Size isn't everything!!

[GazPal]

It depends on how you use it and what you're using it on.

Before anyone gets the hump with the above opening lines, the primary topic is try/jointing planes and the scale of work on which you use them. Which set of criteria determines the size of handplane YOU work with?

Options open to us can be limited or wide ranging and end results can vary depending on skill set, projects and materials you work with. Other factors such as materials prep via power/shop tools also come into play, so some may find they skip past the use of fore, jack and try planes, whilst others either lack or prefer to avoid power tools altogether and head down the hand tool route using the tools they have at hand. The main factors are chosen route and end result or final destination.

When it boils down to it it doesn't really matter who made the tools we use, but how we reach/achieve our end goals.

My own choices vary widely, as they greatly depend upon the work encountered during each project. One day I'll reach for a #08 if working on something akin to a large oak door for a shooting lodge/bespoke sideboard/conference table, or a 05.1/2 / #06 for something like a saw horse, whilst the next I'll chose a #03 for the same task, but the challenge may be something like a jewellery box, or small insert for a display case.

Remembering one person's try plane could very easily be another's smoother and visa versa, which do you prefer and why?

 

[Phil Pascoe]

I suspect I do much as most people - I tend to use the sharpest one there at the time (within reason).

 

[GazPal]

I suspect I do much as most people - I tend to use the sharpest one there at the time (within reason).

IMHO a bit of an odd approach.

 

[Jelly]

I suspect I do much as most people - I tend to use the sharpest one there at the time (within reason).

IMHO a bit of an odd approach.

Yeah, I'll usually select the plane I want, then check the sharpness of the iron when I go to set it up.

For things over 5' I'll almost always use my 30" Griffiths try plane and also occasionally in small pieces which are knotty, where the momentum of a huge chunk of beech is useful.
Under 5' my Marples Jack tends to take over.

I try wherever possible to avoid cutting timber into very small parts until it's been planed square at the very least.... it's a lot easier to get consistency that way.

 

[GazPal]

I suspect I do much as most people - I tend to use the sharpest one there at the time (within reason).

IMHO a bit of an odd approach.

Yeah, I'll usually select the plane I want, then check the sharpness of the iron when I go to set it up.

For things over 5' I'll almost always use my 30" Griffiths try plane and also occasionally in small pieces which are knotty, where the momentum of a huge chunk of beech is useful.
Under 5' my Marples Jack tends to take over.

I try wherever possible to avoid cutting timber into very small parts until it's been planed square at the very least.... it's a lot easier to get consistency that way.

Agreed 100%

 

[bugbear]

For things over 5' I'll almost always use my 30" Griffiths try plane...

At the risk of being (once again) pedantic, I think at a mighty 30" that's definitely a jointer.

BugBear

 

[GazPal]

Try/trying plane and jointer are the same.

 

[Jelly]

For things over 5' I'll almost always use my 30" Griffiths try plane...

At the risk of being (once again) pedantic, I think at a mighty 30" that's definitely a jointer.

BugBear

I stand corrected!

Whilst we're naming planes by size, what's the accepted name for a No.6? I've variously heard them called foreplanes, panel planes and small jointers... I don't think it helps that people can't exactly seem to agree on what they're best used for.

 

[GazPal]

During my apprenticeship, fore plane and small try plane were terms used in tool catalogues to describe #6 sized hand planes. #5.1/2's were known as panel planes. #7's & #8's were referred to as try/jointer planes.

 

[Vann]

Whilst we're naming planes by size, what's the accepted name for a No.6? I've variously heard them called foreplanes, panel planes and small jointers....

Surely it depends on what you've got it set up as? A No.6 could be set-up for any of those uses.

For a while I used a No.5 "jack" as a smoother - tight mouth, straight iron (corners eased), etc.

Cheers, Vann.

 

[bugbear]

For things over 5' I'll almost always use my 30" Griffiths try plane...

At the risk of being (once again) pedantic, I think at a mighty 30" that's definitely a jointer.

BugBear

I stand corrected!

