Plane - Sole Contact Points

UKworkshop.co.uk

Help Support UKworkshop.co.uk:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
Status
Not open for further replies.
Original equipment manufacturer.
Thanks. Good idea too! Actually I've never found a blade which was unusable, even on a rubbish plane. The SV or ESSVEE brand came to mind but the blade was fine. Sometimes they've been overheated by over enthusiastic grinding but you just sharpen more often until you are in better steel
 
Last edited:
IMG_20230526_165711159_MFNR.jpg


Got some flat shavings,

thanks for all the tips, heres what I did to the plane, works pretty well know I think.

positioned the frog face to be coplanar with mouth
relieved & polished the chip breaker
sharpened the blade and polished with autosol on some mdf (not very well)
positioned chip breaker <0.5mm from blade.
 
.......

positioned the frog face to be coplanar with mouth
relieved & polished the chip breaker
sharpened the blade and polished with autosol on some mdf (not very well)
positioned chip breaker <0.5mm from blade.
I do same except I always have a camber for preference, varying radii depending on how the fancy takes me, no magic formulae, which means the chip breaker is set a bit further back.
I put autosol on an MDF disc on the lathe outboard end, turning slowly. It's very fast, instant mirror finish, and I can do gouges etc on the edge of the disc.
 
But nowhere near as sharp as your planes. Just a gimmick.
Not a gimmick but not practical planing either. It's something the Japanese do in shows and competitions, with very carefully prepared planes and highly selected timber. An impressive "circus trick".

 
Last edited:
Not a gimmick but not practical planing either. It's something the Japanese do in shows and competitions, with very carefully prepared planes and highly selected timber. An impressive "circus trick".


And they do it with of all things, waterstones, and flat ones at that.
 
And they do it with of all things, waterstones, and flat ones at that.
Exactly. A long way removed from normal every-day practical woodwork.
I guess this is where the modern fashion for waterstones and flat shavings originated, not to mention camellia oil etc :LOL:
 
Last edited:
A few years ago,the BBC broadcast a programme about the making of a samurai sword and it was fascinating.One of the latter stages was sharpening the thing-it took 8 weeks. Anybody trying the same thing on the scale of a plane would find their business unprofitable or if employed,would have the foreman inviting them to a little chat.

I find a combination India stone does well for 98% of the things I do and if a piece of wood needs it,the 6000 grit waterstone comes into play.Playing tunes with frog position and cap iron location only really matters if you skip from hardwood to softwood frequently and in reality I would pick up a cheapy from a car boot sale or ebay to keep a plane for either.For about 8% of the cost of one of the "hallowed" brands.
 
You got it! Now try increasing the thickness of the shavings and adjust the distance of the chipbreaker from the edge.
When thicker shavings are required to quickly remove material, you won't risk large tear outs.
When you're doing your final pases, those fine shavings will erase any minor tear out.
The final surface will not need sanding.
 
I believe it took 8 weeks to sharpen and polish a new sword. It's a specialist trade and it costs many thousands £.
It's not like they spend 8 weeks everytime they sharpen a sword.
--
Once you set the frog so you don't cause shavings to chocke at the mouth you can forget about it.

Adjusting the chipbreaker when setting up the plane for the shavings you need to take is simply how the plane is used.
 
I have found Rob Cosman on YouTube some of the best learning resources for sharpening and setting up hand planes
 
I have found Rob Cosman on YouTube some of the best learning resources for sharpening and setting up hand planes
I'd be cautious with Cosman. He's very much a showman and could have you jumping through unnecessary hoops.
He does the silly straight-shaving trick - "how to read your shavings" etc etc! :LOL: Not too mention polishing and flattening everything in sight. Don't waste too much time on it.
Always be sceptical of "experts". :unsure:
 
Last edited:
I see Jacob's at this craic again, and as usual, being way off the mark.
He doesn't understand, or just having the rise, and I'm taking the bait.
Either way he works hard in effort to confuse folks.

There's a big difference between getting the cap to work effectively vs what Rob demonstrates,
and he doesn't hide it either, since the waters are indeed muddy on his channel.

It should be easily understood by all, (newcomers included) by now.
Ya'know it's 2012 when DW made this widely known, again!...
as some folks like above, have disputed the usefulness of having a plane which won't tear out for some strange reason, yet a premium marking gauge slipping would be catastrophic.
Perhaps they could see tearout and shoddy marking lines might become shabby chic in time perhaps.

Those same folk mentioning influenced shavings from the cap iron, being similar to scraping or whatever daftness, or whatever silly speculation about cherry picked timbers,
and suggesting to watch the most untrustworthy of folks on YT instead...
which in turn likely lead many folks to the likes of premium tooling, when the going gets tough.
That is... whatever percentage of those who can afford it.

Maybe I should try buying stock shares in the likes of those companies,
and shut me mouth instead, as there is much premium tool pushing coming from all on these here forums.

Anyway fair play to 1Will for not falling for the usual ignorant rhetoric of the ignorant joiners,
or those who hold dear their pre 2012 shenanigan planes,
as only one remaining fella was actually using the cap iron before then, and was actually posting about it on the forums, that has been Warren Mickley.

Folks can pretend to debate this, but the proof is in the shavings,
Try finding that on VHS, it's obvious either everyone else had their heads in the sand,
or skilled folks who simply didn't know, guessing Klausz for instance,
or they thought they had this down, like Blackburn for instance, who still suggests having a tight mouth at the same time.

That might work with a Norris or whatever infill panel plane with a specially fettled "wear" inside the mouth,
but it's for no reason at the same time, since a panel plane won't be chamfering small bevels,
and would lead folks to something which isn't making full use of the cap iron,
i.e not producing shavings of decent thickness, and could lead to folks being lazy with their
camber, and thus never truly finding out how effective a double iron plane can be.
 
Last edited:
do you think masters like stradivarius and chippendale cared about how the shavings looked? looking at everything through microscopes in laboratories, ooh look at that 425 year old tree best not use it because DW told me that if you don't have the cap iron set to precisely 50.4 degrees it won't work properly, they'd have got nothing done if they were alive in today's society.
 
"Nothing done" is taking the Cosman approach, and having to return constantly to the hones.

Compare that to having a cap iron set correctly, the plane will continue to achieve a tear out free
surface even when blunted to the point of having to skew the plane for it to cut.

Worth noting those same results will be apparent if using tight mouth, as with Rob's uber sharpness approach.
Anything else is making extra work for ones self.

Tom
 
You have no idea what Stradivarius or Chippendale cared about. Chippendale probably spent quite a bit of his time trying to get his dead beat customers to pay him for the work he did.
I think I've read the same thing from you or some other fellow in the past that one has to grind the cap iron at a specific angle.
The 50 degree angle is just a ball park starting point, take the damned chipbreaker to the stone, lift it and give it a steep bevel at the tip, boom! you're done. Where on earth have you seen that you have to measure the angle?
 
I've talked to David many times about this, he's never said that. If you disagree with him, refute him with something that it's actually true.

Here's his 2012 article. After 11 years you could at least have taken a look at it and actually critizied it in an honest way.

https://www.woodcentral.com/articles/index.php?page=673
why won't he come here and say it himself? seriously, why is he no longer here?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top