Stanley 60 1/2 block plane

UKworkshop.co.uk

Help Support UKworkshop.co.uk:

NickM

Established Member
Joined
6 Mar 2019
Messages
374
Reaction score
135
Location
Hampshire
I bought one of these on eBay a while back.

Unfortunately someone has filed the throat. It's now enormous (the photo below shows it at it's narrowest!). A bad buy, lesson learnt.

Anyway, I had cast it aside but rediscovered it and thought it might be worth posting on here to see if anyone had a spare body lying around which I could buy off them to get this in proper working order. Please let me know if you do!

IMG_7605.jpeg


IMG_7606.jpeg
 

Attachments

  • IMG_7605.jpeg
    IMG_7605.jpeg
    519.9 KB · Views: 276
  • IMG_7606.jpeg
    IMG_7606.jpeg
    388 KB · Views: 276

NickM

Established Member
Joined
6 Mar 2019
Messages
374
Reaction score
135
Location
Hampshire
Bod,

No, I haven't tried it. I should do that and will give it a go.

Taking the blade out and comparing it with an online picture, it looks as though the front part of the frog has been removed (I think there should be a "lip" just to the rear of the throat which the blade sits on). I wonder if someone filed that away to make it even more low angle?

IMG_7607.jpeg
 

Attachments

  • IMG_7607.jpeg
    IMG_7607.jpeg
    463.1 KB · Views: 237

AndyT

Established Member
Joined
24 Jul 2007
Messages
12,028
Reaction score
515
Location
Bristol
IMG_20200611_115314_DRO.png


Here's mine. It's a fairly early model I think, about a century old.

There's no 'lip' just a flat ramp.

IMG_20200611_115253_DRO.png


Mouth opening, measured without the blade, is 4mm max, 1.5mm min.
 

Attachments

  • IMG_20200611_115253_DRO.png
    IMG_20200611_115253_DRO.png
    455.7 KB · Views: 229
  • IMG_20200611_115314_DRO.png
    IMG_20200611_115314_DRO.png
    441.6 KB · Views: 229

JohnPW

Established Member
Joined
5 Jun 2013
Messages
962
Reaction score
68
Location
London
Maybe the rear of the mouth got chipped and someone filed it straight across. Although the cutting edge to the front of the mouth gap wouldn't change unless the bedding angle changed as well. It just means there's more unsupported blade at the edge.

I can't tell from the photo if the bed (bit with numbers) has been ground down, if it has then that would actually increased the blade angle.
 

NickM

Established Member
Joined
6 Mar 2019
Messages
374
Reaction score
135
Location
Hampshire
John, you're right; I got it the wrong way around - the "work" that has been done would of course increase the angle.

This picture shows the lip, or shorter ramp, that I referred to and which seems to have disappeared on mine.

20191005_125706.jpg
 

Attachments

  • 20191005_125706.jpg
    20191005_125706.jpg
    249.6 KB · Views: 193

AndyT

Established Member
Joined
24 Jul 2007
Messages
12,028
Reaction score
515
Location
Bristol
Well, Stanley does it again. I was trying to show how it should look but seem to have found another way they avoided 0.00001 cents worth of milling work on the later models!
 

NickM

Established Member
Joined
6 Mar 2019
Messages
374
Reaction score
135
Location
Hampshire
AndyT":2yxx6uls said:
Well, Stanley does it again. I was trying to show how it should look but seem to have found another way they avoided 0.00001 cents worth of milling work on the later models!

That was my reaction too when I saw yours!
 

JohnPW

Established Member
Joined
5 Jun 2013
Messages
962
Reaction score
68
Location
London
The later version of the 60 1/2 (with lateral adjuster) seems to have a bigger bed than that narrow strip but my particular example has the bed ground wonky, off square, and needs the blade to sharpen on a skew.
 

Latest posts

Top