Quangsheng No 4

[mr grimsdale]

Any opinion on the Quangsheng No 4?
I'm actually thinking of buying one. I need a good smoother. I've got several No 4s; Stanley, Marple, Acorn, they are all OK but if the QS4 is better then I need one.

 

[woodbloke]

Any opinion on the Quangsheng No 4?
I'm actually thinking of buying one. I need a good smoother. I've got several No 4s; Stanley, Marple, Acorn, they are all OK but if the QS4 is better then I need one.

I had a look at a brand new one at Wizer's bash the other week and was seriously impressed. Not the fit and finish of a LN, but as far as 'bang for buck' I think there's little to touch them.

I reckon there's hope for you yet Jacob :lol: - Rob

 

[jimi43]

I agree Rob...it was a nice plane but strangely I prefer my Record...

I got quite put off by the shiny bits...I would ditch them...its a shame because clearly they are making some fine soles and frogs...I just don't get the trend for bling on the cap...it cheapens it.

Of course this does not affect the functionality which was rather impressive!

Jim

 

[mr grimsdale]

...

I reckon there's hope for you yet Jacob :lol: - Rob

Yes I'm thinking of coming out of the closet!
Needs must when the devil drives.
TBH I don't reckon it'll be anything but very slightly better than my Irwin/Marples No4 (ebay £12), if at all. But I would like to know.

 

[Max Power]

Buy a clifton you tight old git , if you hurry up you might you might get one of the anniversary ones :lol: :lol:

 

[Vann]

I got quite put off by the shiny bits...

I agree. I'm not considering a Quangsheng. However I'm strongly considering a Clifton 4 1/2 (I e-mailed CHT but I can't afford the extra for an anniversary jobbie). I find the least attractive thing about the Clifton is the over-polished lever cap.

I love everthing else about them: the forged iron, the 2-piece cap-iron, the rounded sides. I have a Cliffie No.3 that I'm learning to love.

Cheers, Vann.

 

[mr grimsdale]

Yebbut I'm not looking for love, I just want a good smoothing plane. If it works well it can look like a pile of dogshit as far as I'm concerned.
No convincing answers. I guess I'll stick with my Irwin/Marples.

 

[SNight]

I have got the QS No4 and it will work twice as good as your Irwin / Marples.

 

[Alf]

Well I've looked at the No.3, if that's any help. The gist will be the same, even if the size is not. But watch yourself, Jacob - you might get the bug and suddenly start wondering how a Cliffie would compare... :wink:

 

[bugbear]

...

I reckon there's hope for you yet Jacob :lol: - Rob

Yes I'm thinking of coming out of the closet!
Needs must when the devil drives.
TBH I don't reckon it'll be anything but very slightly better than my Irwin/Marples No4 (ebay £12), if at all. But I would like to know.

If you didn't perceive any benefit in the LN smoother, I can't see a QS (which is just another bedrock copy, with less "engineering" than the LN) holding any additional magic either. So probably best to save your money.

BugBear

 

[mr grimsdale]

That was when I was comparing Stanley and LN 4 1/2s.
No discernible difference on a variety of woods. Surprised me too.
I guess you are right, I'll save my money. But one lives in hope!

 

[woodbloke]

That was when I was comparing Stanley and LN 4 1/2s.
No discernible difference on a variety of woods. Surprised me too.
I guess you are right, I'll save my money. But one lives in hope!

Best thing to do Jacob would be to get along to a Bash in your locality and see if someone could bring a QS No.4 along for you to have a play with - Rob

 

[mr grimsdale]

Brian did the QS6 here which looks pretty positive, as does Alf's review.
I've ordered one from WorkshopHeaven but they aren't available immediately so I won't be reporting back for some time.
It's only got to be a bit better than what I've already got and it could pay for itself quite quickly i.e. save a lot of time with a belt sander on various difficult woods.
I don't like spending money on flash trendy gear though!

 

[mr grimsdale]

Got it. First impressions here.

 

[jimi43]

I don't get it Jacob.

That thread is 90% abuse and 10% confusion.

Why not post a complete analysis here with tests on the extremes of wood that you purchased it for.

I am also confused by the comments on thick blades. I think it is generally accepted and certainly is by me, that the thicker blade will perform better because of less chatter...the same goes for the chip breaker.

I also disagree totally with your comments about the SS on Record planes. For me there is no discernable difference to the stock cap and certainly, when sharpening...the whole process if far faster.

I am not sure where you are going with this "review" but rather than join the ever increasing band of confused...I invite you to clarify.

Cheers

Jim

 

[big soft moose]

Another passing thought. This plane looks very neat and practical, no excessive brass, bling, hand-done details, polish. Brown handles. Neat, well finished but utilitarian.
Visually has much in common with Crown tools which are also very practical, well made, lowish price.
In fact this is the plane which should be being made, in Sheffield, instead of the OTT Clifton range.
C'mon Clifton - we don't want fancy goods; we want good practical tools, made in Sheffield!

help me - i'm starting to agree with mr grim , is there a treatment or am i doomed.... :lol:

Those were pretty much exactly my thoughts on the QS6 ive got - this is what uk manufacurers ought to be building , and while okay labour costs more in the uk on the other hand goods made here dont have to be shipped halfway acroos the world.

if clifton dropped the fancy twiddly bits and made good honest planes like the QS appears to be they could get their prices down to a point where they'd be a realistic buy british competitor for the QS market

 

[mr grimsdale]

...
That thread is 90% abuse and 10% confusion.

Yeah that's how it is over there :lol:

Why not post a complete analysis here with tests on the extremes of wood that you purchased it for.

I haven't got all day I'm trying to do some woodwork

I am also confused by the comments on thick blades. .....

Thin blades are easier to hone and work well thanks to the Bailey design. I'm into freehand honing + no grinding.

...
I am not sure where you are going with this "review" ....
Jim

Well nowhere really :shock: take it or leave it.
NB the 'review' such as it is, is at the end of the thread. The rest is all abuse and confusion.

 

[jimi43]

Ok perhaps I should be more specific.

This post is yours which, I for one would like to read if it were another opinion on the QS in general...I am teetering on the edge so far...

I read it as if it were going to be a review...not ending in a link to another forum where, to be honest, there was little point in reading anything.

I guess my comment is...I was expecting a review...all be it informal, that was someone else's opinion.

Tell me if I am right and I will look forward to reading it along with all the other personal views. If not...then by all means go use it mate...and I will hit the "don't watch this thread" button as I have no interest in reading abusive tittle tattle...I get enough of that at work! :wink:

Jim

 

[mr grimsdale]

It's quite safe to join in over there you know. It's not like Facebook - which gives you syphilis by all accounts.

 

[big soft moose]

It's quite safe to join in over there you know. It's not like Facebook - which gives you syphilis by all accounts.

why would we want to do that - we can get involved in slanging matches and pointless arguments right here :lol: