Quantcast
  • We invite you to join UKWorkshop.
    Members can turn off viewing Ads!

Lie-Nielsen Low angle Smoothie v No.4

UKworkshop.co.uk

Help Support UKworkshop.co.uk:

The Restorer

Established Member
Joined
11 Nov 2004
Messages
118
Reaction score
0
Location
Oxfordshire
Hi folks,

Anyone directly compared the Lie-Nielsen low angle smoother against a Lie-Nielsen No.4 smoother? Is there much in it? Enough to justify the cost difference?

Opinions/comments welcome.
 

Alf

Established Member
Joined
22 Oct 2003
Messages
12,079
Reaction score
0
Location
Up the proverbial creek
I can compare the #164 to the #4.5, if that's any help? Presumably if you're comparing the two it's with a view to using a higher bevel angle in the #164? In which case be aware that it's a PITA to swap blades in the #164 because of needing the fiddly and irritating plate to engage with the adjuster.

Cheers, Alf
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
The Restorer":2ds3gvx5 said:
Hi folks,

Anyone directly compared the Lie-Nielsen low angle smoother against a Lie-Nielsen No.4 smoother? Is there much in it? Enough to justify the cost difference?

Opinions/comments welcome.
I have owned the LN 4.5 for 18 months or so and the LA for about 8 months

In my opinion the 4.5 is far superior to the LA smoother for the job both claim to be good at - smoothing. The 4.5 is my most used LN these days and I have, ahem, quite a few to chose from.

The advantage the the 4.5 has is mass. The extra width helps too. The mass helps the plane keep moving and I find that it is much easier and more satisfying to use than the LA

I mainly use the LA on the shooting board now as it performs a little better there than the 4.5 - not much in it though.

I bought the high angle frog for the 4.5; don't waste your money :) no discernable difference in performance

I am not a hater of LA planes, in fact I just bought the LA Jack, but they do not have the mass to work well as a smoother in my opinion.
 

Alf

Established Member
Joined
22 Oct 2003
Messages
12,079
Reaction score
0
Location
Up the proverbial creek
Tony":3sia25yq said:
In my opinion the 4.5 is far superior to the LA smoother for the job both claim to be good at - smoothing.
<I will not start that discussion again, I will not start that discussion again, I will not start that discussion again> :-# :lol:

Cheers, Alf
 

Midnight

Established Member
Joined
11 Oct 2003
Messages
1,805
Reaction score
0
Location
Scotland
I bought the high angle frog for the 4.5; don't waste your money no discernable difference in performance
ummm..... Tony.... I hate to call you on this buttttttt...

when working a board with well behaved grain then you're right, there's little to choose between them. However, when working difficult grain the high angle frog really comes into its own... The standard angle frog has a slight tendency to tear out; the higher angle frog...doesn't...
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
Midnight":3693shx3 said:
I bought the high angle frog for the 4.5; don't waste your money no discernable difference in performance
ummm..... Tony.... I hate to call you on this buttttttt...

when working a board with well behaved grain then you're right, there's little to choose between them. However, when working difficult grain the high angle frog really comes into its own... The standard angle frog has a slight tendency to tear out; the higher angle frog...doesn't...
fair comment Mike

I tried it on every type of wood I have (oak, mahogany(s), ash, pine, cedar, beech, sycamore ) and on most it was, if anything, worse with more tear-out. Unfortunately, I don't have any real 'exotic' or 'difficult' woods.

If someone plays with more exotic woods and wanted to buy my high angle frog, then they should simply pm me :wink: :lol:
 

The Restorer

Established Member
Joined
11 Nov 2004
Messages
118
Reaction score
0
Location
Oxfordshire
Thanks very much for the replies.
I have various LN's but don't have a smoother. Keep thinking about getting one for finishing off the planer so thought i may save a few quid by getting the 164, however looks like the 4 1/2 is the one to go for.
 
Top