toolsntat
Yep, I collect tools and tat
stanley-60-1-2-block-planes-t109282.html
Send it back and let them know about the fault.
Cheers Andy
Send it back and let them know about the fault.
Cheers Andy
Block plane issues
- Thread starter Ivan86
- Start date
Help Support UKworkshop.co.uk:
This isn't really something you should have to do, but it isn't outside the range of what some would class as fettling (standards vary on that). As far as work on the body being required various tweaks and enhancements such as softening corners and edges, perhaps chamfering the leading and trailing edges, are considered normal fettling tasks by many users. Even premium planes that cost ten times as much as this can benefit from a few tweaks like this!Ivan86":pm4zwuww said:
Anyway, if you can return it and get another one without any additional cost to you as other recommend I would certainly encourage you to take that route as you have nothing to lose. But, the reality is that the replacement may not be much better, and (sorry!) could be worse. This is modern Stanley production, which is hardly a paragon of high production standards and attentive QC; and just to emphasise my point above, both were bad long before production shifted to China (as owners of 70s planes with dreadfully soft irons can attest).
Once you get your replacement you might try honing at the original ground angle and see if the iron is hard enough to support it. If it isn't (the edge may roll or blunt too quickly) then just do the usual and hone at 30°. But best not to do this out of the gate as if you decide you would prefer to return it to 25 you'll find it a bit of a hike to go back from 30.Ivan86":pm4zwuww said:
Except that that isn't a guarantee of not finding a plane with this issue, or in need of some other fettling (q.v. most older bench planes having cap irons that have never been fettled).MikeG.":28ocn6e8 said:
I posted here about a vintage 9 1/2 that I got, used enough to pick up lots of significant scratches on the sole, but it left the factory with this same problem and it was still like this when I picked it up because the previous owner didn't need it to do fine work.
stanley-9-1-2-made-in-england-dating-t97848.html
But what's fettling and what's beyond that? It's a sliding scale: on a 4 or a 5 some consider some work being needed around the mouth or to bed the frog standard fettling, others don't.Bm101":28ocn6e8 said:
AES
Established Member
Before I start I'd like to stress here that I know very little about planes - compared to many here you can change that "very little" - with accuracy - to "almost nothing"!
Starting from there, it does seem to me that apart from having to do a little honing of the blade (NOT grinding!), plus (IF you know enough about the subject, enough minor file and/or abrasive work to make improvements) it seems to me quite incorrect to expect anyone to start working on things like flattening soles, changing angles, etc, etc, before an item bought as a plane (device for removing shavings from wood) will work at all.
Yes, make improvements to make it work better by all means (as above, if you know what you're doing). But having to do almost any sort of work on an item to just make it work at all is, IMO, totally impossible.
Don't you still have the sale of Goods Act in UK any more? What about "fit for intended purpose"? I repeat it's only my idea and I'm probably about to get shot down, but if an item such as the OP's plane can't work at all, as apparently it can't, then to me there's no question, straight back to the vendor it goes.
And same again if the replacement also doesn't work at all. And again and again until the vendors get so fed up that they force the manufacturers to improve their QC, wherever that production has taken place.
I do appreciate that the above "keep on sending it back" approach is both time-consuming and frustrating for the individual, but if enough buyers do it the vendors will wake up eventually (perhaps start their own "Incoming Goods Inspection"?) until the manufacturers do improve their own QC.
So I just can't accept the "Stanley was like that even before they moved production to China" statement as posted above. We, as consumers just should NOT shrug our shoulders and get fixing poor manufacturing problems.
Again I stress that I'm talking here about any new item which does not/cannot work at all, NOT about attempting to improve something which does "work a bit but can be improved" (which is something I do quite often myself, on all sorts of stuff).
If you bought (purely as an example) an electric kettle and if, when you plugged it in, it didn't boil water, what would you do? Sorry, but I can't see any difference at all between that random example and the OP's plane.
