Norris Adjusters
- Thread starter ivan
- Start date
Help Support UKworkshop.co.uk:
That’s a bit random. I have to disagree, the Norris type adjuster is IMO the best solution, it has very little backlash unlike a yoke and gives people like me with large hands more room with not having the adjuster in the way. A hammer and wedge arrangement means you need an extra tool to adjust the blade, and you need to develop the ‘feel’ for both tapping the wedge and the iron. By the time you’d found the hammer the Norris is adjusted and back in business. Have you tried a Veritas plane which has a Norris style adjuster?
Michael_b
Established Member
I can say that while I prefer the Bailey style adjuster, the few planes I own with Norris style adjusters can easily be tuned to produce uniform-thickness sub-0.001 inch shavings, same as the Bailey style.
I prefer one over the other, but both work well.
Inspector
Nyuck, Nyuck, Nyuck!
deema since the improved hand tool myth thread was closed earlier today and some people were arguing over the Norris adjusters it looks like it has spawned its own thread so the battle can continue. 
For what it is worth I like my Veritas NX60 and its "inferior" adjuster over the older Record low angle block plane I have.
Pete
For what it is worth I like my Veritas NX60 and its "inferior" adjuster over the older Record low angle block plane I have.Pete
And this one can can be shut down as quickly, and people put on the bench.
Just sayin'...
Just sayin'...
Michael_b
Established Member
Battle?deema since the improved hand tool myth thread was closed earlier today and some people were arguing over the Norris adjusters it looks like it has spawned its own thread so the battle can continue.
Pete
That can only happen if each side establishes a position and defends it or one side attacks and the other defends. I’ll leave it up to others to judge this criterion. (further content deleted with apologies).
I like both Bailey and Norris style adjusters for different reasons and even though I prefer one over the other I can’t claim that either “doesn’t work well.”
Last edited:
We don't qualify these attempts at meaningful conversation. If your enjoyment spills over into this thread, it will suffer the same fate as the previous thread. If you want to exchange grade school playground banter, do it privately and spare the membership.
Michael_b
Established Member
My apologies for any and all overstepping into inappropriate behavior.
My perception was clearly “off” in some way.
I appreciate constructive discussion, and apparently over-reacted to avoidance thereof. I will restrain myself.
Last edited:
I‘d avoided that thread, appreciate the update, it now makes sense. Nothing like stepping into a minefield unwittingly!deema since the improved hand tool myth thread was closed earlier today and some people were arguing over the Norris adjusters it looks like it has spawned its own thread so the battle can continue.
Pete
I do like the ingenuity of Norris style adjusters, and have a mixture of planes from Veritas and Stanley/Faithfull/other random brands to know that I have no preference one way or another between the Norris and conventional Stanley style. This is because the engineer in me enjoys seeing and using the different solutions to the same issue for aligning the cutting edge of a plane iron.
Now for something that could be controversial, I would like a plane with no lateral adjustment at all, only depth adjustment. This means the plane iron can only be adjusted for depth and no lateral movement whatsoever. This would suit me fine because I use a honing guide to sharpen my plane irons, so the cutting edge is always square to the sides. This would negate the need to make any lateral adjustments when refitting the iron to the plane, and the time saving here balances out the time needed to use a jig. It also means my fat hands don't know the lateral adjustment off whilst planing. As far as I'm concerned, the lateral adjustment is only there to make up for poor sharpening practice, so just fix the real problem rather than design in complexity to deal with the issue further down the line.
Now for something that could be controversial, I would like a plane with no lateral adjustment at all, only depth adjustment. This means the plane iron can only be adjusted for depth and no lateral movement whatsoever. This would suit me fine because I use a honing guide to sharpen my plane irons, so the cutting edge is always square to the sides. This would negate the need to make any lateral adjustments when refitting the iron to the plane, and the time saving here balances out the time needed to use a jig. It also means my fat hands don't know the lateral adjustment off whilst planing. As far as I'm concerned, the lateral adjustment is only there to make up for poor sharpening practice, so just fix the real problem rather than design in complexity to deal with the issue further down the line.
Where did I see a plane that has grub screws through the sides to help with lateral location of the blade ?
Inspector
Nyuck, Nyuck, Nyuck!
Most of the Veritas/LV planes have the screws to locate the blade.
Pete
Pete
Doug B
Shy Tot
Lie Nielsen block plane
Adam W.
A Major Clanger
Like Pete said, the Veritas ones have them.
johnnyb
Established Member
don't know about you guys but I've taken to adjusting norris style using a screwdriver wedged between the sides and the blade.
Michael_b
Established Member
You may wish to Google the phrase, "what is a Norris style adjuster" and see what you think based on what you find.Lie Nielsen block plane
Michael_b
Established Member
I've never tried the screwdriver method. It sounds like you might be able to get good precision easily. I might give it a try and see what I think.
The technique I generally use is to somewhat loosen the "lever-cap-equivalent" (which is adjusted by a thumbscrew type mechanism rather than tightened with a cam lever) and carefully squeeze blade and adjuster together in the appropriate direction based on which side of the blade is taking a thicker shaving. I can easily feel when the blade starts to move. Incidentally, with the exception of the extra step of loosening before adjustment and tightening after adjustment, I use exactly the same procedure for my Bailey style planes--squeeze the blade and lateral adjuster together, just enough to align the blade for a uniform shaving. Yes, this takes a few iterations/checks, but what lateral adjustment method doesn't?
Compared to the time spent planing and even the time spent sharpening, the extra step of slightly loosening the "lever cap" before adjustment and tightening it afterward doesn't amount to much. It takes a couple seconds with the tightness of the thumbscrew.
Michael_b
Established Member
Even if your sharpening is perfect, is the mounting face of the frog perfectly aligned to the base of the plane? Particularly, is it aligned well enough to facilitate (in a smoothing plane) uniformity significantly less than .001 inches (25 microns)? My experience with specifying and ordering machined parts says that would be a very expensive plane. The lateral adjustment can make up for build tolerances in addition to sharpening tolerances.
I, for one, appreciate the ability to adjust the lateral tilt of the blade in addition to depth.
I like the Norris style adjuster but you do need to slacken the screw that locks the blade in place. If you don’t do that they are pretty terrible to use.
Those who dislike them probably don’t know how to use them.
Several of my planes are spiders pattern and need a hammer to adjust and they are my favourite planes. Once you are used to the plane adjusting is incredibly precise.
Those who dislike them probably don’t know how to use them.
Several of my planes are spiders pattern and need a hammer to adjust and they are my favourite planes. Once you are used to the plane adjusting is incredibly precise.
Similar threads
