A very old (and anonymous) plane

[Flartybarty]

First, thanks to all who tried to solve my previous head-scratcher (Mystery Plane).

I have another one which is puzzling me a little in terms of its provenance. This is a moulding plane cutting a flat OG, although I'm pretty sure this is not the original profile. At this point I need to refer to the third edition of British Planemakers, because on page 15 there is a photo of a Davenport plane which is very similar to mine. That this has a similar archaic appearance is obvious. My plane is 10-1/8" long, 2-1/8" wide, width of cut 1-3/4" and 1/2" down. The shoulder slopes quite steeply with very wide chamfers 11/16" wide. The outer rim of the shoulder has been additionally chamfered, although I think this has been down by a later owner. The toe of the plane has been crudely shot at some point, removing about 1/4" from the total length of the plane, together with any possible makers mark. Therefore originally it would have been 10-1/2" long when new. The step separating the shoulder from the body is 1/4" wide and continues round to the heel and toe. The chamfers at toe and heel on the right hand side sweep round onto the shoulder. On the toe, there are two owners stamps plus my own. On the heel there is a small reference code (?) in very small white numbers - 66/88/1-116. This is either a museum reference or a dealers code. I don't think it is contemporary with the plane. The blade is not original, neither is the wedge. Everything about this plane screams VERY OLD. Certainly 18th century and, I'm pretty certain, mid to late 17th century. But that's a guess based on the overall appearance of known early planes such as that mentioned above. I don't think it is a Granford, his chamfers were more restrained, but the Davenport plane has very similar wide chamfers to mine and also a wide step, although difficult to make out whether it is as wide as the one on this plane. If anyone can offer some insight, I'd be obliged.
http://i149.photobucket.com/albums/s56/ ... dh8wj2.jpg
http://i149.photobucket.com/albums/s56/ ... drinb8.jpg
http://i149.photobucket.com/albums/s56/ ... ocunxn.jpg
http://i149.photobucket.com/albums/s56/ ... eqlwms.jpg

 

[Corneel]

Sure, sloping shoulders, rather long body, wide chamfers, no spring. That suggests pretty early. It does have a leaning wedge. I am interested in that feature. The wedge (and the iron) leaning over to the escapement side at the top is an English invention. It never appeared on Dutch planes, while these early English planes certainly look a lot like Dutch planes from the period otherwise. This intrueges me a little, when did they invent this feature? But without knowing the maker of your plane, it ain't easy to date it exactly.

 

[Flartybarty]

The iron still has most of its steel and the shoulder of the iron projects above the level of the shoulder of the plane, which makes me certain that it isn't the original. It's not too easy to see in the pics. But I'm sure that after some 300 years plus, there would not be much left of the original iron. It is maddening that some bright spark chose to trim his plane - to fit into a toolchest ? or simply to remove previous owners stamps ? As an aside, this plane and I have history. I first bought it at the Dorset Steam Fair about 20 years ago at a time when my plane collection was getting out of hand. A couple of years later I sold it along with most of my planes - about 500 in all. Some interesting ones, but mostly pretty humdrum. Early this year I saw this plane on the E site on a Buy-it-now for £600. (Gulp). Unsurprisingly, it didn't sell. The seller then reduced the price in steps in subsequent auctions to the point where I bought it for £60. Which is still a lot to pay, but the only reason, really, was because I recognised my name stamp on the toe. I'm just a sentimental old softy

I'm particularly interested if anyone has any light to shed on the code on the heel. Could this have been part of a museum exhibit ? I've seen similar codes on other items in museums and I know that occasionally they do sell off unwanted or duplicate items, particularly if they're closing down.

 

[Corneel]

Yes the iron sure is a replacement. I was refering how it is seated in the body, leaning over to the left instead of plump down.

Fun story about that plane.

 

[Corneel]

When I look at this picture again, then I am not so sure about the leaning wedge anymore.

The leaning wedge idea is explained here:
http://www.planemaker.com/articles_molding.html

But in this particular plane, what looked to me as a leaning wedge on first look, is actually leaning to the wrong side! I guess you would have to meassure on the real plane, because it is hard to see from this picture if the wedge an iron are leaning at all, or if they are running straight down through the stock.

Anyway, a little later in the Britisch plane history almost all moulding planes have a leaning wedge (top tilts to the right when looking from behind). So if this one hasn't, then it really should be an early one, or it is from a very rural maker who didn't know about such intricasies.

 

[Flartybarty]

As far as my old eyes can see there isn't any discernible tilt to the iron. I had thought there was a VERY slight skew but on closer examination I think that is just wear plus wishful thinking.

An interesting quote from the above mentioned URL " We have planes in our collection in which the original marking gauge lines are still visible. " You can't see them in the photographs but this plane has those marks - along the entire top of the plane, not just around the socket.

 

[Corneel]

Interesting! You've got an intrueging plane there, despite the cutoff nose.

 

[DonMc]

After looking at your photos very carefully and re-reading parts of Don & Anne Wing's study, Early Planemakers of London, © 2005, I have to agree that your plane appears to be quite early. Seemingly, at least as early as the first decade or so of the 18th century, possibly even a little earlier. Though, it would be really nice to have a maker's mark to help nail the time-frame down. And an original wedge and iron might have helped, as well.

In any event, being so early, your plane does have some interest because it was intended to be used "on the spring." I.e, if one looks at the fence and depth stop carefully, it is clear that the plane would have been leaned at an angle (sprung) during use, in order to create the intended ogee (cyma recta). Though it's not unheard of to find a plane of that vintage with spring, as the Wing's compare two planes they deem to be of the first decade of the 18th century, one with spring and one without. Not all early planes with spring were marked with spring lines on their toes, so it is sometimes easy to miss. Again, we won't know if your plane was originally marked with spring lines due to the toe being cut back.

Thanks for sharing the photos and story of your plane with us.

Don McConnell
Eureka Springs, AR

 

[Flartybarty]

And thank you for your input. I'm not too sure that we can be certain about the spring. I am, however, sure that the sole has been modified, however slightly. In particular the depth stop does not seem to be overly generous in width and the mouth is a little wider than one would expect if this was original. It is a great pity about the toe being cut off, but this happens with so many older planes - I guess to fit into a chest with later tools. It's still a nice tool to have and to guess at the lives of its many owners over the centuries !

 

[Corneel]

Yeah in its current configuration it sure has spring. I don't know why I wrote it didn't have spring?

Anyway, these must have been exciting times in the planemakers trade with a bunch of young hot heads, a steaming building boom, a rapidly changing fashion in furniture to ever more complex mouldings and constructions. Reminds me a bit of the 1990's IT world, just before the IT-crisis...