Pinnacle replacement blades

[Henning]

Anyone tried these replacement blades?

http://www.woodcraft.com/offers/chipbre ... e=10IN05NL

Cosman seems to like them, but cynical old me thinks someone paid him a good deal of money...

 

[Benchwayze]

Looks impressive for sure.

I can't see how it's any better than a Hock or Clifton blade, (Except for the pre-flattened back) but I am no metallurgist.

It seems to work well enough; in the hands of Rob Cosman.

I have tried to fit a replacement to my own No. 4. The thick blade wouldn't even look at the mouth, the adjustment was non existent, and I am useless with a file. So I continue to work on my standard blades until they cut like that. Might take an age, but it will be worth it!

On the other hand, if I could source these in the UK, I would be tempted to have another shot. And of course write up a review!

Regards
John

 

[GraemeD]

From what I understand, IBC always made Lee Valley's blades, but have kept under the radar as a manufacturer in their own right. They recently started supplying a range of premium replacement blades via Woodcraft under the Pinnacle brand (that's Woodcraft's own brand). So, they should be at least as good as the blades that Veritas supply as standard....which as we all knowis very good!

The Rob Cosman blades seem to be slightly more expensive, but the matching cap irons have extra tabs which allow a thicker blade to work with a standard Stanley or Record plane (so the depth setting yoke will still engage). So, maybe that is what you are paying for. It won't save you having to file out your mouth IMHO.

Graeme

 

[Harbo]

I posted a similar thread a while back when I noticed the ads in the American Mags.

They advertise them as "original manufacture equipment".

It has been discussed on "Sawmill Creek" with a response from LV and others which avoided the question "is it true?"
From the silence or avoidance you can read into what you like?
IBC manufacture the Pinnacle irons in Canada.

Rod

 

[charvercarver]

Harbo

I was just about to say the same thing.

From what I remember about the Sawmill creek thread, Rob Lee said LBC only did some of the subcontracting on the blades. He was angry because Cosman implied that the reason Veritas won so many awards is because of the work of LBC.

Also I think about 15-20 pounds of the price for the pinnacle blades is for Cosman's DVD which comes with the blade and breaker.

 

[Derek Cohen (Perth Oz)]

I am curious to know if you get a DVD with every blade, and whether the price drops with a second blade when you already have the DVD, or whether you have to pay the price for a DVD each and every time?

The IBC blades are either RC's show or have him as equal partner since the cap iron is his (apparently he has a patent on the cap iron design). I like Rob but he is now getting slammed by his fellow Canadians on the Canadian forum for his "hard sell" promoting of the blade/cap iron.

http://forum.canadianwoodworking.com/showthread.php?t=32916

The idea is a good one, regardless of the glamourising. The IBC blades are thick (thicker than LN) and should boost the performance of a standard Stanley plane. The cap iron is a nice touch since it makes it possible to fit the blade to the standard Stanley adjuster. Incidentally, filing the mouth may not be necessary if you can pull the frog back by virtue of filing the tab under the frog.

Of course the question is whether the high cost of these blades is cost-effective. There are cheaper options around (LN, LV, Hock, amongst others).

I was away when the "fireworks" took place at SMC. I wonder what was said?

Regards from Perth

Derek

 

[charvercarver]

Derek

It kicked off at SMC when Cosman basically said the reason for veritas's success was the blade supplied by LBC, Rob Lee then responded by saying that LBC was just one subcontractor that worked on the iron (I think it was just the grinding but I'm not sure). Then Cosman said the head of LBC would post a reply, which he did but was quickly removed by the moderators as was the original thread.

I've seen another thread just recently, that has also been locked, in which Cosman told everyone who was criticizing him to buy a blade. He seemed quite aggressive to me, but that may just be the toneless nature of internet posting.

Personally I've only bought old specialty planes so I don't have a dog in the fight. I don't think he has done himself any favors in the marketing department though.

 

[Philly]

I saw these blades at the Ally Pally show - Rob was demonstrating them. He was taking some unreal shavings - so fine they were sticking to the plane with static, not something I'd seen before. And this was in an old Stanley 5 1/2.
The chipbreaker idea is great - it means you can fit a big iron in your old Stanley or Record without having to make complicated adjustments to the adjuster yoke.
I'd be interested to see some production blades once they reach this side of the water.
Cheers
Philly

 

[Henning]

Reading around a little, and seeing the video, i think i'll continue saving until i can afford a round trip in the Lee Valley catalogue.

