first plough plane?

UKworkshop.co.uk

Help Support UKworkshop.co.uk:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.

thetyreman

Established Member
Joined
4 Mar 2016
Messages
4,645
Reaction score
1,562
Location
earth
I am getting to the point where a plough plane would be a good investment, I do actually need one of some upcoming projects, just wondering what you guys would recommend?

I am only really interested in cheaper older tools vintage and second hand, don't want to spend more than about £30-£40 if possible,

would appreciate your collective advice,

regards,

Ben.
 
what task do you have in mind for it? The record 043 is a great little one for boxes, but I am not sure how much use it would be for furniture
 
Bugbear's suggestion is a good one and the ebay link proves it's practical.

A few more thoughts:

Some budget lines only have a single skate, on the body - the Record 044 was like this, as was the plastic handled 045C. While that's ok for narrow grooves (as it is on the 043) it's no good if you want to cut a wide rebate and a definite problem if you acquire some beading cutters. (The 050 has an extra skate, aka "sliding section".

Some models have an adjuster that needs special cutters with grooves in. Again, the 044 does, and I think some of the many versions of the Stanley 50, though I don't have one of them. You are better off with plain cutters - if they need a new notch, that's easy with a hacksaw.

Smaller models will be limited on depth of cut - seldom a problem, but it's why the 043 isn't the whole answer.

If you happen to spot a Stanley 45 or Record 405 at a price you can afford - and I've seen some sell on ebay or at David Stanley's for very little - don't be put off by thinking it's complex. It's a good plough plane, which happens to do extra stuff. (It's only the Stanley 55 which gets too complicated to bother with.)

Don't be tempted by cheap planes with no cutters. Conversely, if you spot extra cutters cheap, do buy them - if you are ploughing grooves for ply panels, you need a variety of widths to match the very "nominal" thicknesses.
 
I'd also get the record 044 or 050 (presuming those are the two plastic handled ones) to try and kept the 044 (don't need the 050 for beads, that kind of thing is much easier done with a beading plane, anyway).Very pleased with both, though, especially given that they are less than a C note of $USD with a whole pile of irons.

Make sure you get one that has all of the irons with it and in good shape with all of the original thumb screws, etc.

I haven't missed the LV small plow that I sold, and actually prefer the record to the LV plane if for no other reason that you can set the irons up on a washita from new in about 1 minute. Really hard irons in a plow plane never made sense to me - it's not a plane that's used to take a whole bunch of really thin shavings in a row.
 
Are you a metric or an imperial workshop? Or, like many in the UK, a bit of both?

I'm no expert on the cutters available for different plough planes, but that might influence your choice.
 
D_W":1ptcq4s2 said:
I'd also get the record 044 or 050 (presuming those are the two plastic handled ones)

The 044 was a metal plough, single skate on the body.
The 050 was a metal combination plane, with a second skate on a sliding section. While essential for beading cutters (making the 050 a "combination plane") I think the second skate is handy for wider ploughing or rebating.

The later plastic handled models were the 044C - which was a basic, single skate update to the 044, and the 050C which had two skates, nickers and could make beadings - so was a replacement for the 050.

Sorry for calling the 044C an 045C earlier - I wouldn't want to confuse anyone.

EDIT: Ignore the above. There was an 045C as well. And a conversion kit if you'd bought the basic model!
 
Also, why are we all assuming the tyreman wants a metal plough? Wooden ones are good, plentiful and priced completely randomly. Possibly more suitable for joinery than cabinet making, so that's another question. What sort of work do you want to do?

(And yes, the answer will be to get more than one!)
 
I wouldn't mind a wooden one if it's in good condition, as long as it has a few different width cutters, I work in imperial and metric but definitely would be 100% imperial if I had the choice, got to admit the record 50 looks very nice, especially if I could get it for £35 or less, beading is also something I'd like to try as well.

I plan on making drawer bottoms, grooves for sliding lid boxes of different sizes and (eventually) a full size georgian style door, hope that helps a bit. My only concern with wooden ones is that they might wear out too much...cheers.
 
I have a Record 044. It only comes out of the box very occasionally but does the job OK.

