Low VS standard angle planes
- Thread starter madge
- Start date
Help Support UKworkshop.co.uk:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jizJpFsVcOY
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6Bnfn_OvO_g
Just the first 60 seconds of each video will do!
OK it's a bit unfair but it does illustrate the advantage that a light wooden Jack/smoother can have. Quick and slick. I suppose you could liken it to a nippy little super mini car against a Tank. One is agile whilst nothing is going to get in the way of the Tank.
Each has it's merits.
BTW. Notice how fast the guy adjusts the wooden Plane. He barely looks at what he is doing!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6Bnfn_OvO_g
Just the first 60 seconds of each video will do!OK it's a bit unfair but it does illustrate the advantage that a light wooden Jack/smoother can have. Quick and slick. I suppose you could liken it to a nippy little super mini car against a Tank. One is agile whilst nothing is going to get in the way of the Tank.
Each has it's merits.
BTW. Notice how fast the guy adjusts the wooden Plane. He barely looks at what he is doing!
Jacob
New Luddism. Awake and resist!
well yes - it's obvious. Even faster with a little lightweight scrub.
Metal planes are better or finer finishing though, as they are easier to adjust very precisely.
Why is that chap struggling away with a 7? So obviously the wrong plane for the job.
Metal planes are better or finer finishing though, as they are easier to adjust very precisely.
Why is that chap struggling away with a 7? So obviously the wrong plane for the job.
G S Haydon
Established Member
- Joined
- 24 Apr 2013
- Messages
- 1,667
- Reaction score
- 223
"Why is that chap struggling away with a 7? So obviously the wrong plane for the job."
Vid No2. Because it work for him I guess. Video was not the best production, however I'm not sure if it was the wrong plane. By the book I would assume Jack to level off working across the grain, Try to flatten with the grain, Smoother to fine finish with the grain.
To be fair to the guy in the video he may of already used a jack or he may not off. I might be wrong on this but did Alan Peters use the No7 for loads of work that would normally be done by another plane?
Vid No2. Because it work for him I guess. Video was not the best production, however I'm not sure if it was the wrong plane. By the book I would assume Jack to level off working across the grain, Try to flatten with the grain, Smoother to fine finish with the grain.
To be fair to the guy in the video he may of already used a jack or he may not off. I might be wrong on this but did Alan Peters use the No7 for loads of work that would normally be done by another plane?
- Joined
- 6 Jun 2011
- Messages
- 2,923
- Reaction score
- 828
The guy with the wooden plane was looking quick and slick but he was just hacking off soft tulip, he was using a cambered blade which tends to produce narrow shavings and he is planing circular sawn timber which means he starts off only taking off the high spots.
The second guy using the no 7 does seem a little OTT for the job but the timber is Alder - a bit harder to work. He is using a bevel up plane taking wide shavings the whole length of the board. He is working with more care as he is finishing the board, a different planing technique completely; also as he is using a bevel up plane, is he using a 37, 50 or 62 degrees effective cutting angle, as the difference in energy required between the three angles is significant?
So this is not really a fair comparison.
Alan Peter’s plane of choice was indeed his no 7 probably because it had the most weight and momentum when being used, that’s why when I only had a couple of planes, the no 7 was my plane of choice. My work buddy at the time always used his no 3 and we both produced the same furniture. I don’t ever remember having a heated debate over a tea break about which plane was better, we were too busy earning a living;-)
Planes do have their own specific strong points but you can within reason use most of them for most jobs.
The second guy using the no 7 does seem a little OTT for the job but the timber is Alder - a bit harder to work. He is using a bevel up plane taking wide shavings the whole length of the board. He is working with more care as he is finishing the board, a different planing technique completely; also as he is using a bevel up plane, is he using a 37, 50 or 62 degrees effective cutting angle, as the difference in energy required between the three angles is significant?
So this is not really a fair comparison.
Alan Peter’s plane of choice was indeed his no 7 probably because it had the most weight and momentum when being used, that’s why when I only had a couple of planes, the no 7 was my plane of choice. My work buddy at the time always used his no 3 and we both produced the same furniture. I don’t ever remember having a heated debate over a tea break about which plane was better, we were too busy earning a living;-)
Planes do have their own specific strong points but you can within reason use most of them for most jobs.
Yes, that's why I stated that it's a little unfair. The main principle still holds true though. The lighter wooden plane is quicker and easier to use on most of our European hardwoods, providing it's fairly well behaved stuff. I switch between the two types all the time. I have a pretty good idea of how both types work and their respective advantages.
dunbarhamlin
Established Member
I have a dodgy wrist. A hefty plane acts as an effective damper, smoothing the impact of working a variable material. Since the tool is powered by tea and biscuits, I'm more than happy to scoff a few extra to offset the slightly greater energy requirement (which is trivial anyway, considering I've got 14stone of me to move as well as the tool)
Corneel
Established Member
Yes exactly that is what weight does, smoothing out the irregularities. That feels like the plane is pushing itself. But you still have to eat the biscuits.
I use both types. Usually it is just a matter of which one happens to have a sharp blade.
I use both types. Usually it is just a matter of which one happens to have a sharp blade.
Corneel
Established Member
Ok, I'm going to make some corrections to my own blasphemous posts from the last few days. Fueled by a bit of booze I probably went a little too far.
In itself there is nothing wrong with the theory, but practice showed that momentum can help you in planing hard wood with high resistance. The keyword here is short planestrokes. It is possible to build up enough momentum to get a quite a bit of distance in the wood before you run out of kinetic energy, further then I thought. So If you start a planing stroke at considerable speed, and the resistance in the wood is higher then you are able to just push through, the momentum helps until you run out of it. In the wallnut board I am working at, I guess I can make strokes about half a meter long using the momentum plus my own pushing. This is very usefull in rough planing when you want to remove a lot of wood.
Sorry for stepping on any toes.
In itself there is nothing wrong with the theory, but practice showed that momentum can help you in planing hard wood with high resistance. The keyword here is short planestrokes. It is possible to build up enough momentum to get a quite a bit of distance in the wood before you run out of kinetic energy, further then I thought. So If you start a planing stroke at considerable speed, and the resistance in the wood is higher then you are able to just push through, the momentum helps until you run out of it. In the wallnut board I am working at, I guess I can make strokes about half a meter long using the momentum plus my own pushing. This is very usefull in rough planing when you want to remove a lot of wood.
Sorry for stepping on any toes.
woodbrains
Established Member
Hello,
What have you been drinking, and can you get it over here? I could do with some.
Mike.
What have you been drinking, and can you get it over here? I could do with some.
Mike.
Corneel
Established Member
Jacob
New Luddism. Awake and resist!
Yebbut you don't get anything for nothing - to gain momentum you have to apply more force, so you can get a "chop" effect when you hit a hard bit but overall you will be doing more work. Most of the time you aren't chopping knots, which makes planing unlike using an axe, where chopping is the only option.Corneel":2b8ok7hq said:
Corneel
Established Member
Indeed no free lunch.
I was watching myself when i started to process the last board for my dining table. It's very rough sawn has stains that need to be removed and then it needs to be flattened, so a lot of wood needs to removed. First I went at it with the scrub, traversing the 16cm wide board. That's really a chopping motion. Then I used the foreplane to clean up the scrub marks first diagonally then more or less in length of the board. I was taking a fairly thick shaving and found that it was much easier to run the plane at speed then it was to run it slowly and deliberately, I took strokes about half a meter to a meter long. The board is pretty homogenous wallnut with some big knots in one end.
What happens is that you build up speed before the blade enters the wood. Building up speed means kinetic energy is stored in the moving plane. Then you hit the wood and because the cut is deeper then I can easilly push, the plane decellerates a bit, so kinetic energy is released and helps you to propel the plane. Until you run out of kinetic energy of course and the plane bogs down. The trick is now of course to adjust your shaving thickness and speed so you can use the kinetic energy to help you through the entire stroke, which is limited by your arms length anyway. In long work like with a jointer plane the kinetic energy is less helpfull maybe.
I think this is all extremely funny. You can theorise until you see blue in your face, but real practice is always a little different.
I was watching myself when i started to process the last board for my dining table. It's very rough sawn has stains that need to be removed and then it needs to be flattened, so a lot of wood needs to removed. First I went at it with the scrub, traversing the 16cm wide board. That's really a chopping motion. Then I used the foreplane to clean up the scrub marks first diagonally then more or less in length of the board. I was taking a fairly thick shaving and found that it was much easier to run the plane at speed then it was to run it slowly and deliberately, I took strokes about half a meter to a meter long. The board is pretty homogenous wallnut with some big knots in one end.
What happens is that you build up speed before the blade enters the wood. Building up speed means kinetic energy is stored in the moving plane. Then you hit the wood and because the cut is deeper then I can easilly push, the plane decellerates a bit, so kinetic energy is released and helps you to propel the plane. Until you run out of kinetic energy of course and the plane bogs down. The trick is now of course to adjust your shaving thickness and speed so you can use the kinetic energy to help you through the entire stroke, which is limited by your arms length anyway. In long work like with a jointer plane the kinetic energy is less helpfull maybe.
I think this is all extremely funny. You can theorise until you see blue in your face, but real practice is always a little different.
My practical experience on 'difficult' (knots, changing grain) timbers. With a light weight woodie it often means that you have to bear down more, exerting more downward pressure so that the Plane does not get deflected when it hits a knot. That isn't the case (or at least less so) with a heavier metal plane. 1 - 0 to the heavier metal Plane. On softwood and average density European Hardwood, with reasonably well behaved grain, it is quicker and less tiring to remove material with a woodie.
1 - 1. The final whistle has blown. The match is drawn.
1 - 1. The final whistle has blown. The match is drawn.
mqbernardo
Established Member
i blame the referee.
G S Haydon
Established Member
- Joined
- 24 Apr 2013
- Messages
- 1,667
- Reaction score
- 223
I've done the front and rear like that for 20+ yrs, but I'd not thought to do the sides.
Similar threads
