Stanley No 80 - Tool or Boat Anchor/Antique

[Bodgers]

I have in my possession a Stanley No 80 (Sweetheart marking on clamp) that looks like someone has had a go at restoring.

It kind of looks ok on first glance, but I notice a few potential problems...

1. The mouth is a bit knarled up - is that a problem on a cab scraper?

2. The blade clamp is bowed - is that a problem. Out of the box the clamp was crazy tight and the blade was dished with it.

3. The blade looks very old and battered. I was going to get a replacement. Any suggestions for a good cheap one?

Sent from my MI 3W using Tapatalk

 

[AndyT]

1. The mouth is a bit knarled up - is that a problem on a cab scraper? No

2. The blade clamp is bowed - is that a problem. Out of the box the clamp was crazy tight and the blade was dished with it. The screw is supposed to add a controlled curve to the blade, so this doesn't sound like a problem.

3. The blade looks very old and battered. I was going to get a replacement. Any suggestions for a good cheap one? It looks fine in the photos. I suggest you try the one you have first, as a replacement might not be the same hardness. You need to file then hone a 45 degree bevel, then turn a burr on the edge.

It looks fine to me - the thing that matters most is how well it performs.

 

[Bodgers]

1. The mouth is a bit knarled up - is that a problem on a cab scraper? No

2. The blade clamp is bowed - is that a problem. Out of the box the clamp was crazy tight and the blade was dished with it. The screw is supposed to add a controlled curve to the blade, so this doesn't sound like a problem.

3. The blade looks very old and battered. I was going to get a replacement. Any suggestions for a good cheap one? It looks fine in the photos. I suggest you try the one you have first, as a replacement might not be the same hardness. You need to file then hone a 45 degree bevel, then turn a burr on the edge.

It looks fine to me - the thing that matters most is how well it performs.

Great, thanks. I'll give it a go...

 

[Cheshirechappie]

As Andy said, basically. It must be pretty good - it's not even got a smidgen of rust on it!

Worth a quick check around the sole and mouth for burrs that might scratch the workpiece. The blade will need filing back to remove the battered 1/2mm or so at the edge, then some attention with a sharpening stone in the usual way, and a hook burnishing on it. Other than that, the whole tool looks pretty much ready to go to work.

Nice find - they're getting a bit pricey second hand, I gather.

 

[Racers]

+1

I can't see anything that will cause it not to work.

If you wan't it to look better rub the sole on some stuck down 80 grit and paint the rest black.
The blade can be cleaned in Cilit bang, brown sauce, vinegar etc

As Andy says sharpen it and use it.

The battered bits look like its the side of the blade I think I see the bevel on the top edge.

Pete

 

[AndyT]

Looking again at the pictures, I wonder if it has been cleaned up with a rotary wire brush? Or it might be just the effect of the light.
Also, drilling holes through the thumbscrews so you can use a tommy bar on them was NOT part of the original design!

 

[Sheffield Tony]

That bend clamping plate might be a minor issue. My Record version was like that, and it gave you two modes of operation - very heavy cut, or a lot of chatter. But it is surprisingly easy to bend back to shape, after which mine at least was fine to use.

 

[toolsntat]

Looking again at the pictures, I wonder if it has been cleaned up with a rotary wire brush? Or it might be just the effect of the light.
Also, drilling holes through the thumbscrews so you can use a tommy bar on them was NOT part of the original design!

I have some with the holes Andy :wink:
Cheers
Andy

 

[AndyT]

Looking again at the pictures, I wonder if it has been cleaned up with a rotary wire brush? Or it might be just the effect of the light.
Also, drilling holes through the thumbscrews so you can use a tommy bar on them was NOT part of the original design!

I have some with the holes Andy :wink:
Cheers
Andy

Oops, sorry

Serves me right for only having one to compare it with!

 

[Bodgers]

As Andy said, basically. It must be pretty good - it's not even got a smidgen of rust on it!

Worth a quick check around the sole and mouth for burrs that might scratch the workpiece. The blade will need filing back to remove the battered 1/2mm or so at the edge, then some attention with a sharpening stone in the usual way, and a hook burnishing on it. Other than that, the whole tool looks pretty much ready to go to work.

Nice find - they're getting a bit pricey second hand, I gather.

Yeah I hesitate to say what I paid...

£36 + 2.50 postage.

I may as well have stumped up another £20 or so and got the Veritas

Sent from my MI 3W using Tapatalk

 

[Bodgers]

Looking again at the pictures, I wonder if it has been cleaned up with a rotary wire brush? Or it might be just the effect of the light.
Also, drilling holes through the thumbscrews so you can use a tommy bar on them was NOT part of the original design!

Yeah I think the 'resto' job is far from sympathetic. Whatever tool they have used it's even burned through part of the 'S' on the Stanley logo.

I think these things were originally black, but this has been brushed down and some sort of grey coating added.

Sent from my MI 3W using Tapatalk

 

[thetyreman]

there's nothing wrong with it, try sharpening the blade and there's no reason why it won't work, check that the sole is flat with a straight edge though if you haven't yet.

 

[D_W]

That one actually looks to be in pretty good shape. Iron, too. You'll be able to get rid of the scuzzle at the end of it without much trouble, and the sole and mouth look better than a lot of what I've seen.

It's a tool that you can make use of if you invest the time in learning to set the hook on it and getting the nuances of not ruining the edges of workpieces.

The bend in the cross-piece is a non-issue, I'd let it be.

 

[Derek Cohen (Perth Oz)]

I agree with David - it is in good nick. The marks at the mouth are irrelevant since this has no bearing on performance. In fact, a flat sole is irrelevant as well.

I am not a great fan of scraping planes - I prefer cabinet (card) scrapers) - and occasionally pull out my #80 to remove glue. The point is, they are not precision tools, so just clean it up, remove any burrs that may affect the work, and use it for the right occasion. It does not replace a hand plane.

Regards from Perth

Derek

 

[patrickjchase]

3. The blade looks very old and battered. I was going to get a replacement. Any suggestions for a good cheap one? It looks fine in the photos. I suggest you try the one you have first, as a replacement might not be the same hardness. You need to file then hone a 45 degree bevel, then turn a burr on the edge.

The iron in the 80 is simply a 0.040" or 0.050" (can't remember which offhand but it's in that range) piece of hardened high-carbon steel, tempered to blue hardness (Rc50 or so).


There are many readily available sources: A few that I've used or seen used include old sawplates, floor scrapers (though make sure they're made of 1095 HCS), and industrial supply houses. As an example of the latter, you could make 16 #80 irons by cutting up this strip from McMaster in the US: https://www.mcmaster.com/#9075k353/=1bdk69n. I'm sure that there are equivalent options in the UK.


I agree with AndyT's comments on the other questions: The mouth doesn't matter in an 80. The curvature will be directly controlled by the camber control anyway, so that's similarly a nonissue.

 

[David C]

Your 80 looks fine to me.

I used to use this tool for the scraping of veneered table tops, which I suggest is a precision operation.
The slightly cambered blade was set to a very fine cut, perhaps 0.001", and wispy sliced shavings resulted, giving no tearout.

Best wishes,
David