Replacement Plane Irons.
- Thread starter woodbrains
- Start date
Help Support UKworkshop.co.uk:
Jacob
New Luddism. Awake and resist!
It'll work as a smoother/scraper but will need sharpening every few minutes. The LV does it better and keeps an edge longer.nanowire":2xfyfgx6 said:
My recent experiment with clifton cap on 4½ thin blade seems good so far and keeps an edge better than the back bevel thing. It's cutting more than scraping, which makes the difference I guess
woodbrains
Established Member
nanowire":2o6sdkkq said:
Hi,
It is easy to remove the back bevel if you don't like it, so give it a try. Hone a 25 deg primary as usual and just ligtly hone an edge at about 5 or 10 deg on the back. Only about 1/2 to 1 mm is needed otherwise the cap iron will not fit correctly, and you will find it difficult to adjust the plane. It doesnt take long to re hone after that, just alternate from one side then the other each time it needs doing, so maintaining a very short back bevel. Interchangeble irons are a good way to go, if you dont have 2 smoothers.
Regarding being a scraping action, it technically isn't as you would have to go to a much higher EP for that. Many infills of old were available with higher pitches, York pitch (50 deg) was a favorite and they were still planes all the same. We are just trying to emulate the same here. if it gets you out of a difficult spot, then don't question the technical reasons, just enjoy the fact that it works.
Mike.
woodbrains
Established Member
bugbear":1gqui6yt said:
Hello,
Thanks for the links, they seem like very thorough tests and I am wading through the info. It seems that LN A2 blades were actually more fragile than O1 with poorer edge retention, which is a surprise. (Not tried one myself) But Hock A2 showed none of the defects (Have one of those) Also, Clifton aside getting a scathing comment about the surface finish when new, seems to be no better than other carbon blades in terms of wear, but remakably, continued to perform better, due to the irons THICKNESS. It also seems that sharpening media has a marked effect on specific blades performance. Some got sharper with media that others did not, if you follow. i.e. some blades got a better edge with Chrome Oxide when others better with diamond paste and poorer results when reversed. Thought provoking stuff.
Mike.
Cheshirechappie
Established Member
Righty-ho then, Bugbear, following your curt instruction at 9.03am, I have re-read said thread. I probably didn't read the links before because they referred to 'infill planes', and thought it might not be directly relevant to Bailey-type planes.
Nonetheless, there is some interesting stuff in there. I was surprised how close in performance the O1 and A2 irons were, given the hype in the woodworking media, and as Woodbrains said earlier, the Clifton iron seemed to doing quite well enough to continue work when the tester ceased testing it.
The conclusion seems to be that M2 HSS lasts longest, but needs diamond lapping to create a fine enough edge for woodworking to start with. Maybe with the ready availability of diamond honing stones in recent times, it's time for HSS to make the transition from metal-cutting to wood-shaving. (It probably won't be long before someone is doing comparative tests of M2 and M42 Cobalt-bearing HSS!)
Anybody got any Bailey-type planes with High Speed Steel irons?
Nonetheless, there is some interesting stuff in there. I was surprised how close in performance the O1 and A2 irons were, given the hype in the woodworking media, and as Woodbrains said earlier, the Clifton iron seemed to doing quite well enough to continue work when the tester ceased testing it.
The conclusion seems to be that M2 HSS lasts longest, but needs diamond lapping to create a fine enough edge for woodworking to start with. Maybe with the ready availability of diamond honing stones in recent times, it's time for HSS to make the transition from metal-cutting to wood-shaving. (It probably won't be long before someone is doing comparative tests of M2 and M42 Cobalt-bearing HSS!)
Anybody got any Bailey-type planes with High Speed Steel irons?
Jacob
New Luddism. Awake and resist!
TBH I thought those tests were verging on the bonkers.
The only meaningful test is on the shop floor (or bench).
Though this isn't easy - you can't plane the same piece of wood twice.
I've managed to plane a whole table top without any tear out at all. Moderately difficult wood. Mainly the 4½ plus Clifton cap, but back up from the Veritas la bu smoother. They are very different mainly due to width and camber, the Veritas having the steeper camber giving narrower but deeper cut. This makes them sort of incompatible as they leave such a different footprints.
Current theory is that I ought to upgrade a 4 and a 3 with clifton cap irons. Given the same camber they'd work as a team of three with progressively smaller footprints. It's the surface finish I'm after, not the flattening or levelling.
