish up well.
So finally I had a usable plane and it is a delight to use. I tried it on a variety of hard and softwoods and the size does enable you to get in to quite small areas. I found the plane quite easy to set up and adjust and just one picture of a shaving
In conclusion, I am now very pleased with the plane and I would be happy to recommend to anyone looking for a small detail plane. In retrospect, I probably should have asked for a replacement blade as it did take a lot of work to become usable so if you are thinking of getting one, don't wait until you need it just in case you have the same issue with the blade and need to send it back.
Glynne
As several people mentioned, myself included, the Quangsheng whilst a nice bit of kit it was too large for the type of projects they undertook. Macros mentioned both the Veritas and Clifton detail planes and after having used the Quansheng, I decided to splash out and buy the Clifton 400 from Matthew as this was on offer. So for anyone else thinking of a detail or small shoulder plane, here are some brief views on the Clifton.
As you can see the plane comes sealed in a box (there is a point to this as you'll see later).
The plane is a lot smaller than the QS
I did think of returning the blade for a replacement but as I was wanting to use the plane, I bit the bullet and flattened / polished the back which I had to start on a 400 grit diamond stone, then a 1000 before hitting the scary sharp. I did rush this a bit so the finish isn't what I would normally aim for but the blade does polish up well.
So finally I had a usable plane and it is a delight to use. I tried it on a variety of hard and softwoods and the size does enable you to get in to quite small areas. I found the plane quite easy to set up and adjust and just one picture of a shaving
In conclusion, I am now very pleased with the plane and I would be happy to recommend to anyone looking for a small detail plane. In retrospect, I probably should have asked for a replacement blade as it did take a lot of work to become usable so if you are thinking of getting one, don't wait until you need it just in case you have the same issue with the blade and need to send it back.
Glynne
Attachments
hmmm. one of those Cliftons at 1/2" or one of these in 3/8" https://www.canadianwoodworking.com/ver ... bbet-plane.
I think it will probably be the veritas because it is quite a bit cheaper, but I do like the look of that Clifton.
Strangely there are not a huge number of reviews on either on the web, and of the few most seem favourable.
I think it will probably be the veritas because it is quite a bit cheaper, but I do like the look of that Clifton.
Strangely there are not a huge number of reviews on either on the web, and of the few most seem favourable.
bugbear
Established Member
Possible word of advice here; be very cautious before "correcting" a blade that has been sharpened "out of square" in a low bedding angle plane. Milling the bed for these becomes more and more critical (and hence difficult) as the bedding angle lowers. Since it is crucial for planing that the blade's edge is parallel with the sole it may be necessary to correct any bed-plane errors by ... sharpening the blade at a slight skew.
I learnt this when renovating a (cheap) #90J bullnose rebate. I carefully squared up the blade, and then had to carefully re-skew it!
BugBear
I learnt this when renovating a (cheap) #90J bullnose rebate. I carefully squared up the blade, and then had to carefully re-skew it!
BugBear
I have received the plane and spent some time last night playing with it. I have to say, I love it and if I wasn't skinter than skint at the moment, I would now own one of these planes. It will almost certainly be my next purchase and I want to really thank Matthew for this passaround and letting me get my hands on it.
I have a Stanley 92, which is much older and (I think) smaller than the one used by GHaydon in his excellent video. I also have a wooden shoulder plane, but I've always struggled with adjusting it correctly, so my experience of shoulder planes is limited to the Stanley really.
Firstly, the packaging was good and as soon as I took the plane out, I was struck by how weighty it is. I find that this really makes a difference when planing end grain compared to my other plane. I'm not saying that you couldn't do it just as effectively with a lighter plane, but for me, this is a huge advantage. I also really like how it feels in the hand and the look of the thing. Whilst I understand the concerns about the sharp edges, they didn't bother me in the half hour or so I used the plane and the inset pattern and the general finish were excellent. There seemed to be something of a burr left on some edges and I found that only a few passes with my hand seemed to smooth this away, so a few minutes with a diamond file or sandpaper and this would be sorted, if anyone did feel this was an issue. I can understand why this would frustrate some people, but at this price point, I don't see it as a huge problem.
Another feature which I also really like is the length of the mouth, which is also adjustable. This allows you to seat the plane firmly before the blade engages in the wood. Again, this may not assist more experienced woodworkers, but for those (like me) without that experience, this is helpful and adds to my perception of this plane as being more forgiving. The adjuster on the mouth meant that I could close it up and get very fine shavings and in this regards, as with the heft of the plane, there is just no comparison between this and the Stanley.
Finally, the finish left by the plane was excellent. I used it on long- and end-grain pine and on all three orientations of oak and the finish left on every surface was very good indeed. I was particularly impressed with the cross-grain oak finish...with a knifed line, the finish was crisp and smooth and surprisingly easy to control.
I do not make masses of tenons, but it is something I will be working to develop over the next 12 months and I hope to have this plane to help me to adjust the (inevitable) mistakes I make. For rebating and general cleaning up work, this plane is superb and for me, just 'feels right' in my hand. Like with musical instruments, I think that this is one of the most important tests.
I will play with this some more today and then get it posted on to the next on the list over the weekend.
