Really stupid question about hand planes.

[Cheshirechappie]

Why call us "shaving-measurers" then, we have enough to contend with from Jacob, don't need some one else stiring things up.

Pete

If it gave offence, I apologise unreservedly - but there was no intention to stir things up or upset anybody.

However, if you want to know how well a plane is performing, measure the workpiece, not the waste. As I tried to point out, in removing the shaving, you distort it considerably, so the fibres will have been displaced relative to one another, and therefore it may well not be the same thickness as the amount removed from the workpiece.

 

[Jacob]

Why call us "shaving-measurers" then, we have enough to contend with from Jacob, don't need some one else stiring things up.

Pete

More the merrier IMHO. There is a loads of baloney talked about woodwork and the more sceptics and doubting Toms the better, right or wrong! And it's more interesting to give these ideas a good going over.
There's such a reverential attitude to the holy texts and the the high priests. Sometimes comical - think of all those little chaps struggling with huge no7 planes because of a throwaway remark from Alan Peters. :lol: Or the deadly seriousness about the latest bevel angles being handed down from the pulpit.

PS and you are spot on Cheshirechappie, no need to apologise!

I think this book is open at the page on DT bevels: