scrub plane

[lurcher]

i need a little advise i want to make a scrub plane from a no 4 record
has anyone done this and if so how much did you open up the mouth .
or can you open the mouth to much . i had a great wooden scrub plane had the front horn handle and a nice blade i think it went to the auction with some old tools so as i would like to go as much unplugged as possible the need for a new scrub plane has arisen .

 

[J_SAMa]

Camber, like alot of camber on that blade is what you need.
Fact is one can never make a metal "scrub plane", the closest you can get is a fore/jack.
I just backed the frog to a point where it forms one plane (as in geometric plane) with the little bit of metal just under the frog (whadya call it anyway).
Might as well make yourself another wooden one if you're able
Sam

 

[Vann]

...the little bit of metal just under the frog (whadya call it anyway).

The back of the mouth.

Cheers, Vann.

 

[tobytools]

I haven't done this with a 4 but wouldn't an aggressive camber be enough. Opening the mouth might be needed depending on what iron and chip breaker you have.
TT

 

[lurcher]

i have lots of planes to choose from 3 record no 4s
4 marples no 4s
3 stanley no 42
also 2x no6
1xno 7
2 x5.1/2
1 x no5
i am also going to camber a spare blade to fit my 5.1/2 to no 7
i cant justify buying a new plane for this job i just got rid of my thicknesser so its all by hand now next to go is the 2 routers and tables both elu tools i dont use them so they can go to

 

[tobytools]

Convert the 5 1/2 iron and you can use it on several planes
TT

 

[Cheshirechappie]

I've just checked the mouth width on my Record No.4 with the frog right back level with the back of the mouth, and with the original iron the mouth is (near enough) 3/32" wide. Given that a 1/16" camber is probably enough (you'd need to be Popeye to push a 2" blade chewing a shaving much thicker than that in hardwoods!) I'd say the mouth is probably just about OK unopened. That said, mine's a 1980s Record; older planes may have tighter mouths.

It might be worth cambering a spare iron and giving it a try with the plane otherwise unaltered. The problem with filing the mouth wider is that it ruins the plane for anything else, so if it works satisfactorily without filing the mouth out, you've always got the option of resetting the plane for finer work if needs be.

A final thought - as you've several planes to choose from, it may be worth checking which has the widest mouth, and using that as the scrub. They're bound to vary a bit - the extra 1/32" on existing mouth width could make the choice easy.

 

[Vann]

I've just checked the mouth width on my Record No.4 ... That said, mine's a 1980s Record; older planes may have tighter mouths..

My early record planes (pre-1960) tend to have tight mouths, in the 4.40mm to 4.70mm range (measured parallel to the sole). While my Record-Marples SP4 planes (post 1995) are in the 6.15mm to 6.35mm range.

Similarly my type #6 USA Stanley No.4 mouth is just 4.25mm wide, while my 1973 UK Stanley No.4 has a 5.20mm mouth.

Marples, WS, Rapier all seem to have mouths over 5.5mm. My Acorn (Stanley era) has a 6.6mm mouth.

I'm loath to file the mouth on a plane - even if it has no collector value. When there are so many lesser quality planes around with wide mouths available, why butcher/modify a good one?

The problem with filing the mouth wider is that it ruins the plane for anything else, so if it works satisfactorily without filing the mouth out, you've always got the option of resetting the plane for finer work if needs be.

A final thought - as you've several planes to choose from, it may be worth checking which has the widest mouth, and using that as the scrub.

Hear, hear.

Cheers, Vann.

 

[Cheshirechappie]

Just to clarify something, the measurement of mouth width I quoted above was made with the plane assembled, and the blade advanced to it's cutting position. The 3/32" dimension is that from the cutting edge of the blade to the front edge of the mouth; in other words, it's the gap available for a shaving to pass through as the plane cuts. It's not the width of the machined slot in the plane's sole - that's 1/4" on mine, so about the same dimension that Vann quoted for his Marples/Record SP4.

 

[J_SAMa]

subtleties-of-shaving-deflection-t73781.html
Just gonna quote myself here:
"I set the mouth tight with my thick replacement blade in the plane. When I have to take a deeper cut, I switch in the thinner original blade, which opens the mouth up again. So no, I don't really have to move the frog when changing the cutting depth. It is really just a one-time job"

And that's how I use the same plane as both a jack and a smoother.

 

[Cheshirechappie]

As a further note of interest (or maybe not!) I've just checked the mouth of the 1980s Record 05 1/2 jack I don't use since I replaced it with a Lie-Nielsen in the mid 1990s. The mouth slot in the bed casting is 3/16" wide (which accords neatly with the 4.7mm Vann quoted for some of his vintage Records).

Now, the mouth slot in the 1980s Record Marples 04 smoother I quoted above is 1/4". Both planes were made at roughly the same time (give or take a year or two).

Why on earth would you make the mouths of your smoothing planes WIDER that your jack planes? :shock:

(The other thing I'd forgotten is how poor the machined finish is on the sole and sides of the 05 1/2 plane. It's flat and straight enough, but looks like it was machined with an angle grinder. )

 

[MMUK]

(The other thing I'd forgotten is how poor the machined finish is on the sole and sides of the 05 1/2 plane. It's flat and straight enough, but looks like it was machined with an angle grinder. )

If it needs a good home let me know :wink: