- 19 Jan 2010
- Reaction score
If I was in the market for a No.51, I'd want a Lie-Nielsen. The quality is at least equal, the design (frog) is better, so the Stanley would have to be considerably cheaper to tempt me.Eric The Viking":5ao9tb6b said:...is this a realistic price?
I did play with one at Axminster when we visited - really sweet.Vann":33i80f4k said:If I was in the market for a No.51, I'd want a Lie-Nielsen.
The Lie-Nielsen jobbie at $US500 equates to $NZ625, shipping extra. So £500 for an old Stanley, which equates to $NZ1000, again excluding shipping, is not even going to get consideration.Eric The Viking":3d8piwc4 said:It's very slightly* too expensive for me though.
*for extremely large values of 'very slightly'.
The No9 is bevel up and not skewed, but works well enough on a shooting board. I used to have one :mrgreen: The LN51 has twice the mass (iIrc) of the No9, a skewed blade and is much better...I have one of those now :mrgreen: :mrgreen: - RobEric The Viking":sruu39js said:Serious question Scouse, Is the #9 skewed? I know it's bevel-up.
If it is, the #51 is very hard to justify in comparison.
Chris, I was confused myself by the chute/shoot thing myself so I looked it up; the Oxford English Dictionary states: "shoot; plane (the edge of a board) accurately", the word 'chute' is American, apparently.soulboy":9vk1b6c1 said:
For that kind of price, you could "just" buy a pair of skewed mitre planes from Philly.cam":1jyujccc said:I have to agree with Vann...unless you are an avid Stanley collector...buy the LN plane..cheaper and without a doubt better quality...