[Q] Fettling a Stanley No. 271 mini router plane

[Fromey]

Today I bought a nice |Stanley No. 271 mini router plane from Bristol Design. It's in good nick and has all its shiny nickel (?) plating. I note that the sole clearly shows the casting or brief machining marks from its original manufacture. Is it necessary with one of these to flatten and smooth the sole? I suspect it's not and I'd prefer to maintain the nickel anti-corrosive coating.

 

[Peter Sefton]

If the sole is not flat then lapping will improve its performance, but as you say it might just be worth leaving it original.

 

[MIGNAL]

Depends if it rocks about a bit on the sole. If not then I doubt that flattening it will make any difference.

 

[Phil Pascoe]

If a micron or two worries you , flatten it.

 

[Racers]

Hi,
I would leave it alone, you will wear the nickle off. All the ones I have seen have machining marks on the sole.
If you get a record/preston the sole id bare and you can lap it but I don't think it will make much difference in the performance.

Pete

 

[bugbear]

Hi,
I would leave it alone, you will wear the nickle off. All the ones I have seen have machining marks on the sole.
If you get a record/preston the sole id bare and you can lap it but I don't think it will make much difference in the performance.

Pete

Seconded - unless it actually is so convex it can rock and wobble, which I doubt.

The Record #722 is nicer, IMHO, due to its super clever blade retaining mechanism, nicked (bought, actually) from Preston.

BugBear

 

[Fromey]

Thanks for your feedback. I haven't as yet tested it for flatness. I was mainly wondering if a flattened and slightly polished sole would help its movement over wood, but I suppose it's so small a surface area that it would be negligible.

Bristol Design also had a Record #722 but the japanning was heavily chipped and I noticed that the other hole, apparently for the blade (?), didn't have a hole for a screw so I was perplexed as to its purpose. In addition, the blade had a circular shaft whereas the Stanley has a groove for better registering with the screw. Bugbear, the "super clever blade retaining mechanism", is that where you can simply turn the blade around backwards? What's the purpose of the second hole in the Record plane if you can't actually fix the blade or a depth stop into it?

 

[bugbear]

Thanks for your feedback. I haven't as yet tested it for flatness. I was mainly wondering if a flattened and slightly polished sole would help its movement over wood, but I suppose it's so small a surface area that it would be negligible.

Bristol Design also had a Record #722 but the japanning was heavily chipped and I noticed that the other hole, apparently for the blade (?), didn't have a hole for a screw so I was perplexed as to its purpose. In addition, the blade had a circular shaft whereas the Stanley has a groove for better registering with the screw. Bugbear, the "super clever blade retaining mechanism", is that where you can simply turn the blade around backwards? What's the purpose of the second hole in the Record plane if you can't actually fix the blade or a depth stop into it?

http://web.archive.org/web/200812241552 ... d.html#722

BugBear

 

[Racers]

Hi, Fromey

The adjuster mechanism is a rod that passes through the two holes with cutouts matching the holes for the cutter in, this is pulled by the nut clamping the blade in place.
So only one adjuster is needed for the two positions.

Pete

Edit, must type faster

 

[Fromey]

Thanks! Ingenious. I wish I had had Internet access while I was in the shop!