Oh no! Not another PLANE thread!?

UKworkshop.co.uk

Help Support UKworkshop.co.uk:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.

BigShot

Established Member
Joined
15 May 2009
Messages
460
Reaction score
1
Location
Manchester, UK
Yes, another.

My apologies if this has been done to death already - I never have much luck with these forum search thingies.

I've got the impression, from reading several things on here and elsewhere, that older Stanley planes are generally better than the new ones. A while back I found a site that dated #4 planes based on various features (ring to receive the front handle or not, cast lettering positions, etc) but I can't remember what site it was now.

I'd like to find out if my other Stanley planes are old or new, worth tidying up or not and also get an idea of what to look for in a #7 (I'm going to need one soonish as I won't be able to afford a power jointer for a long time).
I've got a 3, 4, 4½, 9½, RB10, 78.

On that note, what's the cut-off point (if there is one) where the "good" old becomes the "not so good" new? Is there a certain year where the quality plunged or is it not so clear cut?


Am I right in thinking that (for example) a Stanley 9½ can only mean a block plane like mine, or could there be (for example) a 9½ block and a 9½ bailey (or something else - being new to all this I wouldn't know, y'see).


As I'm about to start learning to plane soon, I'd like to have the best tools I can afford, and as there's no way I'll be able to afford any of the really well respected brands new I'll be going for older Stanleys from car boots and the like. My budget is just too tight for anything more. My money really needs to go into wood for things like tool storage (it's that or the floor!) a bench and then wood for the projects I've got lined up.

I look forwards to any responses you can come up with.

Cheers folks. :D
 
In Some Tiny Respects?


Thanks for the link.. I'll check it out.
Thanks for the US vs UK thing too - at least 4 of mine are British made, one only has a US Patent on it so guessing that one's American.
 
BigShot":2ayp44h2 said:
...- I never have much luck with these forum search thingies.
I've spent far too long doing searches. They work great for me (unfortunately... :oops: )

BigShot":2ayp44h2 said:
I've got the impression, from reading several things on here and elsewhere, that older Stanley planes are generally better than the new ones. ... what's the cut-off point (if there is one) where the "good" old becomes the "not so good" new? Is there a certain year where the quality plunged or is it not so clear cut?
I don't think there's a cut off, more a decline over a period of a few decades, starting with WW2.
A good rule of the thumb is: if it's got a rounded top to the frog it's earlier (= good); if it's got an ogee-shaped top to the frog it's later (= not so good). If you can't see the frog shape (i.e. in a photo), flat top to the iron indicates earlier, rounded top, or top corners, indicates later ('though this method is flawed as irons can easily be replaced or swapped).
Of course, there were probably always those Monday morning and Friday afternoon planes that aren't up to scratch, and even today the odd new Stanley defies the odds and comes out okay.

Good luck.

Cheers, Vann.

ps ISTR?
 
Vann - Pre 1939 it is then... well, if I can find one at least.
I'm not in a hurry to spend months traipsing around car boots.
Not quite sure what you mean by the ogee shaped frog top. Had a quick search but haven't seen anything that matches that description. I'll look again though.

Still none the wiser on ISTR and won't be until either Danny tells us or I stop being so inexplicably reluctant to look it up through the magic of google.



Andy - do you know if there's enough difference between the US and UK planes to make using a US guide unreliable enough in the UK that the untrained eye might mistake a new one for an old one?
 
BigShot":3dg7stab said:
Vann - Pre 1939 it is then... <snip>

Still none the wiser on ISTR and won't be until either Danny tells us or I stop being so inexplicably reluctant to look it up through the magic of google.

ISTR = I seem to recall

sorry Galoot speak

Danny
 
dannykaye":1efgk73x said:
BigShot":1efgk73x said:
Vann - Pre 1939 it is then... <snip>

Still none the wiser on ISTR and won't be until either Danny tells us or I stop being so inexplicably reluctant to look it up through the magic of google.

ISTR = I seem to recall

sorry Galoot speak

Danny

IWATA, so 'I Seem To Remember' was my guess! But then I don't do many crosswords, so synonyms aren't my strength.
AFAIAA!

:D
 
Cheers for the definition of ISTR, Danny. I'm as nerdy as the next guy but couldn't wrap my head around the beyond my initial guess.

At least I can identify US planes now (though I've got one here with a US Patent number on it that doesn't seem to fit with the flow-chart things or pictures on those sites).

Is there anything for the UK made planes? Whether as detailed or not.
 
BigShot":2fwg5jw1 said:
Is there anything for the UK made planes? Whether as detailed or not.

nothing I have ever found is as good as the US sites sadly. When I tried to use the US data on a UK plane I got nowhere.

Danny
 
BigShot":3nus3kcr said:
Is there anything for the UK made planes? Whether as detailed or not.
www.recordhandplanes.com does a reasonable job for Record planes, but I don't know of anything for UK Stanleys. However I suspect that UK Stanleys and Records probably copied each others changes (to an extent), so it may at least give you a rough guide. HTH.

Cheers, Vann.
 
Danny - there were clearly some casting differences between US and UK planes right off the bat.

One of the sites was insisting my #4 was a #5 in spite of the numeral 4 on the thing - it didn't go as far as calling me an silly person but I could tell by the way it looked at me that it was thinking it.

I don't suppose any of you plane-nutters (or enthusiasts, whichever you prefer) are in or near Manchester are you? It'd be nice to have someone who knows about these things point me in the right direction of what to look for. I'm not a collector (of anything - the clutter just annoys me) so I won't be any competition - I promise. ;)
 
BigShot":3h4o9kda said:
Andy - do you know if there's enough difference between the US and UK planes to make using a US guide unreliable enough in the UK that the untrained eye might mistake a new one for an old one?

Good question - I don't know the detailed answer (I have quite a few planes, but I'm not an obsessive collector, really I'm not) but I'd imagine they would be broadly in step.

Most of the ones I have are US-made - judging by old tool catalogues I think there was a lot of importing before there was UK manufacturing.
 
Back
Top