If i had any good OLD Stanleys i would maybe be tempted though.

 

[bugbear]

...but the matching cap irons have extra tabs which allow a thicker blade to work with a standard Stanley or Record plane (so the depth setting yoke will still engage). So, maybe that is what you are paying for.

Hmm.

"Patent Pending".

Surely this isn't a new (and thus patentable) idea?

https://www.ukworkshop.co.uk/forums/post ... ays#188593

The technique illustrated (damn well) by Jarviser, is from an article by the sainted Jeff Gorman in 2006.

Hah. He was thinking about it (publicly...) in 1999!

http://swingleydev.com/archive/get.php?message_id=61679

BugBear

 

[Benchwayze]

You are probably right BB,

As far as I am aware though, it isn't when an idea is first publicised that counts. It's the first person who actually patents, or develops the idea who has first dibs.

History is littered with such cases.

The Dutch had a telescope long before Gallileo made his first. (He used their idea)

I believe Fox-Talbot wasn't the first person to make a photograph. Someone in France did that, but did nothing about it.

Edison also managed to sneak his lightbulb in, ahead of someone else.

C'est la Vie!

John

 

[dannykaye]

however, you can stop a patent by showing prior art at the application hearing, I think. but you have to be there, once it is granted it costs a lot to overturn it on that basis. This is the problem with US granted software patents, people (IBM, Microsoft etc) started applying for patents that would let them kill any software written. This then allowed them to force people with real, patentable, new software ideas to hand over their technology...

 

[Benchwayze]

As I always suspected Danny. Short-sighted lawmakers, who let the new technology bewlider them. Thus allowing M'soft to impose their over-stringent copyright 'rules' on everyone.

I understand M'soft's thinking, but wonder what would happen if Dire Straits (or someone like that) insisted their CDs be played on just one HiFi system! Lol!

Please note.. This post is my copyright, from the moment it was finished!

Back to topic... I will wait until these blades are imported before I try them out!

regards
John :wink:

 

[Paul Chapman]

From what I remember about the Sawmill creek thread, Rob Lee said LBC only did some of the subcontracting on the blades. He was angry because Cosman implied that the reason Veritas won so many awards is because of the work of LBC.

I think if I'd been Rob Lee I would have been angry as well. It's unfortunate that Rob Cosman has chosen to imply that the success of Veritas planes is primarily down to the blades, which he says are made by someone else. There is much innovative design and engineering in many of the Veritas planes (eg the skew rebate plane to use just one example) and the remarks about Veritas/Lee Valley in his promotional blurb were rather silly IMHO. If Rob Cosman's blades are as good as he says, then he should promote them on their merits and not by trying to rubbish other manufacturers.

Cheers :wink:

Paul

 

[Benchwayze]

(I can't find the original argument, Paul, so I won't venture an opinion on that! )

However I'm not sure Cosman was 'rubbishing' other products in the video he just made for these blades. The gist of what he said (I think) was that these blades would allow workers who can't afford top-end planes to have an impressive plane at low cost.

That said, it's not impossible to get an ordinary Stanley and original blade to take 'read-through' shavings. It just needs a lot of fettling! And I am running out of time too quickly to bother with all that!

Thus, I find LN planes quite adequate TYVM! Although, I might try a Clifton one day when I have some spare 'shrapnel' in my pocket.

:lol:

Regards John

 

[charvercarver]

Paul

I think the blades will probably be on a par with Hock, LN etc. and I can see why someone would buy them, I just find RC's attitude a bit strange. Making digs at Veritas and LN seems bafflingly counter-productive to me.

 

[Eric The Viking]

You are probably right BB,

The Dutch had a telescope long before Gallileo made his first. (He used their idea)

I believe Fox-Talbot wasn't the first person to make a photograph. Someone in France did that, but did nothing about it.

Edison also managed to sneak his lightbulb in, ahead of someone else.

C'est la Vie!

John

Nope. It's proof of 'prior art' that will invalidate a patent. Even if you have one awarded, it can still be contested on the basis of proven prior invention by someone else, and that being placed somehow in the public domain, in the form of notes or witnessed conversation, etc.

Regarding the examples you cite:

-- Galileo didn't patent anything. IIRC, at the time there wasn't a system as such, although patents were granted by royalty on an ad hoc basis.

