Quangsheng No 6 Test

[Modernist]

The fruits of my momentary weakness arrived today, packed to the nines as is customary. Fortunately being a 6 the wooden box potentially has some uses but the goods were certainly well protected for their journey.

Having wiped off the protective goo I thought I'd test the oft mentioned "out of the box" theory and set about a piece of Brazilan Mahogany which was still on the bench after a species check with Mr Grim (he's human :lol: ).

To my surprise it was fine producing a stream of even shavings and a satisfying hiss. As with the recent block plane the new grinding did impart a certain directional pull but I am sure this will quickly wear off.

The tote was the customary grasswood or whatever it's called but, whilst not in the patina'd cherry class, is quite serviceable. It's tempting to make some new in cherry for the full experience.

I next checked for squareness and quality of grinding. Appearance was excellent and grinding fine and I could see no error in the squareness around the mouth but a slight slick of light squeezed under one side of the square at the rear.

I cleaned up the tables on the Hammer and tried the plane against this surface. Although I could detect no rocking I could just ease a 3 thou feeler under the back corner - not the end of the world. I than sat down with a cup of tea to consider my purchase. Finishing the tea I tried it again and was delighted to note that it was now as flat as I could measure.
I tried the saw table and different positions in case the tables were a bit out but couldn't get a 3 thou feeler under anywhere. (I,.d snapped my 1 1/2 thou blade so could test for that.

I can only put this down to the fact that the plane was freezing when unpacked and had warmed up to room temperature for the second test. I think that'll do for me - well done Quangsheng and WSH.

The bedrock frog adjustment was tested and worked smoothly, closing the mouth up to zero if required. Despite the comments to the contrary I remain a believer in just cleaning up the front surface of the mouth. It can't do any harm can it?

Finally we come to the blade adjustment which was the only critical point about the block plane. It works smoothly enough but there are a full 1 1/2 turns between motion fore and back.

I don't think this is any big deal. After all there is 3/4 of a turn on my LN 4 1/2 and just how much of our lives do we spend spinning the adjuster to and fro?

I have not fully prepared the blade/cap iron yet but a quick touch on the stone indicates the steel is similar to that of the block plane i.e. quite easy to hone and taking a fine edge quite quickly. Edge holding will have to be establish on a more long term test so I will report back in due course.

Once again this is a quality tool, not in the big 3 class, but close enough to give their marketing departments a major headache. Like others I was suprised by the quality at this price level and have no reservations in recommending it to others. Not having a 5 1/2 I am intending to use the 6 as a general joinery plane and I believe the extra length and weight will prove to be an advantage.

 

[big soft moose]

nice review brian - that's good enough for me and i'll be ordering one for myself asap.

 

[Mr Ed]

A useful review Brian. If I needed a plane this size (which I don't) I would consider these - at nearly a third of the price of a L-N with apparently similar performance they would have to be considered. That said I love my L-N 5 1/2 and I can't see this generating quite the same satisfaction of ownership, but thats probably me being a snob.

Ed

 

[Green]

Are these the same as the ones Rutlands and Tilgear sell?

Nice campaign

 

[big soft moose]

Are these the same as the ones Rutlands and Tilgear sell?

Nice campaign

no - the rutlands cheaper plane brands are anant and dakota - both of which are rubbish, while the cheaper ones on tilgear are brook (about which i know nothing but at that price they aren't likely to be any good) and stanley which are largely thought to be rubbish (these days)

as far as i know workshop heaven are the sole importer of quasheng planes

 

[wizer]

as far as i know workshop heaven are the sole importer of quasheng planes

No there are other importers. The name of who escapes me now.

 

[big soft moose]

as far as i know workshop heaven are the sole importer of quasheng planes

No there are other importers. The name of who escapes me now.

I can't find anyone else via google

that said they look very similar to the woodriver planes that woodcraft sell - but they are usa based and although the price is less the shipping would probably equalise it

 

[wizer]

Matthew is the only person calling them by their manufacturers name. The Wood River planes are indeed QS. But we have a UK based internet site selling them but I can't find the link now.

