STANLEY N04 DIFFERENCES - HELP NEEDED

[Sparkypete]

Hi all , i have a question regarding Stanley/Bailey No4 Planes.

I have just picked up 2 of these for silly money at a car boot requiring restoration,to add to my other earlier version of one of these.
Now these 2 are slightly different,ie one appears to be a war issue with a steel frog adjuster screw whilst the other has the brass nut.No patents are stamped on these and i think they equate to a No17 and a No19, although im not 100%.
What i have discovered thou is the base at the front of the frog is different on both types,one having small ribs?
What i was intending doing is making one good one from the pair,and all parts seem interchangable.
I may restore both if i can get a handle set at a good price soon

Does anyone know the reason for the difference, and is one type better than the other?

Many thanks Pete

PS....In addition does anyone have a front screw for the Tote(rear handle) of a Stanley No5 going spare?

 

[RogerP]

As a minor collector of these things I think it's a mistake to mix-an'-match to make Frankensteins. :shock:

I assume you've investigated ...
http://home.comcast.net/~rexmill/planes ... typing.htm
http://www.tttg.org.au/Content/Stanley% ... rt%202.pdf
http://hyperkitten.com/tools/stanley_bench_plane/

Of course if you have British made Stanleys the information is not necessarily accurate as it's US research.

If you want cheap ready made wood rear and front handles there's always ...

http://www.my-tool-shed.co.uk/p21932/Fa ... tAodXW4A5w
http://www.toolbox.co.uk/faithfull-fron ... tAodNC8AVg

... which can be re-stained, modified etc. 8)

 

[Vann]

As Roger says, the type study doesn't apply to UK made Stanleys (nor Aussie made, though I think it's close for Canadian made Stanleys). The first UK Stanleys were based on the USA model of the time (type #16) but from there it's all downhill.

..one appears to be a war issue with a steel frog adjuster screw whilst the other has the brass nut.?

I'm assuming you mean the iron depth adjuster wheel (I've not heard of a brass frog adjuster screw). Some WW11 planes have a hard rubber adjuster wheel. Stanley UK introducted a plated steel depth adjuster wheel in the late 1960s/early 1970s (I have one on my 1973 UK No.4), along with aluminium handle nuts (could yours be one of these?) before returning to brass wheel and nuts before the end of the 1970s.

...the base at the front of the frog is different on both types,one having small ribs?
...Does anyone know the reason for the difference, and is one type better than the other?

Photos would help explain the differences you mean.

Cheers, Vann.

 

[RogerP]

Hi all , i have a question regarding Stanley/Bailey No4 Planes.
.......... one appears to be a war issue ........

A true British war-time made Stanley or Record plane should have this on the lateral blade adjuster ..

 

[Vann]

A true British war-time made Stanley or Record plane should have this on the lateral blade adjuster ..

Hi Roger. I've got a couple of Record "warfinish" planes like that, but I didn't know Stanley (UK) used that stamping :shock:

Cheers, Vann.

 

[RogerP]

A true British war-time made Stanley or Record plane should have this on the lateral blade adjuster ..
Hi Roger. I've got a couple of Record "warfinish" planes like that, but I didn't know Stanley (UK) used that stamping :shock:

Cheers, Vann.

Maybe they don't! I'll check later.

Rog

 

[Bod]

Does anybody know which year Stanley, first made No.4s in the UK?
I have my fathers No.4, which he claimed was his fathers, but I think Grandfather didn't have it very long! Knowing him, it might well have been 2nd hand to start with.
It's nothing special, needs a full restoration, will happen one day, then sit with my worker collection.
Bod

 

[MMUK]

...the base at the front of the frog is different on both types,one having small ribs?
...Does anyone know the reason for the difference, and is one type better than the other?

Photos would help explain the differences you mean.

Cheers, Vann.

I'm assuming he means one sole has longitudinal ribs?

Like this

 

[Vann]

Does anybody know which year Stanley, first made No.4s in the UK?

Stanley bought out JA Chapman in December 1936. I don't know how soon after that they began producing planes, but I would think they'd have been well into production before the war broke out - certainly in the common sizes like No.4.

JA Chapman had been making Acorn brand planes since 1934, but I believe Stanley UK may have initially used Stanley (USA) produced patterns (altered to read "Made in England") or possibly even imported the first castings in some sizes. My one and only Acorn (made after the Stanley take-over) has the earlier type frog - that Stanley phased out in 1902 :shock:

Cheers, Vann.

 

[heimlaga]

I have a hard time fathoming that anybody would buy a plane to take the handles off it and then scrap the rest. Good planes are valuable tools and secondhand ones are a finite resource that shouldn't be wasted away.

Making wooden totes and knobs is not too difficult for an ordinary hobby woodworker.

 

[Bod]

Hi all , i have a question regarding Stanley/Bailey No4 Planes.

I have just picked up 2 of these for silly money at a car boot requiring restoration,to add to my other earlier version of one of these.
Now these 2 are slightly different,ie one appears to be a war issue with a steel frog adjuster screw whilst the other has the brass nut.No patents are stamped on these and i think they equate to a No17 and a No19, although im not 100%.
What i have discovered thou is the base at the front of the frog is different on both types,one having small ribs?
What i was intending doing is making one good one from the pair,and all parts seem interchangable.
I may restore both if i can get a handle set at a good price soon

Does anyone know the reason for the difference, and is one type better than the other?

Many thanks Pete

PS....In addition does anyone have a front screw for the Tote(rear handle) of a Stanley No5 going spare?

Pete
Do your planes have "made in England" cast on them?

Bod

 

[Vann]

...the base at the front of the frog is different on both types,one having small ribs?
...Does anyone know the reason for the difference, and is one type better than the other?

I'm assuming he means one sole has longitudinal ribs?

Like this

I assumed he was meaning the ribs in the frog receiver, like this

Cheers, Vann.