John
 
AndyT":op82gw2y said:
D_W":op82gw2y said:
I'd also get the record 044 or 050 (presuming those are the two plastic handled ones)

The 044 was a metal plough, single skate on the body.
The 050 was a metal combination plane, with a second skate on a sliding section. While essential for beading cutters (making the 050 a "combination plane") I think the second skate is handy for wider ploughing or rebating.

The later plastic handled models were the 044C - which was a basic, single skate update to the 044, and the 050C which had two skates, nickers and could make beadings - so was a replacement for the 050.

Sorry for calling the 044C an 045C earlier - I wouldn't want to confuse anyone.

EDIT: Ignore the above. There was an 045C as well. And a conversion kit if you'd bought the basic model!

044C is the one that I have. And a marples copy of the 044 (which I'd assume was record-made, but it has the same irons that an 050 would have). As much as the all metal earlier plane looks more serious, the plastic handled plough is a treat to use.
 
thetyreman":171an8l8 said:
I wouldn't mind a wooden one if it's in good condition, as long as it has a few different width cutters, I work in imperial and metric but definitely would be 100% imperial if I had the choice, got to admit the record 50 looks very nice, especially if I could get it for £35 or less, beading is also something I'd like to try as well.

I plan on making drawer bottoms, grooves for sliding lid boxes of different sizes and a full size georgian style door, hope that helps a bit. My only concern with wooden ones is that they might wear out too much...cheers.

The wooden planes have a metal skate, you won't have a wear problem with them, but you may have some reconditioning work to do if the skate isn't as it should be (slightly higher in the front than back, but not much - even is OK, too, but some of the older planes have the front skate monstrously higher than the back, and can be a bear to use for fine work.

If you get a wooden plane, make sure it has the original irons with it. A mish-mash of irons will cause you trouble. It's worth the extra cost to buy them all together (and make the person who sells them tell you that they're original to the plane) since the wedge and plane are set up for a specific taper, and the angle on the front of the skate is set to match the groove in the back of the irons that come with the plane. The taper, iron length and size of those grooves is all over the place from plane to plane, so you can have trouble if you just try to mix and match.

The older irons are not going to be a specific size (metric or imperial), even if they're marked, they won't be perfect and some (most?) will be tapered in width along their length so that they work better in a deeper cut. They are a joy to use, and the size variation is nothing to worry about.
 
beading is also something I'd like to try as well. I plan on making drawer bottoms, grooves for sliding lid boxes of different sizes


From a practical, maker's point of view there's a hierarchy of tools for beading.

At the very top for furniture making is a beading plane in the form of a traditional moulder, i.e. with a wooden stock. The combination of the sole and the 50 or, better still, 55 degree pitch will give you the best results on hardwood, no tear out and a beautifully burnished finish. The downside is that for every good old one there are several poor ones that need a lot of work and quite a few that are past redemption. Quality new ones, i.e. from Philly Planes, cost a fair bit of money.

Just below that is a scratch stock with a well made cutter. It has the advantage that you can work in either direction to deal with wayward grain and you can size it precisely for your specific needs. The downside is that making and maintaining cutters takes a bit of effort and with most designs of scratch stock there is no depth stop, so you have to pay some attention in use, especially if you'll be mitring together different sections and you want them to line up. Scratch stocks don't work that well on softwoods, but on hardwoods they're very acceptable for even first class work.

At the bottom are beads formed with multi-planes/plough planes. These are generally at a 45 degree pitch and have no sole. With carefully selected, straight grained softwoods you can just about get away with it, but the results are rarely all that great.

Incidentally, in my opinion an electric router is about on par with a multi-plane as a beading tool. Prone to scorching and scalloping the results are often poor.

I'm labouring these points because, after following your bench build, you seem to be fairly committed as a maker, for most people it wouldn't matter but you might be aiming that bit higher up the quality scale.