Thanks again Matthew.
I have a Stanley 92, which is much older and (I think) smaller than the one used by GHaydon in his excellent video. I also have a wooden shoulder plane, but I've always struggled with adjusting it correctly, so my experience of shoulder planes is limited to the Stanley really.
Firstly, the packaging was good and as soon as I took the plane out, I was struck by how weighty it is. I find that this really makes a difference when planing end grain compared to my other plane. I'm not saying that you couldn't do it just as effectively with a lighter plane, but for me, this is a huge advantage. I also really like how it feels in the hand and the look of the thing. Whilst I understand the concerns about the sharp edges, they didn't bother me in the half hour or so I used the plane and the inset pattern and the general finish were excellent. There seemed to be something of a burr left on some edges and I found that only a few passes with my hand seemed to smooth this away, so a few minutes with a diamond file or sandpaper and this would be sorted, if anyone did feel this was an issue. I can understand why this would frustrate some people, but at this price point, I don't see it as a huge problem.
Another feature which I also really like is the length of the mouth, which is also adjustable. This allows you to seat the plane firmly before the blade engages in the wood. Again, this may not assist more experienced woodworkers, but for those (like me) without that experience, this is helpful and adds to my perception of this plane as being more forgiving. The adjuster on the mouth meant that I could close it up and get very fine shavings and in this regards, as with the heft of the plane, there is just no comparison between this and the Stanley.
Finally, the finish left by the plane was excellent. I used it on long- and end-grain pine and on all three orientations of oak and the finish left on every surface was very good indeed. I was particularly impressed with the cross-grain oak finish...with a knifed line, the finish was crisp and smooth and surprisingly easy to control.
I do not make masses of tenons, but it is something I will be working to develop over the next 12 months and I hope to have this plane to help me to adjust the (inevitable) mistakes I make. For rebating and general cleaning up work, this plane is superb and for me, just 'feels right' in my hand. Like with musical instruments, I think that this is one of the most important tests.
I will play with this some more today and then get it posted on to the next on the list over the weekend.
Thanks again Matthew.
David C
In Memorium
BB,
That's what Karl H and I call azimuth error. I got the term from him.
David
That's what Karl H and I call azimuth error. I got the term from him.
David
Ok, I've got the plane from Noggsy. I have to say it looks like it's hardly been used. I've got some doors and face frames to make, so I think I'll spend some of the weekend doing that. Try and give the plane a good workout. Thankfully I'm the last person to have it so no one else has to put up with my 'sharpening'.
Just picking up on Glynne's little digression... the Clifton 400 does look very nice... I recently succumbed to the appeal of its predecessor, the Preston 1366. Only 3" long and 3/8" wide:
and seen here posing beside its big brother
And yes, I did have to hone the blade!
and seen here posing beside its big brother
And yes, I did have to hone the blade!
Had a bit more of a play with the plane of the last few days. It's very well made and it seems like you lot have hardly used it. I'm hoping to spend some time making doors over the next few days, so as long as people don't mind me keeping it for another week or so I'll have a proper bash at it.
jimi43
Established Member
Congrats on the new job morfa!
=D>
Jimi
=D>
Jimi
Ok, hmmm, I still have the plane. I've been working away on my kitchen the last few weeks. I've been doing quite a few tenons and I'm beginning to think I'm going to have to buy it. I suspect I'm over stepping the line somewhere here. However it's an excellent plane and I'm really loving using it. It's also becoming a key part of my work process. Mark the tenon, get out the sash saw to crosscut the shoulders, then grab the dozuki me to rip the cheeks off, over to the QS to tidy the shoulders up quickly, then test fit. Finally block plane if the shoulder is a bit long or big. The QS really does an excellent job of squaring up the shoulders.
I've not had to sharpen it, but I have noticed that the blade isn't perfectly square so it doesn't cut so well on one side. You have to use it on one side and not the other. That's not an issue for me, but don't know how it's got like that. It still looks like new.
As the other reviewers have done such a detailed job I'm stuck to say anything new really. Apart from to say it's an excellent plane and well worth the money. Especially when second hand shoulder planes aren't that common or cheap.
I've not had to sharpen it, but I have noticed that the blade isn't perfectly square so it doesn't cut so well on one side. You have to use it on one side and not the other. That's not an issue for me, but don't know how it's got like that. It still looks like new.
As the other reviewers have done such a detailed job I'm stuck to say anything new really. Apart from to say it's an excellent plane and well worth the money. Especially when second hand shoulder planes aren't that common or cheap.
bugbear
Established Member
morfa":2asw1ion said:
Oh, I think you found something very important and useful to say. I highlighted it.
BugBear
Ed Bray
Established Member
Just in case anyone is interested in one of theses, Matt has some 'slight seconds' of them on ebay for £60 including shipping.
Ed Bray
Established Member
Mine arrived today, I think it is great and whilst I am not the most experienced with hand tools which may have a bearing on the fact I cannot discern what the fault actually is, it seems smooth enough to me in use and I haven't specifically noticed any 'sticky' bit.
Best £60 I spent on Tuesday =D>
Best £60 I spent on Tuesday =D>