 

[big soft moose]

Matthew is the only person calling them by their manufacturers name. The Wood River planes are indeed QS. But we have a UK based internet site selling them but I can't find the link now.

I'll take your word for it , but its academic as i'd rather trade with matthew than some unknown internet site.

 

[Green]

The Tilgear planes I am talking about were branded 'Grant'. They caused a bit of a stir when they were advertised. Tilgear no longer stock them.

Rutlands A1 American #6 can be seen here:

http://tinyurl.com/yzjt6yk

There will be others selling them no doubt.

 

[Modernist]

I'd beware of the Anant from Rutlands. I briefly owned an Anant Bull Nose and the sole was about 3 deg out of square with the sides. I concluded that they had simply been linished freehand in manufacture.

To be fair to Rutlands they exchanged it, with cash adjustment :? for a Veritas which is one of the finest planes I have ever experienced. The design features and quality of manufacture are outstanding.

These Quangshengs are not at that level but, in terms of usability, they are not so far behind. The differences are tolerable and can be improved if desired. The fundamentals of bedrock design, materials, quality of machining and general fit are excellent and, even supposing you preferred a different blade, you could buy one and still have change in 3 figures from the competition.

At this level personal preference plays a big part in the choice. I love the quality of LN manufacture although there is little innovative in the designs. Veritas have got the innovation with bells on, the skew rebate is another gem, but the bench planes don't appeal to me aesthetically. Clifton are superb and probably have the best blades and tolerances but, to me they have an old fashioned air, probably as a result of to much Preston in them. Quansheng are designed for the thicker blades from he outset (why faff around externding Y levers) and with good grinding and the aforementioned bedrock design have taken advantage of the "heirloom" bulls**t and overpricing to stake a claim to serious consideration. Stanley, who should know better, have demonstrated a masterclass in how to lose a dominant market position and frankly deserve to fail with the appalling quality and misguided design features of their latest range. Their current offering and campaign has all the hallmarks of being controlled by accountants and marketing departments with the experience and technical expertise having been lost or ignored.

 

[big soft moose]

I'd beware of the Anant from Rutlands. I briefly owned an Anant Bull Nose and the sole was about 3 deg out of square with the sides. I concluded that they had simply been linished freehand in manufacture.

To be fair to Rutlands they exchanged it, with cash adjustment :? for a Veritas which is one of the finest planes I have ever experienced. The design features and quality of manufacture are outstanding.

i'm not certain but i think the annants are the same planes as the ones axminster sell as their own brand - we currently have a 4 and a 6 at work and they are nasty , not only are the soles out of square but they also feel cheap in the hand and the edges of the castings werent particularly smooth until we rubbed them down (unusually poor for axminster - we bought them before i'd learnt enough about planes to realise how poor they were)

these are the planes i am replacing with cliftons as per the other thread - we will keep the cheap and nasty for use in the field adjusting signs to fit mortices, smoothing down damaged gate rails etc which is about all they are fit for.

 

[OPJ]

Another good review. I don't see the adjuster problem as anything really worth worrying about when all the other parts seem to work fine. How often do you honestly need the super-fine adjustment for making shavings so thin you can read newspaper through them!! I think it will be interesting to see or hear whether any distortion of the sole takes place over the next year or two (I believe that's a common problem with modern Stanley and Record planes)...

Today, I got my hands on the rebate block plane (thanks to Mark and Tom ) and that also has a considerable weight to it. I've only spent about an hour playing with it so far but already, I'm quite impressed. Indeed, the blade does seem to take a sharp edge well and, despite what wizer said the other day :wink:, I've found it is capable of taking those ridiculously-thin shavings (if you have a little patience with the adjustment). I'll need more time with it though, before I can give a more definitive verdict and will attempt to make a raised and fielded panel over the weekend (...once I've cleaned all the rust off my planer!! :x).

 

[wizer]

Glad it finally got to you Olly. My comments are really that of an inexperienced hand tool user, so I'm interested to hear how the various people review it. The beauty of a passaround I guess. Tho I did find the adjuster a little annoying, but at this price, it's hardly worth mentioning. I'd had my eye on a Clifton 5 1/2 am sorely tempted (or just sore at the moment ) by this no.6

 

[Modernist]

Rutlands A1 American #6 can be seen here:

I looked at that and the casting and fittings do look very similar although the lever cap looks poorly plated. The handles are stated as Bubinga but look like the common "grass" type to me.

I notice they've knocked a tenner off it!

 

[big soft moose]

Rutlands A1 American #6 can be seen here:

I looked at that and the casting and fittings do look very similar although the lever cap looks poorly plated. The handles are stated as Bubinga but look like the common "grass" type to me.

I notice they've knocked a tenner off it!

Even assuming they are the same, I'd rather pay the extra tenner and trade with a supplier who has an excellent customer service record like matthew than save it and trade with rutlands

 

[Alf]

Yup, me too.

Brian, thanks for your thoughts on the #6. The one thing I was really wondering about concerning these planes was whether they could keep the standard consistent across multiple units or whether you had to get lucky, but it seems they have. The adjuster does seem to be the weakest point though, not surprisingly.

i'm not certain but i think the annants are the same planes as the ones axminster sell as their own brand

A few years ago the Axminster 'workshop' block plane I got was a Groz - and just about as gross as you describe. Not that the Anants are much better, but they do have the allure of making the odd model or two that no one else does. Blades are bloody awful though.

How often do you honestly need the super-fine adjustment for making shavings so thin you can read newspaper through them!!

With a smoother? Quite a lot, I find. But more importantly it's a useful benchmark that a plane's capable of taking the exact thickness, or rather thinness, of shaving you want. Any old chisel can take thick shavings. And everyone understands fluffy shavings; even non-woodworkers get it.

Cheers, Alf

 

[andy king]

Hi Wizer,

The website you may be thinking of is this one: http://www.hassophandtools.co.uk/acatalog/planes.html
I saw them at the Harrogate show and had a standard low angle block and a no4 smoother sent in for review.
The guy there was adamant that they were Japanese, and it may be that he was importing from Japan and thought it to be the case. The boxes actually state 'made in Asia'.
I've since been in touch with Matthew who has confirmed they are from the same Quangsheng factory.
Both the planes I have looked at (and I have a couple of others here from Matthew) are of superb quality. Why Stanley, with their 'premium plane' launch couldn't achieve this level and consistency with their heritage and background is beyond me.
As Brian states, the backlash on the bench plane is maybe a weak point, but not for me - the smoother has about 2 full turns to mave between advance and retract, but the wheel runs very freely and takes a fraction of a second.
I would say the weakest point, fo me anyway, is the lateral lever.
Old planes had riveted grips at the top, (or screwed on the LN) where as the one I have here has a twisted lever, much the same as the ones used on planes nowadays. It doesn't affect the ability to do a fantastic job, but is a weakpoint from a cosmetic point of view.
For me, these planes are superb quality and a bargain.
I wouldn't hesitate to recommend them to anyone.

cheers,
Andy

 

[wizer]

Thanks Andy, that's not actually who I was thinking of. It was a site selling mostly building stuff IIRC. But still backs up my point that they're available from other retailers. I think the difference is that Matthew has been very open about the source and given us (the people) a chance for a first hand review.

 

[andy king]

Ah right, you probably mean this one: http://www.toolman.co.uk/
When I saw them at Harrogate, the guy who supplied it said he would rather we used the 'Hassops' website for some reason - I recall him saying the 'Toolman' site was more for general trades and that he had a lot of plastering type stuff he sold through it.
It doesn't look like it when you look at the site though!

cheers,
Andy