Elephant Infill

[D_W]

Mine is a No 1 14 1/2 inches and the bun looks lower and somehow neater than that particular No 13. Is that a post war Norris? There is also about a 1/2 inch overlap of the sole at toe and heel. The lower part of the bun meets the first upward curve from the toe, I will try and sort a pic out.
Spiers planes look better still but then you are building a one off special that will suit you so get sketching .

Reading this on the phone yesterday - I had a buck labeled No 1 17 1/2 inch panel smoother years ago. Inexpensive because someone had dropped it and reglued the handle and reshaped the bun. Overall, it's a more refined plane - steel sides. The no 13 is casted and a little more crude and bulky.

A not-much-better picture of the no 13. the style of the lever cap screw may date it.

it's difficult to find a picture of another one the same length.

the smoother (no 13) is even a little less neatly made, but is a really nice working plane. this plane's proportions are also nice in use, but it could've stood losing a pound or a pound and a half in the casting and would be a better daily user. Which is what I intend to do if I ever copy it - refine the lines and level of finish just a little, make the wood a little less bulky and do it in a 1/8" thick side and 3/16th sole instead of whatever it is.


(just measured, 0.42" thick sole at the front and back, but machined or casted a little thinner in the middle. Still a tub. would impress people at a woodworking show on easy wood because there would be little feel of the actual planing - which seems to delight beginners).

The smoother version in 2 1/4" width isn't really overweight at all and doesn't have the same effect while using.

 

[essexalan]

Reading this on the phone yesterday - I had a buck labeled No 1 17 1/2 inch panel smoother years ago. Inexpensive because someone had dropped it and reglued the handle and reshaped the bun. Overall, it's a more refined plane - steel sides. The no 13 is casted and a little more crude and bulky.

View attachment 149649

A not-much-better picture of the no 13. the style of the lever cap screw may date it.

it's difficult to find a picture of another one the same length.

the smoother (no 13) is even a little less neatly made, but is a really nice working plane. this plane's proportions are also nice in use, but it could've stood losing a pound or a pound and a half in the casting and would be a better daily user. Which is what I intend to do if I ever copy it - refine the lines and level of finish just a little, make the wood a little less bulky and do it in a 1/8" thick side and 3/16th sole instead of whatever it is.


(just measured, 0.42" thick sole at the front and back, but machined or casted a little thinner in the middle. Still a tub. would impress people at a woodworking show on easy wood because there would be little feel of the actual planing - which seems to delight beginners).

The smoother version in 2 1/4" width isn't really overweight at all and doesn't have the same effect while using.

Pictures of my No 1, sole is 4.8 mm and sides are 3.4 mm.

Kingshott recommends 3/16" soles and 5/16" sides but he does mention that 1/8" sides would do.
I would guess that the lever cap is gunmetal.
The chopping board is end grain English cherry planed flat with this very plane and my prototype for a number that followed after.

 

[D_W]

would that be 5/32nd sides?

I had a kingshott video- I've built a few infills, though, and like them better with a little less metal. They're still heavy even when trimming back a little bit. though I guess your norris isn't that far off of 3/16 and 1/8ths.

if being able to get warp free sides is a concern, another 16th might not be a bad idea. I've only had one plane that really needed a significant amount of metal removal.



(would look a little better without dust!, but a replacement side knob should be made in a better style and the wedge remade for looks).

At any rate, the sole on this one was pulled into concavity an inch when peining in the cross plate (peined in because it's installed skew) - the two brass pins on the side are part of a single plate. I just filed fingers off of the end of the plate and peined them in.

Otherwise, the less that's removed after fitting, the easier it is to find tiny unexpected voids in the pins and tails.

Looks like your plane landed on its side at one point. As mentioned, I had a 17 1/2 rebadged Buck branded no 1 with exactly the same break and used it pretty heavily (could've cared less about the repaired handle - loved the plane, but the longer they get, the more nose heavy they get).

 

[D_W]

Two other good patterns - I did these no favor by leaving them covered with dust and taking a picture of them in the dark.



The bottom is a spiers in very good shape - but as mentioned, these are copied probably more than any other panel infill. The one in the back is a kit plane with a casting.

to some extent it's almost copied in spiers style, but whoever made it violated a design rule on the front. It dips from curvature into flat on the metal sides for the nose. It's a small thing, but spiers left a very slight tapering in height from that last curve down to the front of the plane and it looks better.

I often wonder who did design work for the sort of small factory makers like spiers and norris, as things that started small but got big here typically also had hired professional design. I wondered at one point how both fender and gibson managed to make their early guitars attractive within their design constraints and not really have any outright violations in their lines when they were somewhat original. I later found out that both paid professional designers while developing the guitars to make sure there wasn't low hanging fruit. When CNC making of guitars came along, uncreative and maybe budget minded or profit minded folks forgot about some of these and gave us things like the hamer special, which was flat across the back where the neck joins. A terrible look and has sort of relegated those guitars to a "meh" in history.

 

[D_W]

A not-too costly option with this plane is also to use AEB-L, just unhardened, and make the whole thing stainless without making it look garish. AEB-L stock doesn't have big particles in it and doesn't look terribly different when you're milling it.

George put in my head last night that it may be interesting to also make a second plane with a blued steel lever cap as he'd be glad to make one and a screw.

it's not that I can't make the screw and lever cap- I can, and have knurling tools to do it. I don't have a lathe, but the hand knurler that I have would do a fine knurl and I could segment it on a screw, but I don't have an acme thread tap.

And George would make me a hand tap and die for brass if I asked (if it's possible) but I think he's just making a few things for the enjoyment of it right now and he can turn lever cap blanks and fine acme screws out like most of us would make a dovetail joint.

I would personally also like the chance to do some finer work than i've done previously on tools. I think I'm capable of it and not afraid of the fact that I could be wrong about that.

A plane with a blued or color cased lever cap would be interesting and I could perhaps adapt the wood fixture aesthetics just a little bit to be kind of a vintage firearm style with slightly more bold crisp lines, and perhaps with something like claro walnut for the infill.

 

[essexalan]

would that be 5/32nd sides?

I had a kingshott video- I've built a few infills, though, and like them better with a little less metal. They're still heavy even when trimming back a little bit. though I guess your norris isn't that far off of 3/16 and 1/8ths.

if being able to get warp free sides is a concern, another 16th might not be a bad idea. I've only had one plane that really needed a significant amount of metal removal.



(would look a little better without dust!, but a replacement side knob should be made in a better style and the wedge remade for looks).

At any rate, the sole on this one was pulled into concavity an inch when peining in the cross plate (peined in because it's installed skew) - the two brass pins on the side are part of a single plate. I just filed fingers off of the end of the plate and peined them in.

Otherwise, the less that's removed after fitting, the easier it is to find tiny unexpected voids in the pins and tails.

Looks like your plane landed on its side at one point. As mentioned, I had a 17 1/2 rebadged Buck branded no 1 with exactly the same break and used it pretty heavily (could've cared less about the repaired handle - loved the plane, but the longer they get, the more nose heavy they get).

Yes 5/32" sides. Difficult getting a clear measurement on my plane because of the stuffing and the extensive clean up. The stain on the side is just that with no sign of any warping or breakage, I did take a look with a loupe but can see nothing untoward. Probably disappear if I polished it.
I haven't seen the Kingshott video but his book is excellent and always intended to build one but haven't the faintest idea how the dovetailing works in practice.
With your knowledge of steels I would go for the one with the least stiction.
Not sure about blued steel because it will still rust but walnut always makes a good combination, black walnut perhaps I do like that wood.
I reckon the design sort of evolved as they went along with cost being a major problem trying to compete with Stanley hence the cast Norris planes.
Will be interested in your cap iron approach as I stumbled across the correct use of cap irons while searching for tuning infills with the intention of making my own. Mine came with a Norris iron but a tatty cap iron, replaced with a modified cap iron from a wooden plane.

 

[D_W]

Yes on the blued still being a steel that can rust. the trick with carbon steel is usually to just put a very thin very low pound cut of shellac on the show surfaces of it and then handle it with oily hands when sharpening.

That's the virtue of the bronze cap - it'll get dark and ugly but that's about the worst of it.

 

[D_W]

I looked this morning to see how much AEB-L would be for this plane (fine grained stainless that isn't as gummy). On the fence about it as it's not anywhere close to being unaffordable (about $130 with shipping for the bottom and sides, and it works by hand reasonably well when annealed unlike coarse stainless with big gobs of chromium and stuff).

To really run with the theme, I could also add a thick AEB-L iron and cap iron.

This isn't as cheap as 1018 bar would be and it might be just a bit more physical work, but it's cheaper than making a plane out of O1, which isn't uncommon itself. O1 is nicer to work with than mild steel after everything is assembled - it files and finishes nicely thanks to the carbon.

And it would be at least reasonably stainless as I've not had any piece of aebl stock in the rack rust at all. it drills and cuts without air hardening at the point of cut or drilling so easily like 440c and V11, etc.

 

[rob1693]

You have some real talents in tool making dave. you make some beautiful tools people would be glad to own