New Stanley planes

[Phil Pascoe]

I'm expecting to move house soon, so I had one of my regular trips to the dump. Now , one of the drawbacks to this "recycling centre" is that you are not allowed to recycle anything. Anyway, I ditched some scrap iron in the metal skip, and had a quick look around. right in front of me was a Nobex mitre saw, but it was incomplete so useless to me - but as I walked away, there on the side was a No.4 Stanley. So, having a cardboard box in my hand, in went the plane. After an hour of cleaning, the thing doesn't look bad - it's plastic handled, but useable and free.
What I was wondering was who was the design genius that decided they needed such wide mouths? I measured it, compared to an old rosewood handled No.6c that I use regularly - 190 thou compared to 260 thou on the "smoother"! Why are they made so wide? The machine didn't make it's own mind up - someone programmed it - who decided they would be better with a mouth that's reminiscent of Cherie Blair's?

 

[AndyT]

I'm guessing here, not knowing exactly how the mouth would be made. But assuming it starts as a casting with no gap and that the mouth is then milled out, could one possible reason be that a wide mouth would allow the use of relatively stout cutters? And that they would be slightly cheaper in use than delicate narrow cutters (liable to break, smaller working surfaces, shorter life)?

 

[Phil Pascoe]

Yes, possibly. There's obviously a reason for it - it didn't happen by accident.

 

[Dangermouse]

Reason is new non-premium Stanley's are made by children in outer Mongolia and use Russian machines which were used to make submarines.

 

[Eric The Viking]

Can you take advantage of it, for example using a blade with a steep camber or a toothed blade, for scrubbing purposes?

I've never understood why people buy #4s as a first plane. They strike me as a lot less useful than a #5 as a general purpose plane, not that they're useless, but you can't for example, true up long stock as easily. I've got a lovely little war finish #4, but it comes into its own on the shooting board mainly. My #5 and #5 1/2 are the go-to tools, and the block plane, and even the shoulder plane get far more use than the #4.

I'm considering doing just what I suggested, simply to make better use of it. I last flattened a big hardwood board with a surfacing cutter in the router, but it was really messy, and I'd have probably saved time and had more control with a scrub or toothed plane. There's an interesting thread on tooth blades (mainly for dealing with gnarly grain) over in the hand tools section.

E.

 

[marcros]

I'm considering doing just what I suggested, simply to make better use of it. I last flattened a big hardwood board with a surfacing cutter in the router, but it was really messy, and I'd have probably saved time and had more control with a scrub or toothed plane. There's an interesting thread on tooth blades (mainly for dealing with gnarly grain) over in the hand tools section.

E.

Eric,

Mess aside, what was the surface like using the router. I am building a sled at the moment for flattening my bench, and then a table top. It is about 50% complete at the moment and i am waiting on some bits to finish it.

What cutter did you use? I see that whealdons do one, but I would prefer not to spend £45 quid one one for occassional use.

Mark

 

[Dee J]

Don't these new cheap stanleys have moveable frogs? Can't you close the mouth up as small as is required for the job in hand?

Dee

 

[Phil Pascoe]

Eric - Yes, I don't see the No4 as an only plane, either. I do use a No4 regularly, but in conjunction with a No5 1/2 or a No6. The long dead chippie I used to work with always maintained that the No's 4 & 5 were site tools because you had to carry them around, and the No's 4 1/2 and 5 1/2 were shop tools. Nonsense, maybe, but logical nonsense.

Dee - yes, but you end up with a big badly supported overhang to take up that width. Also, I've always set my planes by touch and find it difficult with huge gap behind the cutting edge. For this I await the forthcoming opprobrium.

 

[Eric The Viking]

Mess aside, what was the surface like using the router. I am building a sled at the moment for flattening my bench, and then a table top. It is about 50% complete at the moment and i am waiting on some bits to finish it.

What cutter did you use?

I was helping a friend do this: The stock was too thin really for its intended use (a Shaker-style rack of coat pegs), so we needed to flatten it (it was in wind a bit) but take off the absolute minimum of material. it was chocked on a router mat, so it couldn't move, and we got the optimum angle for the first surface. The other side was done flat on the mat (on the bench top).

I need to work on the technique a bit for next time, but it served:

Cutter: six-wing surface trim from Wealdens. I've had it a while and the finish is very good.

2x2 timbers either side of the board on the bench top,
Two pieces of 3/4" square steel tube spaced about 7" apart (clamped in frames of scrap timber outboard of the 2x2s) to make a sled sliding along on the 2x2s.
Router's steel fence bars running on the steel tubes so it could slide in the other axis too.

You don't want to attempt to slide often along the timbers - steel on steel is much smoother. The tubing was rough powder coated - with hindsight I'd sand it clean before starting as the router would've moved more smoothly.

A bit of cleanup sanding was necessary afterwards as there were slight scuff marks, but I put it down to sag in the supports (the board was about 15" wide oak, meaning the 2x2s had to be about 21" apart). We could have done it with my big Makita orbital, but my friend decided to farm it out to one of his suppliers who has a proper wide drum sander.

It probably needed less than 1mm overall. I haven't seen the finished result, but it looked really nice from the six-wing jobbie - didn't tear out and brought out the figure nicely (it wasn't quarter-sawn, but it was a bit gnarly).

I'd definitely do it again for awkwardly sized boards, but it takes a while to set up and do, and it's no substitute for a pass or two through a decent planer thicknesser.

Wealden cutters:
http://www.wealdentool.com/acatalog/Online_Catalogue_Surface_Trim_225.html
(Ouch! That's quite a lot more than when I bought mine!)
There are also these:
http://www.wealdentool.com/acatalog/Online_Catalogue_Surface_Trim__3_Wing_250.html
but they're only 3-wing and narrower, I think. I don't know what difference it might make.

I used the T11, incidentally, and the fine depth adjuster proved invaluable.

We started with an extractor pipe on the router, but it got in the way too much, so we ended up doing sections and hoovering in between.

E.

PS: We actually started with a #5 + cambered blade, taking off the high spots as an exercise, but got short of time, so resorted to the router. I don't regret it, as although sharp and back-bevelled a bit, the tearout was hard to control and frustrating. I had two irons on the go, honing one on the other bench while he was planing, but I couldn't keep up! (It wasn't fair really: he's new to woodwork and wanted to do it by hand, and I found a lot of difficulty with it myself).

 

[marcros]

cheers. I am making mine as a half permanent fixture. The back rail will be attached to the wall and left in place, the front rail put in place as needed (still working on this part, but I think it will be held in a workmate, and will be adjustable,). There is some up and down adjustment on the sled too, and I am going to put some spirit level vials on. 1st job will be to zero the bench levelled to flat using this setup, so that when the 1st side of a piece is done, it can be thicknessed using that as the reference. I think that my freud has a fine height adjuster on it- pretty sure in fact.