-- Neither did Fox Talbot (when you say Frenchman, you're thinking about Daguerre, I suspect, who used a different chemical process, but did create images). Since wood often chemically darkens or lightens in sunlight/UV, it is quite possible to make an image on it with light alone, although it's what might be described as a 'time exposure' and would be somewhat grainy (I'll get me coat... in a sec...)!

-- Swann (Scotsman) and Edison (Yank) pretty much invented the light bulb simultaneously. To summarise a lot of legal fuss & posturing, Edison got the US patent first, Swann contested it, and after a lot of expense a no-score draw was declared, and they agreed to co-operate, rather than let it go to penalties. The resulting company was Swann-Edison.

In the case of this plane iron and chip-breaker, it's a common tactic to apply for a patent and say you have. Your application date is initially taken as proof of originality (unless successfully contested), so a patent application _can_ be as good as an actual patent (as long as you eventually get one). It can also be a scare tactic, giving you time to get established.

I haven't read the application: It might be the peg/slot, or it might be something else to do with the product, such as some part of the heat treatment. Patents, incidentally, don't have to do what they're intended to do, so it might be a feature that actually has no effect!

I stress I'm speculating, and not casting aspersions on what appears to be a very good, if pricey, blade.

To change the subject: I warped a mid 1980s Stanley plane iron recently by heat treating it clumsily (but it sharpened up beautifully before I realised! ). To replace it I bought the laminated Japanese blade that Axminster are selling.

Like others, I found it wasn't ground square, which was annoying, but after gently re-grinding and honing it, I think it's wonderful. My fettled #5 flies, and easily makes translucent shavings. To my surprise I even get curls off MDF! I think they've put the price up slightly, but it's still just under £40 for the wider one.

HTH,

S.

 

[Benchwayze]

Thanks Eric,

In which case I bow to your superior knowledge.

Although I didn't say Gallileo patented the telescope. He is regarded as the 'Father' of it however, in much the same way that Darwin is regarded over Evolution. In fact there was some other noted naturalist; more of a hobbyist, who had the same ideas, but who was more concerned with his private collection, than publishing a 'paper'. I don't have the details to hand, but in the NHM there is now higher regard for this man.

As for me, hope the copyright is safe in all of my paintings, photographs and novels? :wink:

As I said,
C'est la vie...



Regards
John

 

[Eric The Viking]

As for me, hope the copyright is safe in all of my paintings, photographs and novels? :wink:

Different kettle of glue: you automatically have copyright on anything you create, from the moment you create it. That's written words, drawings, photographs, paintings, designs, sculpture, music, video/films, and so on. There are slight oddities in the case of recorded music, film and photography, and things like journalism, done for hire, but generally speaking your work is automatically protected by law and international conventions. That means you have certain rights: to copy and sell it, to allow others to copy or photograph or re-record it, etc. If others do any of those things, without getting your permission, you can sue them, or get a court to tell them to stop, etc. The detail is somewhat arcane!

The only similarity with patent law, as I understand it, is that if contested you'd have to prove originality. Occasionally, I do stuff and want to prove originality, so I mail myself a copy (or just get a stamp cancelled across the flap of the envelope at the local Post Office). I keep it unopened with the rest of the work, so that, if necessary it can be opened in front of witnesses at a later date. Electronic timestamps, such as those on emails and files are pretty useless as they're so easy to forge.

Oh, and both have expiry dates: patents are 20 or 25 years (can't remember which!), and copyright varies depending on what's being considered: music is 50 years after a recording, written works, musical scores (i.e. the paper and the performance rights) and photographs are 75 years after the death of the author (by international convention). It's a bit messy in that regard.

One of the oddest examples is J.M. Barrie's Peter Pan, which, by special act of Parliament, has perpetual copyright (in the UK) vested in Great Ormond Street Hospital. There was a big fuss recently, IIRC involving Disney, and the EU (typically!) tried to muscle in on it too, saying the life+70 rule should apply (but this hasn't been contested in court yet). I think the dispute was eventually settled.

 

[TrimTheKing]

Look good but have to agree with Derek, if I potentially wanted 3 or 4 I wouldn't want to have to pay for the DVD every time.

I would like to undertand whether this would be the case or not.

Regarding the fighting, what a load of old c0ck waving b0ll0x! Rob shouldn't be mentioning the names of other manufacturers in his promotional blurb, that's just out of order, regardless of whether he meant it tongue in cheek.

Other than that, he's got a product to sell and it's up to us to buy one and make our minds up whether he's overselling or not. Or don't.