On a similar theme, if you're cutting grooves you really want whatever goes into those grooves to be snug. A rattly fit is just that bit tacky. That has some implications for choosing cutter widths. You'll mainly find MDF in metric widths, ply is nominally sized so is very variable, in practise getting that nice snug fit with sheet goods panels or drawer bottoms often requires either metric cutters or a fractionally undersized cutter followed by a side rebate plane. With solid timber throughout it's less of a problem, you would follow the normal procedure of "make the hole then make the thing that goes into the hole", so you'd cut the groove then size the panel to fit. The one area that might require a special cutter width is drawer bottoms if you're working to the classic English design with slips. In that case you want a drawer bottom that's precisely twice the groove thickness. Sure, you can chamfer the lower edges of the drawer bottom to fit, but it's more efficient if you can work straight off the tool. For most drawers that means a cutter that's 4mm wide or 5/32", although 3/16" will do at a pinch. Long story but the bottom line is that for drawer making you want a multi plane with a 3/16" cutter, and if you're really fussy you'll want spare cutters to grind down to your favourite dimensions.

Good luck!
 
Derek made an excellent point a while back regarding beading tools in combination planes. Add a back bevel of 5 or 10 degrees. Still wont be as nice as a proper moulding plane but I'm sure it's work very nicely.
 
G S Haydon":3lkmzcn0 said:
Derek made an excellent point a while back regarding beading tools in combination planes. Add a back bevel of 5 or 10 degrees. Still wont be as nice as a proper moulding plane but I'm sure it's work very nicely.

I'm less convinced. Here's why,

-do you add the back bevel to the quirk or to the entire profile? The worst place for tear out isn't deep down in the quirk, it's right on top of the bead.
-a beading plane needs to take pretty deep cuts, you're trying to get down to a depth of at least 3mm, often quite a bit more, you don't want to do that a thou at a time. Back bevels work well for finishing cuts, not so well for deep hogging cuts
-Derek works in in timbers that I'm not familiar with and will probably never use

It's good that people try different approaches, and I'll always listen to Derek's opinions, however I'd like to hear more recommendations from practising makers for that technique before I'd be tempted to try.
 
hi, I settled on an old record no44 in the end, and bought the ray isles 8 blade set, I'm very happy with it, got the no44 for just £6! not bad at all, also got a moulding plane for less than £10, it's a single bead 3/16", something tells me I've got the bug now, they are going to save me a lot of time longterm, thanks for all the advice.
 
custard":3hqmyl39 said:
G S Haydon":3hqmyl39 said:
Derek made an excellent point a while back regarding beading tools in combination planes. Add a back bevel of 5 or 10 degrees. Still wont be as nice as a proper moulding plane but I'm sure it's work very nicely.

I'm less convinced. Here's why,

-do you add the back bevel to the quirk or to the entire profile? The worst place for tear out isn't deep down in the quirk, it's right on top of the bead.
-a beading plane needs to take pretty deep cuts, you're trying to get down to a depth of at least 3mm, often quite a bit more, you don't want to do that a thou at a time. Back bevels work well for finishing cuts, not so well for deep hogging cuts
-Derek works in in timbers that I'm not familiar with and will probably never use

It's good that people try different approaches, and I'll always listen to Derek's opinions, however I'd like to hear more recommendations from practising makers for that technique before I'd be tempted to try.

Hi Custard

The backbevel is for interlocked grain. When you work with wood like this, it is advisable to take your time, and not rush it. In wood like this, deep cuts are inadvisable.

You will have to try this yourself. In my experience it is not the top of the bead that causes the problem, but the quirk. The quirk will lift up the reserved grain, and so is vulnerable to tearing out the wood fibres.

What happens is that if the quirk immediately tears out, there is nothing else to do but throw away the moulding because it will show. By the time you reach the top of the bead, the shaping is almost complete.

The area alongside the bead is angled, and this is being cut on the skew. Part of the bead, per se, has been trimmed with a block plane, and the bead is now really just receiving a skim. By the time you reach the top of the bead, there is very little to cut. Even if there is a smidgeon of tearout, this is very easy to repair.

Regards from Perth

Derek
 
That looks like a good clean example, Tyreman.
I don't doubt that the modern alternatives from Veritas or Lie Nielsen are good tools too, but there's no way they can compete at that price. And you've also supported a small independent UK producer in buying the Ray Iles irons.
A win all round.
 
Back
Top