Jointer flatness . . . did I go far enough ?

UKworkshop.co.uk

Help Support UKworkshop.co.uk:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
The cap iron is sort of like driving a stickshift in the city and then finding out that an automatic is available and using it. You still have to be able to drive, but if you ever go to a city with bad traffic and drive a car with a tall first gear and a stickshift, you'll fall in love with an automatic.

As far as setup goes, the little traces of this are everywhere until planes got cheap (cheap meaning manufacturers started to cut corners and leave tuning and fitting up to you, because the budget wasn't there to have someone making everything just so). I recall the first prewar norris plane I got, I thought, "well, if the mouth is really tight, I won't be able to set the cap close, and I'll have to just use the plane as a pattern and build another". What I actually found was a very deliberate filing of the front of the mouth above the sole so that the cap could be set all the way down, but the plane would still work with a mouth that's no more than a hundredth. The setup more or less becomes the same for all of these planes, and bad performance is a matter of defect and not design problems. What I'm getting at here is that I could state for a double iron plane that I've not used, but of familiar pattern, i could guarantee how the best setup would be achieved. Ttrees is correct in this case. Of course, you can get by with a less good setup (that's cumbersome to say), but there's no reason to do it when better is free.

FWIW, I actually did it "your way" for 6 years, but didn't make a move to do a lot of the rough work with planes until the latter part of that period. I find working with machines dissatisfying and confusing, because I'm disorganized and creative, as opposed to organized and not so creative. I don't have the brain type that enjoys a massive cut list, follow the steps and see if it fits together at the end, or see if you mis-made something. Hand dimensioning closes that gap and keeps me involved the whole way, but it took four years for me to figure that out. I think others would like it, too, and the cap iron is the one link in the chain that gets people there. I've gotten better at using machines since then (even if you're disorganized, experience makes things easier), but still only use them when time counts.

Ttrees question about direction of planing even when there's not tearout tells me he's on the right track.

It not that curious to me that people would throw a fit about the cap iron (you are not included in this comment, and you're entitled to get triggered regardless), and refuse to do something that would make their day easier, just because they don't like where the message is coming from. I'm sure there were plenty of people who resented the only person who was really beating a drum about it 10 years ago (Warren Mickley) and wanted to prove him wrong because they thought he was a troll. That's too bad, I guess - I've always tried the things that people suggest (when I have disagreed with them) - because whether I like them or not, if their way is the best way, I'm going to do it.
 
D_W":30ei84yi said:
.......If you don't think that there is a significant difference, or that the cap iron isn't relevant

I've said nothing about that at all. Why on earth would you think I was commenting on such matters?

in a discussion of using a plane (that has a cap iron), you probably have more to learn

And there you go. Your own words show that you haven't bothered reading the thread. You just see "plane", and dive in with "cap irons. It's all about the cap iron". This thread was NOT about using a plane. Re-read the OP. He says nothing whatever about the use of a plane. It is entirely about flattening the sole of the plane.

It's not mastering woodworking, it's mastering planing. I've never seen anyone who actually got half way to mastering it (which doesn't take much) say otherwise, but I have seen a lot of people blow up about it like you just did.

I "blow up about it" because you and others hijack every single plane thread with interminable advocacy of your preferred method, without paying any attention to the subject of the thread. Whitter on about your cap iron as much as you like in threads about cap irons, or setting planes, but not......not..........in threads about the flatness of a plane's sole. My argument is not with what you are saying, but where you are saying it.
 
"Re: Jointer flatness . . . did I go far enough ?"

Far enough is what? wall art?

Far enough is in flattening the plane for use.

I did comment on that. As long as the plane is flat to slightly toe and heel proud, it will be a good user.

In the context of flatness being enough, fitness for use is implied and that means whether or not you can use this jointer for things you'd do to joint. That's part flatness and part plane setup. Guess what plane setup includes, at least if you want to do it well.

Summarizing "yes, the plane is plenty flat enough, you're ready to try it out now doing this...".
 
MikeG.":170glc50 said:
Paddy Roxburgh":170glc50 said:
........That level of Dunning -Kreuger got me triggered........

Indeed. Well said.

Dunning-Kruger doesn't fit, because it implies that the party making a point is incorrect or incompetent and doesn't know it.
 
D_W":7v7gxlna said:
......... fitness for use is implied........

No, it isn't. Neither is planing implied when someone asks about rip sawing. Nor clamping boards together. Let's discuss plane (yes, and cap iron) set up when someone asks about plane set-up, and not every single damn time someone puts "plane" anywhere in their post.
 
custard":382kzene said:
Never mind with the feeler gauges, just put a hatching across the entire sole with a thick black felt pen and keep going until it's removed. Start with a coarse grit (I use 80 grit, some use a bit coarser). Don't switch to a finer grit until the hatching is gone, the bulk of the work is done with the coarsest grit. Only then work down through the grits (I go to 240 grit, some go to 320), don't forget to ease any sharp edges and arrises along the way, finally use a metal polish which will help keep your plane slick on the workpiece.

Don't obsess about this, remember a plane will flex a surprising amount under hand pressure alone.

After that set yourself some practical training projects with a plane, like edge jointing two boards or planing a rough sawn board true and square.

An apprentice planing exercise that originated at the Barnsley Workshops and it now widely used on woodworking courses all around the world is to start with a rough sawn Oak board and make an octagonal breadboard where all dimensions are accurate to within +/- 0.5mm and the two opposite faces are flat and parallel.





If you're fairly new to woodworking you should expect this exercise to take as much as 100 hours. Besides learning about plane craft it's also a useful lesson that hand woodworking to fine tolerances is incredibly S-L-O-W!

This would be a great piece for one of those high dollar tool shows. I'm fairly sure I could meet a half mm tolerance within an hour or two. I probably couldn't have done it at all before turning to sawing and planing from rough.
 
Good to see the latter statement being said in different words but spot on correct agreeable.
ALL about the cap, nothing to do with technique.

The only thing I don't agree with is... the war on tear.
That phrase is not applicable when a jointer plane is concerned.

If doing fine work, like what a jointer is mainly intended for...
A jointer plane is just a long jack, when the cap iron is not set correctly,
only difference is, its even more prone to dive off the ends of your work.

I see a single iron jointer, as some different tool for rough work for some application that I've never needed.
I have yet to see a use, which there might be


Tom
 
MikeG.":3gjiptwh said:
D_W":3gjiptwh said:
......... fitness for use is implied........

No, it isn't. Neither is planing implied when someone asks about rip sawing. Nor clamping boards together. Let's discuss plane (yes, and cap iron) set up when someone asks about plane set-up, and not every single damn time someone puts "plane" anywhere in their post.

>>What conceivable difference do you think a small concavity will make to the performance of the plane, mikey78?<<

That's your first response. Tell me again how you would make that response outside of the bounds of discussing flatness in regard to fitness for use?
 
D_W":10ah93l0 said:
..........Tell me again how you would make that response outside of the bounds of discussing flatness in regard to fitness for use?

We ARE discussing fitness for use. We aren't discussing anything other than fitting the sole of the plane for use. He asked how far he needs to go flattening the sole. I told him. Maybe you can point out where he asked about adjusting his cap iron?
 
MikeG.":3qpsuq70 said:
D_W":3qpsuq70 said:
..........Tell me again how you would make that response outside of the bounds of discussing flatness in regard to fitness for use?

We ARE discussing fitness for use. We aren't discussing anything other than fitting the sole of the plane for use. He asked how far he needs to go flattening the sole. I told him. Maybe you can point out where he asked about adjusting his cap iron?

Well, I didn't even bring up the cap first on here and never would've mentioned it, but since you asked who brought it up, I responded to ttrees. Presumably talking about flatness in use requires describing what creates it. Generally not a perfectly flat sole.

However, I didn't see the OP ask you about the effect of the concavity in use, but you did bring that up first. Were you thinking about advising the OP how the planing is affected, but without discussing flatness?

My original answer is the one I'm sticking to. If it's flat enough so that the toe and heel aren't measurably proud of the sole, or out of flat in the other direction, the user is done. If the discussion moves to whether or not it'll be good enough for flatness, I agree with ttrees, it's flat enough for that, the rest will have to come from the user and that'll be easier setting the cap iron straight.

I'd lop off half of the time spent lapping and spend it instead fitting the cap and doing the week or so of planing that it takes to master it.
 
D_W":1lc281kg said:
....... I didn't see the OP ask you about the effect of the concavity in use, but you did bring that up first.......

Now you're just being silly. The OP asked whether his sole was flat enough, and highlighted the concavity he was concerned about. I answered by asking what difference he thought that concavity would make. If you find that step illogical, but you find it OK to jump straight to setting the damn cap iron, then I suggest you are either seeing the world through a very weird set of blinkers, or you are just here for an argument.
 
Again, who jumped straight to the cap iron? Read my original answer. I think it was more instructive than yours by a mile, and it made no mention of a cap iron. It discussed sole flatness in use without asking the OP a question (getting a question isn't helpful when you're seeking an answer).

I responded to TTrees. I try often to be diplomatic and say it won't make that much of a difference to use the cap iron if you have good power tools, as the person who got me into woodworking has tuned his jointer into a machine that has made it so he's never needed a jointer plane in the first place, not even for sprung joints).

I've gotten the same level of flack stating that a mouth two thousandths proud of a sole on a jointer will be annoying in routine relatively precise use, but I'll stick to that also. It's not just the flatness tolerance that matters, but the direction that it occurs. If someone doesn't notice the effect of a mouth that's several thousandths higher than toe and heel, either they're working on really small pieces of wood, or they don't perceive much.

The follow-up cap iron talk is free of charge.

by the way, I'm going to quote two of your comments, and maybe you can explain those, too.
 
Post 1:

MikeG.":o80hobqa said:
D_W":o80hobqa said:
......... fitness for use is implied........

No, it isn't.

Post 2:

MikeG.":o80hobqa said:
We ARE discussing fitness for use.

It's really difficult to discuss anything with someone who contradicts their own posts within minutes.
 
D_W":3nzdp0vz said:
Again, who jumped straight to the cap iron?..........

I responded to TTrees. ............

You just answered your own question

I've gotten the same level of flack stating that a mouth two thousandths proud of a sole on a jointer........

Was it in a thread about the sole of a plane? If so, you shouldn't have received flack. If it was in a thread about wood finishing, then you deserved it. I say again...I don't have a problem with what you are actually saying. I have a problem with this subject being brought up in inappropriate threads......like every time "plane" is mentioned.
 
D_W":28uk8hpi said:
.......It's really difficult to discuss anything with someone who contradicts their own posts within minutes.

Only if you don't think things through, read posts in context, or try to understand what the person is saying.

We are discussing the fitness OF THE SOLE OF THE PLANE for use. Your broad brush "we're talking about fitness for use" as an excuse for bringing up off-topic cap iron stuff is entirely a different matter.
 
D_W":2l9y9x6c said:
MikeG.":2l9y9x6c said:
Paddy Roxburgh":2l9y9x6c said:
........That level of Dunning -Kreuger got me triggered........

Indeed. Well said.

Dunning-Kruger doesn't fit, because it implies that the party making a point is incorrect or incompetent and doesn't know it.

DW, my comment wasn't aimed at you. it was aimed at someone saying that planing straight/flat with a jointer is only to do with the cap setting and nothing to do with technique, and in the same sentence stating he had never used his jointer. Indeed he was 100% certain. I think that fits the description perfectly. Personally I'm only 80% certain about things I've been doing for thirty years.
 
Unless your using a jointer to take off huge amounts on laminated table with really uneven but agreeable consistant lengths
of timber with slightly lesser effort.
That's it, so far an example of all the use of a non set cap iron in a jointer for fine work...
In which case you would be better to switch to another long plane with the cap iron set afterwards.

And the reason your not being 100 percent certain on the matter, is possibly the fact you keep hearing this cap iron tale.

Tom
 

Latest posts

Back
Top