Smoothing plane

[Zag73]

Hi

I’m mulling the idea of getting a smoothing plane. I love the veritas planes and have narrowed down my choice to a veritas low angle smoother and a veritas bevel up smoother? Has anybody any experience of these two planes? Is one better than the other? I have a veritas Jack plane. Would a smoother do significantly more than the Jack? For context , I’m a hobbyist hybrid woodworker.

Thanks in advance.

 

[Hornbeam]

There will always be a cross over in what different size planes will do . I would go for the bevel up smoother and set it up with a fine mouth opening and tight cap iron. You can then set your jack up as a jack plane
See this thread for lots of views on bevel up vs bevel down
https://www.ukworkshop.co.uk/threads/quangsheng-no-62-low-angle-vs-no-5-vs-no-5-1-2.139763/

 

[Zag73]

There will always be a cross over in what different size planes will do . I would go for the bevel up smoother and set it up with a fine mouth opening and tight cap iron. You can then set your jack up as a jack plane
See this thread for lots of views on bevel up vs bevel down
https://www.ukworkshop.co.uk/threads/quangsheng-no-62-low-angle-vs-no-5-vs-no-5-1-2.139763/

Hi. Many thanks for the response. Good that there’s a place for both.

 

[Ttrees]

Don't buy anything but a Bailey smoother first, i.e Stanley/Record for very little, and learn how to use a double iron smoother first, i.e involvement of the cap iron
straight shavings and not curlies, this will tell you the cap iron is working.
You won't see the cap iron working in most folks videos, very obvious.

Why an old Bailey for cheap?
1. because you won't be afraid to hone the cap iron steeply at the leading edge,
likely might be wary to try if going premium BD plane route.
2. you don't need fancy hones for fancy steels.
3. Certainly worth having to try, compared to something expensive, you may prefer the ergonomics of the well designed totes on pretty much every Bailey plane ever made,
aswell as the weight difference to a lesser extent.

Unless youre specifically planing rosewood, or some other uber dense tropical species and restricted to the wispiest of shavings,
and not just most of the regular interlocked or figured timers, then it doesn't make sense to buy some fancy BU plane, as it's restrictive to the depth of cut.

Tom

 

[IWW]

My suggestion would be neither! We all tend to make recommendations according to our own experiences & the type of work we do, so let me add that caveat before proceeding!

IMO, you'll be better served by a # 4 Bailey type if you simply want a smoothing plane. A good used one will be far cheaper & more versatile than any BU job. The advantage of the low-angle, bevel-up configuration was touted as being able to get a high attack angle for cranky woods by simply switching to a blade with a steep grinding/sharpening bevel. However, the price of that can be much more effort pushing the darned thing & more rapid edge wear.

A standard-pitch plane with a cap-iron is capable of giving better results with less effort and more prolonged time between sharpening. It takes a little time to truly master the cap-iron business, but not that much in the scheme of things, and right from the start, you are likely to get better results than you'll get with the BU plane sharpened at a typical bevel angle which gives it an attack angle of around 45 degrees, give or take. That makes it a standard-pitch plane, which is easier to push, but lacks the advantage coferred by a cap iron. To control tear-out you need to use a very tight mouth & that can lead to choking unless you take very fine shavings.

Years ago, I acquired a Veritas BU smoother with the idea it would solve all my gnarly grain problems & double as a nifty small shooting plane. I soon learnt to dislike it as a smoother because of the aforesaid properties of increased effort & edge wear. My old Stanley #4 runs rings round it; it will handle crankier grain (of which we have an abundance down here!), with less effort expended. As a small shooter the Veritas was ok, but I subsequently got hold of a LA jack, which does a better job for me thanks to the extra mass, & for small work, like shooting small drawer dividers & suchlike, I prefer to use a block plane nowadays. So the Veritas smoother sits forlornly in the tool cupboard for very long stretches. It's not a bad plane, it's just not suited to my needs.....
Cheers,
Ian
Edit: I guess Tom types faster than I do.....

 

[deema]

It may be terminology, but to me a low angle plane and a bevel up plane are one and the same thing. I’m assuming your options are between a traditional bevel down plane and a bevel up / low angle.
I have owned the bevel down Stanley, Record, Lie Nelson and Veritas no4 planes. All are highly capable planes when setup. The Nelson and Veritas you can buy and use, no worries about whether it’s the plane or the person if you’re not getting the results you expect, it’s the person.
I always recommend getting one decent high quality plane if you don’t have anyone to teach you, it takes out a lot of self questioning about what to change as learning to plane can be frustrating. Clifton are also a superb plane.
Now, I primarily have Veritas planes, why? Well I have large hands and the handles / space to fit my hands around them is far more with the Norris type of plane. I love the Norris style of adjustment of the plane iron. I also love being able to adjust the mouth width without taking the plane apart.
I have purposefully stayed away from the PMV blades (I used to have only PMV) and bought specially the A3 blades. Why? Well they are easier to sharpen, don’t take as long. I gave away my last PMV blade!

 

[thetyreman]

there's no reason why you couldn't use your existing plane for smoothing as well but it is handy to have a dedicated smoothing plane, with the low angle planes they have an adjustable mouth so you'd want a tighter mouth for the smoother than jack, but on a double iron I set the cutting iron about 0.9mm back and smoother 0.3mm or less, however I have used the jack for smoothing as well.

 

[D_W]

Hi. Many thanks for the response. Good that there’s a place for both.

that thread will get you in deeper maybe than you need to go. The discussion centers much more around going beyond just using hand tools as a complement to power tools. When you mention "hybrid", presumably that means planes for finish work and fitting only? Smoothing, trimming after dovetails?

i have a strong preference for a typical stanley type plane, as it's ultimately far more capable than a bevel up plane and more versatile, but it does take some use and time to get everything out of it. it's a genius design that rewards you for learning more and more about it and how to use it.

If you like the bevel up jack plane and you've used it for a variety of woods, etc, then a smoothing plane is pretty much the same thing with a bias in sole length to be shorter so that you can get a finished surface without having to span everything with such a long plane (that is, the plane can tolerate a little bit more movement or fitting changes like planing the side of a case after it's been glued up. A smoother is a far nicer follow-on for work like that and can be half or third or better in terms of the amount of planing needed.

 

[D_W]

Well, I will add as an aside - at one point, i had a BUS and a LV LA jack. This was a long time ago now, but I do recall that any vigorous use resulted in very sore wrists because the handle angle just wasn't suitable for civilized planing. I think the advisor who was there and probably isn't any longer might be neanderthal, though.

You can replace those handles with something more fitting for a regular bench height, but it does seem a little harsh to have to do that.

 

[Derek Cohen (Perth Oz)]

There have been negative comments about BU planes around the forums, and I thought that I might put them to bed (pun unintended - as these photos were taken a week ago as I planed the Jarrah board for two beds).

I use both BD (closed chipbreaker) and BU (high cutting angle) planes. Until the closed chipbreaker was resurrected around 2012, BU planes with high cutting angles were my go-to to tame tearout in West Australian woods. I eventually adopted BD planes because they do manage to work better in this regard, and have become my first choice. However, I very much doubt that many could tell this with most non-Australian woods. The BU planes worked well in the past, and continue to work well today. If one takes your fancy, use it.

Veritas Custom #4 with closed chipbreaker (70-80 degree leading edge) on a 42 degree frog ...

Veritas BU Smoother (modified appearance) with 62 degree cutting angle ...

The surface quality looks the same.

I would not disagree with statements that a Stanley #3 or #4 could be tuned to produce similar results, and at a lower cost. I have them and can do this. My point is that, if one wants to purchase a Veritas or LN plane, then I am not going to try and dissuade them - after all, there is pleasure in the use of a fine tool, and why spoil someone's fun. Further, if one is not working with extensive reversing grain, then a BU plane will work very well for moderate reversing grain, and the blade will hold its edge just fine, thank you.