Whilst we're naming planes by size, what's the accepted name for a No.6? I've variously heard them called foreplanes, panel planes and small jointers... I don't think it helps that people can't exactly seem to agree on what they're best used for.

Down in the middle sizes, there's a lot of variation in nomenclature. Worse, the size really needs to be considered with respect to the work you're doing (which is rather the point of the thread). A #5 might be a jointer - if you're making jewellery boxes.

My (slightly humourous) point was that I can't actually imagine a 30" plane being anything other than a jointer.

BugBear

 

[Richard T]

I've noticed that some people call their planes after what they use them as/ have them set up for and people who sell/manufacture them call them differently.

Just for instance the plane I use as my 'mitre' was sold to me as a 'low angled smoother'.
It just depends on the pitch; -sales pitch all too often.

 

[GazPal]

Down in the middle sizes, there's a lot of variation in nomenclature. Worse, the size really needs to be considered with respect to the work you're doing (which is rather the point of the thread). A #5 might be a jointer - if you're making jewellery boxes.

My (slightly humourous) point was that I can't actually imagine a 30" plane being anything other than a jointer.

BugBear

Or possibly a giant's slim-line smoother. Although some use #07's & #08's for every aspect of their work.

Much of the reason for overlap in naming convention is the fact the intermediate plane sizes tend to see use in various roles. One man's jack plane is another's smoother and so on and so forth. Pretty much the reason behind my beginning this thread, as I thought it might be of interest to see what people use, why, how and when they use them.

So much contradiction seems to stem from the many varied individual perspective and commonly thought of conventions - a la Hayward, et al - , but perhaps the real reasons can best be uncovered by simply asking the who, what, where, when, why and how's involved.

 

[Jelly]

Down in the middle sizes, there's a lot of variation in nomenclature. Worse, the size really needs to be considered with respect to the work you're doing (which is rather the point of the thread). A #5 might be a jointer - if you're making jewellery boxes.

My (slightly humourous) point was that I can't actually imagine a 30" plane being anything other than a jointer.

BugBear

Yes, it's probably a wee bit on the big side... but there again so am I! One thing is for sure, I certainly wouldn't like to think how much it would cost to source a sufficiently sized piece of quartersawn beech to make another these days!

The whole confusion in the middle sizes is kind of unavoidable though, I've been using my No 4 for both getting the final finish on the legs & top and trying little slips cut from an off cut to make drawer sides whilst working on that purpleheart table... Ultimately defying any attempt at defining its purpose, even relative to one workpiece!

 

[J_SAMa]

It depends on how you use it and what you're using it on.

Before anyone gets the hump with the above opening lines, the primary topic is try/jointing planes and the scale of work on which you use them. Which set of criteria determines the size of handplane YOU work with?

Options open to us can be limited or wide ranging and end results can vary depending on skill set, projects and materials you work with. Other factors such as materials prep via power/shop tools also come into play, so some may find they skip past the use of fore, jack and try planes, whilst others either lack or prefer to avoid power tools altogether and head down the hand tool route using the tools they have at hand. The main factors are chosen route and end result or final destination.

When it boils down to it it doesn't really matter who made the tools we use, but how we reach/achieve our end goals.

My own choices vary widely, as they greatly depend upon the work encountered during each project. One day I'll reach for a #08 if working on something akin to a large oak door for a shooting lodge/bespoke sideboard/conference table, or a 05.1/2 / #06 for something like a saw horse, whilst the next I'll chose a #03 for the same task, but the challenge may be something like a jewellery box, or small insert for a display case.

Remembering one person's try plane could very easily be another's smoother and visa versa, which do you prefer and why?

^ Exactly why I'm buying a No. 6 instead of No. 7.

The No. 7 is overrated. Its heft is definitely a downside for someone as young as me or and has just started working with wood.

Sam

 

[GazPal]

^ Exactly why I'm buying a No. 6 instead of No. 7.

The No. 7 is overrated. Its heft is definitely a downside for someone as young as me or and has just started working with wood.

Sam

I think a #06 is a good intermediate plane as it can be used for jointing just as well as for shooting board work or roughing out and panel levelling. The additional heft found in #07's and #08's has it's plus sides as both planes cut knotty timbers as if they were clear stock, but they score massively when dealing with long and broad timbers.

 

[Jelly]

Remembering one person's try plane could very easily be another's smoother and visa versa, which do you prefer and why?

^ Exactly why I'm buying a No. 6 instead of No. 7.

The No. 7 is overrated. Its heft is definitely a downside for someone as young as me or and has just started working with wood.

Sam

I wouldn't say long planes are over-rated, if you're working on anything large then it's very hard to beat them... However I can also see that at your age that pushing 4ish kilos of cast iron about would be very tiring!


FWIW, a wooden jointer that's the size of a №7 or №8 would be significantly lighter and easier to use...

A №7 weighs in at 8⅛lbs* and a №8 at 9¾lbs, by comparison a 22" (№7 equivalent) Beech plane weighs in at a shade under 7¼lbs and a 24" (№8 equivalent*) weighs in at 7⅞lbs...

A №6 weighs 7¾lbs, which is actually half a pound more than a wooden plane of equivalent size to the №7!

Edit: During my research to find those numbers I found this plane which is narrower and lower than the woodies I based my numbers on (thus in theory should be somewhat lighter, calculating on a volumetric/density basis, approximately 5½lb), a snap at €43!

*Being that you're based in the netherlands, I did originally the kg equivalent in brackets next to the weights in lb for your convenience, but it was almost unreadable... so for reference 1kg≈2.2lb

**Kindof, the №8 also has a wider iron and sole (2⅝" compared to 2⅜"), whereas almost all woodies are built round a relatively standard 2⅜" cast steel irons

 

[Cheshirechappie]

I think the real genius of the Bailey plane design is it's versatility. The woodies and the infills have their function dictated by their mouth opening (tight for smoothing, open for roughing), but all the Bailey planes from 1 to 8 can be set up with either tight, open or somewhere between mouths. So any of the range can be set up for heavy stock removal, trying or smoothing. The only limitation is one of common sense - it would be quite possible to try up the wood for a new front door with a number 3, but maybe a bit silly. Especially if you have a number 7 to hand.

That versatility comes at a slight price, in that a Bailey plane will never be quite the equal of a tight-mouthed infill when the wood gets demanding, and a dedicated scrub plane will always shift more waste than the mouth-opening of a Bailey will allow. However, it does give the woodworker a lot of options as to how their planes are set up. If you prefer longer planes, you can have 'em. If you like lighter ones, you can have that. You can even get by with just one plane, if you're prepared to swap blades and fiddle with frog settings. No other plane design gives that versatility.

As a result of that flexibility, there will never be a single answer to the question of how to set them up. I still veer towards long ones for truing up, short ones for smoothing and something middling for rough work, though.

 

[GazPal]

Much is made of the supposedly excessive weight of the larger iron bodied planes, but it needs to be said that good stock prep is key to minimising each step taken. I think a user's body type can colour tool choice, but - having said that - I've known and worked alongside cabinetmakers who were very lightly framed and thought nothing of putting in a twelve hour shift using a #07 or #08. Technique plays a massive part in how well we're able to handle tools.

 

[bugbear]

Much is made of the supposedly excessive weight of the larger iron bodied planes, but it needs to be said that good stock prep is key to minimising each step taken. I think a user's body type can colour tool choice, but - having said that - I've known and worked alongside cabinetmakers who were very lightly framed and thought nothing of putting in a twelve hour shift using a #07 or #08. Technique plays a massive part in how well we're able to handle tools.

On a slightly different (but related) note, I saw a write up of a course taken by Mike Dunbar. The class were in awe of the speed with which he worked, but he didn't seem to be working harder than the pupils.

The answer was that due to skill and/or confidence, he was getting closer to the line at each stage than the pupils, who were (thus) leaving more material to be removed with the subsequent (finer, slower) stages.

BugBear