Then if I ebay the LV that'd pay for all the bits and a night out too! No brainer; bye bye LV, hello bits from Sheffield!
What's really good about the Record + cliffy cap iron, is the very rapid blade extraction and replacement for frequent quick honings - very necessary with smoothing. Clunk click and it's out. Click clunk and it's back. Unless you are Rob of course, then there would be a short intermission while he scrabbled about on the floor looking for it!
The LV is a right faff in comparison - no lever, knurled knob instead, the adjuster comes up with the blade and has to be separated, the blade is thick and takes longer to hone, putting it back is the same faff in reverse, but it keeps an edge a bit longer.
The only meaningful test is on the shop floor (or bench).
Though this isn't easy - you can't plane the same piece of wood twice.
I've managed to plane a whole table top without any tear out at all. Moderately difficult wood. Mainly the 4½ plus Clifton cap, but back up from the Veritas la bu smoother. They are very different mainly due to width and camber, the Veritas having the steeper camber giving narrower but deeper cut. This makes them sort of incompatible as they leave such a different footprints.
Current theory is that I ought to upgrade a 4 and a 3 with clifton cap irons. Given the same camber they'd work as a team of three with progressively smaller footprints. It's the surface finish I'm after, not the flattening or levelling.
Then if I ebay the LV that'd pay for all the bits and a night out too! No brainer; bye bye LV, hello bits from Sheffield!
What's really good about the Record + cliffy cap iron, is the very rapid blade extraction and replacement for frequent quick honings - very necessary with smoothing. Clunk click and it's out. Click clunk and it's back. Unless you are Rob of course, then there would be a short intermission while he scrabbled about on the floor looking for it!
The LV is a right faff in comparison - no lever, knurled knob instead, the adjuster comes up with the blade and has to be separated, the blade is thick and takes longer to hone, putting it back is the same faff in reverse, but it keeps an edge a bit longer.
woodbrains
Established Member
Jacob":30bs09zj said:
Hi,
In truth the tests are very academic and the best test is using the things. However, I can't fault the testers for being as objective as they have been and it does give some weight to some of the things that we find out in our more subjective testing/experience. Otherwise, we will all have opinions that can never be verified with any certainty and these forums might as well be on metaphysics for all the good the knowledge is worth. I'm glad some people have the time and patience to do such things.
I'm glad you are liking the Clifton cap irons. The veritas BU smoother is not necessarily the best tool for smoothing cranky grain, as supplied from the factory though. The firm blade seating and thick iron will help lots, but a low angle and 25-30 blade bevel gives an EP not optimal for wild stuff. (I'm assuming you are still using the stock blade and grind) Try increasing the honing angle a bit at a time 'til the tearout is reduced but the effort needed to push the plane is not too great, then you might like the thing better. I guess about 40deg-45deg will do the trick, but raise it up gradually until it does what you need.
Mike.
Jacob
New Luddism. Awake and resist!
I've been honing at about 45º and have cambered it, perhaps too much. At the mo it cuts like a super scrub plane i.e. perfectly but with narrow, relatively deep peelings. I have to admit - it goes where all the others fail, but I use it only in reserve as necessary, because I don't like it somehow. Perhaps because the adjustment is so ineffective and blade removal process so fiddly. It hones OK freehand though. I thought the A2 steel would be difficult, but it isn't.woodbrains":2j6apvrp said:
And it's a lot of money locked up in a stupid plane!
Gerard Scanlan
Established Member
I am pleased to read that experienced woodworkers are discovering what a difference the two piece clifton cap is making to the performance of their planes. I was astonished at the improvement it made to my plane, but was open to the idea that it might just be me that was easily surprised. 
It is great that someone went to all the bother and expense of testing plane blades but as in all tests there are always comprises. The blade that scores best in a test may fail on the next few strokes, one that performs a little less well may go one twice as long. A blade that goes blunt fairly quickly may sharpen up really quickly and give the best cut. So it is perfectly correct to say if a woodworker who planes wood all day long is in favour of a particular blade he is unlikely to be wrong for the work he is doing.
It is great that someone went to all the bother and expense of testing plane blades but as in all tests there are always comprises. The blade that scores best in a test may fail on the next few strokes, one that performs a little less well may go one twice as long. A blade that goes blunt fairly quickly may sharpen up really quickly and give the best cut. So it is perfectly correct to say if a woodworker who planes wood all day long is in favour of a particular blade he is unlikely to be wrong for the work he is doing.
bugbear
Established Member
Jacob":3u6py1ha said:
Doesn't sound correctly tuned for smoothing to me. I suggest widening (shallowing, is that a word) the camber,
BugBear
woodbrains
Established Member
I agree; the camber should only be slight--just enough to prevent track marks, but ideally the whole width of the blade (or a little less, it is hard to hit that ideal) should make a shaving, that gets thinner towards the edges. I think for a smoother, this should be less than a thou difference from centre to edges as the depth of cut is only likely to be a thou or two. Obviously I don't expect anyone to measure this amount, but it is a good idea to have in your head when honing a camber, as a subjective guide. Typically, it will only take about 3 strokes on the finishing stone, with a little extra pressure exerted towards each edge, to give the desired camber. This is using waterstones,which cut relatvely quickly, oilstones will take longer, you will have to gauge that for yourself.bugbear":1m4hjddu said:
If you really don't get on with the BU smoother, then I'm just sorry you didn't try the heavier cap irons sooner, it would have saved you some hassle.
Mike.
Jacob
New Luddism. Awake and resist!
There is no "correct" tuning.bugbear":11gfys3g said:
Mike Wingate
Established Member
I am very impressed with the 50 degree blade in my QS LA jack plane for dealing with awkward grain.
bugbear
Established Member
Jacob":1tu8y088 said:
A wider camber would still help, correct or not. Try it!
BugBear
mtr1
Established Member
I like the QS T10 iron I have in my QS jack, holds an edge really well. I liked it so much I bought one for my record No 4 smoother, the record get picked up more than the LN No 4 with its crappy A2 blade that just crumbles if you wave it in front of timber. Might put the QS iron in the LN...
Never tried one of the two piece cap irons, they must be good if Jacob likes them, are they really that good?
Never tried one of the two piece cap irons, they must be good if Jacob likes them, are they really that good?
jimi43
Established Member
mtr1":3888mggz said:
In my opinion too...the Clifton caps are really that good....but I have said that all along.....but it's only an opinion and I certainly wouldn't want to force that opinion. It's what works for you. I also hear that the QS one piece cap irons which are substantially thicker are also great upgrades to the standard setup though I have yet to try one.
I have however tried the T10 QS iron in my panel infill and that's where it is going to live from now on...it's blinkin' marvellous. My experience of A2 has been less than happy...
Jim
woodbrains
Established Member
Hi,
The compartive blade testing links that Bugbear posted seem to direct that LN A2 blades are not up to much and LV are not significantly different, which would verify what the last few posts seem to be saying. In brief, the testers conclude that the claim that they hold their edge longer and better withstand abasive materials is not borne out, the edges are easily chipped in use, even when increasing the bevel angle when sharpening. However, they also conclude that Ron Hock's A2 cryo irons do in fact show improvements over O1 steel. I have a Hock iron in my 05 jack and one in a block plane and always thought them to be worthwhile, so it is obvious there are differences in the way these steels are produced. Does LN and Veritas cryogenically treat their irons? Maybe this is the determining factor.
Have a QS iron in a smoother for the last few days. Seems a little harder than the Clifton's for example as takes a little longer to sharpen. So far seems to be holding up well, but too soon to say for sure, Will know in a few more days I think. They are very good quality in terms of factory finish, though. I can't think of any better that I have used, though Veritas will probably be at least as good, judging by the scraper plane and shoulder plane I have of theirs.
Mike.
The compartive blade testing links that Bugbear posted seem to direct that LN A2 blades are not up to much and LV are not significantly different, which would verify what the last few posts seem to be saying. In brief, the testers conclude that the claim that they hold their edge longer and better withstand abasive materials is not borne out, the edges are easily chipped in use, even when increasing the bevel angle when sharpening. However, they also conclude that Ron Hock's A2 cryo irons do in fact show improvements over O1 steel. I have a Hock iron in my 05 jack and one in a block plane and always thought them to be worthwhile, so it is obvious there are differences in the way these steels are produced. Does LN and Veritas cryogenically treat their irons? Maybe this is the determining factor.
Have a QS iron in a smoother for the last few days. Seems a little harder than the Clifton's for example as takes a little longer to sharpen. So far seems to be holding up well, but too soon to say for sure, Will know in a few more days I think. They are very good quality in terms of factory finish, though. I can't think of any better that I have used, though Veritas will probably be at least as good, judging by the scraper plane and shoulder plane I have of theirs.
Mike.
Paul Chapman
Established Member
Karl":3l37sg43 said:
+1
Cheers :wink:
Paul