Regards from Perth

Derek

 

[Phil Pascoe]

I love the veritas planes and have narrowed down my choice to a veritas low angle smoother and a veritas bevel up smoother ...

The OP likes Veritas, therefore will end up buying Veritas. No need for any further mention of Baileys.

 

[Zag73]

There’s a lot of love for the bevel down At this stage , I find the bevel up planes much easier to use and love the feel of veritas planes.

 

[Zag73]

There have been negative comments about BU planes around the forums, and I thought that I might put them to bed (pun unintended - as these photos were taken a week ago as I planed the Jarrah board for two beds).

I use both BD (closed chipbreaker) and BU (high cutting angle) planes. Until the closed chipbreaker was resurrected around 2012, BU planes with high cutting angles were my go-to to tame tearout in West Australian woods. I eventually adopted BD planes because they do manage to work better in this regard, and have become my first choice. However, I very much doubt that many could tell this with most non-Australian woods. The BU planes worked well in the past, and continue to work well today. If one takes your fancy, use it.

Veritas Custom #4 with closed chipbreaker (70-80 degree leading edge) on a 42 degree frog ...

Veritas BU Smoother (modified appearance) with 62 degree cutting angle ...

The surface quality looks the same.

I would not disagree with statements that a Stanley #3 or #4 could be tuned to produce similar results, and at a lower cost. I have them and can do this. My point is that, if one wants to purchase a Veritas or LN plane, then I am not going to try and dissuade them - after all, there is pleasure in the use of a fine tool, and why spoil someone's fun. Further, if one is not working with reversing grain, then a BU plane will work very well, and the blade will hold its edge just fine, thank you.


Regards from Perth

Derek

Hi Derek
Thanks for the above , I’ve read both your reviews of the veritas smoothers. Excellent and very thorough! But as always , good to take on board many views. I’m more inclined to the bevel up smoother. I don’t use any exotics. Typically , oak , ash , maple etc. So, I guess I wouldn’t necessarily see the benefit that the chop breaker introduces.

Thanks

 

[Zag73]

I love the veritas planes and have narrowed down my choice to a veritas low angle smoother and a veritas bevel up smoother ...

The OP likes Veritas, therefore will end up buying Veritas. No need for any further mention of Baileys.

Thank you

 

[Zag73]

that thread will get you in deeper maybe than you need to go. The discussion centers much more around going beyond just using hand tools as a complement to power tools. When you mention "hybrid", presumably that means planes for finish work and fitting only? Smoothing, trimming after dovetails?

i have a strong preference for a typical stanley type plane, as it's ultimately far more capable than a bevel up plane and more versatile, but it does take some use and time to get everything out of it. it's a genius design that rewards you for learning more and more about it and how to use it.

If you like the bevel up jack plane and you've used it for a variety of woods, etc, then a smoothing plane is pretty much the same thing with a bias in sole length to be shorter so that you can get a finished surface without having to span everything with such a long plane (that is, the plane can tolerate a little bit more movement or fitting changes like planing the side of a case after it's been glued up. A smoother is a far nicer follow-on for work like that and can be half or third or better in terms of the amount of planing needed.

Hi
I use planes for finishing or adjusting after machining. I was hoping that the smoother would help minimise use of a sander. This being, I have enjoyed using the planes I have and may well, going forward, end up using them more and more. I’m getting to that stage in life where I have a lot more time

 

[thikone]

You could use Low Angle Jack for everything. Maybe with additional blades for different angles. Especially since you are hybrid woodworker and machines usually produce pretty flat surfaces, jack size plane is good or smoothing too.

So, why new plane? What new plane should bring?

Well, it should increase productivity and bring efficiency to your work. If not then you don't need it or don't use it right. As others have mentioned, you need to set it differently than the jack. For example, one for medium cut, one for fine cut. That would reduce the amount of blades changes and adjustments. If you never adjust LAJ and don't feel occasionally the need for different plane settings then maybe you don't really need a second plane.

By the way, Veritas BUS uses the same blades as LAJ. And also Veritas Shooting plane uses them. In theory it seems nice to think that blades can be shared between the too. In practice, however, they usually serve different prurposes and and therefore honed differently and I never really swaped them ever... Much better to have two blades dedicated to one plane, that works alright for me.

I usually don't sand flat surfaces but just plane them with freshly honed blade. And if surface is wider than plane's blade you will get "plane tracks", unless the blade has a chamber to it or at least rounded corners (that is easier to do on BD plane, by the way).

I started with BU planes as they were the vibe at that time (LAJ, BUS, BUJ). Unfortunately, I tried to use them on factory made panels (beech, pine) that consist if small pieces of random orientation glued together. That didn't work out as quite often I had deep tearout. Then I switched to BD (Custom #4-1/2, #5-1/2, #7) that work much better in that situation, tearout on reversed grain can be seen and felt by hand but can be removed by two passes of finely set smoother.

Now I'm more like you say "hybrid", thicknesser/planer and bandsaw are my machines. Still use Custom #7 for edges and #4-1/2 for surfaces (and shooting plane, of course). And for small jobs just bandsaw and planes. Two-three coats of oil and the surface is as smooth as plastic!

 

[Tony Zaffuto]

Don’t have much to add other than pick your weapon and learn to use it. Don’t fall into the trap that “this” or “that” will fix what is really a bit of lack of experience. In other words, go with one of the suggestions in this thread and stick with it, using it and learning it.

 

[Zag73]

You could use Low Angle Jack for everything. Maybe with additional blades for different angles. Especially since you are hybrid woodworker and machines usually produce pretty flat surfaces, jack size plane is good or smoothing too.

So, why new plane? What new plane should bring?

Well, it should increase productivity and bring efficiency to your work. If not then you don't need it or don't use it right. As others have mentioned, you need to set it differently than the jack. For example, one for medium cut, one for fine cut. That would reduce the amount of blades changes and adjustments. If you never adjust LAJ and don't feel occasionally the need for different plane settings then maybe you don't really need a second plane.

By the way, Veritas BUS uses the same blades as LAJ. And also Veritas Shooting plane uses them. In theory it seems nice to think that blades can be shared between the too. In practice, however, they usually serve different prurposes and and therefore honed differently and I never really swaped them ever... Much better to have two blades dedicated to one plane, that works alright for me.

I usually don't sand flat surfaces but just plane them with freshly honed blade. And if surface is wider than plane's blade you will get "plane tracks", unless the blade has a chamber to it or at least rounded corners (that is easier to do on BD plane, by the way).

I started with BU planes as they were the vibe at that time (LAJ, BUS, BUJ). Unfortunately, I tried to use them on factory made panels (beech, pine) that consist if small pieces of random orientation glued together. That didn't work out as quite often I had deep tearout. Then I switched to BD (Custom #4-1/2, #5-1/2, #7) that work much better in that situation, tearout on reversed grain can be seen and felt by hand but can be removed by two passes of finely set smoother.

Now I'm more like you say "hybrid", thicknesser/planer and bandsaw are my machines. Still use Custom #7 for edges and #4-1/2 for surfaces (and shooting plane, of course). And for small jobs just bandsaw and planes. Two-three coats of oil and the surface is as smooth as plastic!

Those are the same machines I have. I’ve used my Jack to rough prep would and then run through planer thicknesser. Is this what you do?

 

[Limey Lurker]

To me, the Stanley/Bailey plane is the equivalent of the chocolate digestive biscuit, in that both are impossible to improve upon.

 

[Zag73]

To me, the Stanley/Bailey plane is the equivalent of the chocolate digestive biscuit, in that both are impossible to improve upon.

I’m not a fan of chocolate digestive biscuits