So again my personal opinion is that the OP's plane is NOT a case of having problems which are "something you shouldn't really have to do". It's something that is totally unacceptable, and something which, under UK law as I understand it, is something for which the vendor is 100% responsible for rectifying at nil cost to the buyer. That is certainly the case under Swiss law, and I very much doubt that UK law offers less protection.
Starting from there, it does seem to me that apart from having to do a little honing of the blade (NOT grinding!), plus (IF you know enough about the subject, enough minor file and/or abrasive work to make improvements) it seems to me quite incorrect to expect anyone to start working on things like flattening soles, changing angles, etc, etc, before an item bought as a plane (device for removing shavings from wood) will work at all.
Yes, make improvements to make it work better by all means (as above, if you know what you're doing). But having to do almost any sort of work on an item to just make it work at all is, IMO, totally impossible.
Don't you still have the sale of Goods Act in UK any more? What about "fit for intended purpose"? I repeat it's only my idea and I'm probably about to get shot down, but if an item such as the OP's plane can't work at all, as apparently it can't, then to me there's no question, straight back to the vendor it goes.
And same again if the replacement also doesn't work at all. And again and again until the vendors get so fed up that they force the manufacturers to improve their QC, wherever that production has taken place.
I do appreciate that the above "keep on sending it back" approach is both time-consuming and frustrating for the individual, but if enough buyers do it the vendors will wake up eventually (perhaps start their own "Incoming Goods Inspection"?) until the manufacturers do improve their own QC.
So I just can't accept the "Stanley was like that even before they moved production to China" statement as posted above. We, as consumers just should NOT shrug our shoulders and get fixing poor manufacturing problems.
Again I stress that I'm talking here about any new item which does not/cannot work at all, NOT about attempting to improve something which does "work a bit but can be improved" (which is something I do quite often myself, on all sorts of stuff).
If you bought (purely as an example) an electric kettle and if, when you plugged it in, it didn't boil water, what would you do? Sorry, but I can't see any difference at all between that random example and the OP's plane.
So again my personal opinion is that the OP's plane is NOT a case of having problems which are "something you shouldn't really have to do". It's something that is totally unacceptable, and something which, under UK law as I understand it, is something for which the vendor is 100% responsible for rectifying at nil cost to the buyer. That is certainly the case under Swiss law, and I very much doubt that UK law offers less protection.
Jacob
New Luddism. Wake up and resist.
Best option is to send it back and buy an old one from ebay. Later ones are garbage and sometimes beyond remedy.
Basically a new plane should need nothing but a quick light hone, a few normal adjustments, a squiggle of candle wax and off you go!
I'd go for a Stanley 220 - with a wooden button, not the all metal ones.
Basically a new plane should need nothing but a quick light hone, a few normal adjustments, a squiggle of candle wax and off you go!
I'd go for a Stanley 220 - with a wooden button, not the all metal ones.
profchris
Established Member
The Sale of Goods Act is indeed your friend, though I'd claim not of satisfactory quality under s 14(2) <snip of brief lecture on the technical difference between s 14(2) and s 14(3)>
You are rejecting the defective plane and are entitled to a refund. If, from the kindness of your heart, you'll risk a replacement, you have the same rights. Seller pays return postage costs (in theory, has to collect, but I wouldn't push that one).
Sadly, I doubt a return campaign would do much good. At the budget end, modern retailing builds in a high returns percentage because that's still cheaper than paying for the QC needed to produce consistently satisfactory quality. Certainly we can't blame Chinese manufacture for the poor quality - they'll deliver whatever quality you're prepared to pay for, as Quangsheng demonstrates. Poor quality has no link to nationality - I (once only) drove an Austin Allegro!
You are rejecting the defective plane and are entitled to a refund. If, from the kindness of your heart, you'll risk a replacement, you have the same rights. Seller pays return postage costs (in theory, has to collect, but I wouldn't push that one).
Sadly, I doubt a return campaign would do much good. At the budget end, modern retailing builds in a high returns percentage because that's still cheaper than paying for the QC needed to produce consistently satisfactory quality. Certainly we can't blame Chinese manufacture for the poor quality - they'll deliver whatever quality you're prepared to pay for, as Quangsheng demonstrates. Poor quality has no link to nationality - I (once only) drove an Austin Allegro!
Assuming that you bought it as a consumer rather than as part of your business, the Consumer Rights Act is applicable rather that the Sale of Goods Act.
I doubt that you will need to get into legal detail to return it, just state that it is not of satisfactory quality and send it back.
I doubt that you will need to get into legal detail to return it, just state that it is not of satisfactory quality and send it back.
From the User's Guide to Block Planes by Chris Gochnour, Fine Woodworking #164 (2003):
More along the same lines in the following links:
http://fingerlakesguitarrepair.com/tuni ... ock-plane/
https://virginiatoolworks.com/2015/04/2 ... ock-plane/
https://www.canadianwoodworking.com/tip ... lock-plane
And a video that came up on my YouTube page a couple of months ago showing how to tune cheap block planes to a high standard, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D2t4TIhJWPg This is from from user Young Je who has some really interesting tool-making projects for anyone who hasn't found his channel already.
More along the same lines in the following links:
http://fingerlakesguitarrepair.com/tuni ... ock-plane/
https://virginiatoolworks.com/2015/04/2 ... ock-plane/
https://www.canadianwoodworking.com/tip ... lock-plane
And a video that came up on my YouTube page a couple of months ago showing how to tune cheap block planes to a high standard, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D2t4TIhJWPg This is from from user Young Je who has some really interesting tool-making projects for anyone who hasn't found his channel already.
Jacob
New Luddism. Wake up and resist.
If you have to do all that before you can use it it's cr@p to start with. Send it back.
Unless you really want to get into tool fiddling, which is a a hobby in its own right and barely related to woodwork.
Unless you really want to get into tool fiddling, which is a a hobby in its own right and barely related to woodwork.
Bod
Established Member
What is the exact model number of your plane?
I have a G12-020 which appears similar, but has some differences to your pictures.
You might find a number stamped on the left hand rear side.
Mine is fiddling devil to assemble, but works well.
Bod
I have a G12-020 which appears similar, but has some differences to your pictures.
You might find a number stamped on the left hand rear side.
Mine is fiddling devil to assemble, but works well.
Bod
AJB Temple
Finely figured
I've been through a few block planes. Eventually arrived at the conclusion that the time I spend fettling cheap ones could be used more profitably making things. I have a Veritas block plane. Perfect and sharp straight out of the box. Included spare blade.
I have less and less patience with manufacturers churning out tools that need skill and experience to set up to work optimally. Good luck with sorting out yours.
I have less and less patience with manufacturers churning out tools that need skill and experience to set up to work optimally. Good luck with sorting out yours.
Ivan86
Established Member
Thanks for all the helpful replies.
In the end I've posted it back for a refund today. If it had been a quick fix I'd have kept it but it was sounding like way too much work. Think I'll save a bit longer and invest in a better plane, hopefully the Veritas one.
I'm not having much luck with tools at the moment, also bought a bench vice recently which I went to install today to find the two jaws weren't flush (only touched at the top when fully shut!). Another one to return... sigh!
In the end I've posted it back for a refund today. If it had been a quick fix I'd have kept it but it was sounding like way too much work. Think I'll save a bit longer and invest in a better plane, hopefully the Veritas one.
I'm not having much luck with tools at the moment, also bought a bench vice recently which I went to install today to find the two jaws weren't flush (only touched at the top when fully shut!). Another one to return... sigh!
Jacob
New Luddism. Wake up and resist.
Sposed to. Under load they'd flex a bit anyway and end up more parallel. You want them gripping tightest at the top edge.Ivan86":1b02dvi1 said:
Ivan86
Established Member
Nigel Burden
Established Member
Record woodworking vices are designed for the jaws to only touch at the top.
Nigel.
Nigel.
Nigel Burden
Established Member
Jacob beat me to it.
Nigel
Nigel
