Thicker plane Irons

[fezman]

Hi,
I've got 3 stanley planes, two second hand, 1 new and thought it would be a good idea to get some new irons for these. The most recent acquisition (a 5 1/2) had a pretty poor iron, and that prompted me to buy some axminster replacement blades. The no4 i have has a decent iron, but a new one seemed a treat given they were only £7 *

I read the (limited) reviews and it seemed that these would simply slot in and replace the original irons. The axi's are a bit thicker than the originals, about 1.5mm by my reckoning. So the problem i am finding is that when the blades are extended to cutting depth, they are pretty much at the leading edge (or beyond) of the plane mouth.

I tried moving the frog back a bit, but that didn't work. I moved the chip breaker to various (1mm to 3mm) gaps from the plane edge with no difference.

My question is am i missing something in adjusting the iron / chip breaker / frog. Or should i be widening the mouth to accommodate a fatter blade?
I'm very much a noob to this and would appreciate some feedback.
thanks
Ian

* if anyones interested, I bought 2x 4/5 irons and 2x 4.5/5.5 irons from axminsters outlet ebay site. the 4.5 /5.5 irons were in perfect condition and required just a bit of honing. The 4/5 irons - one had a nick in the edge - took 5 minutes to correct, the other had a chiped corner on the back edge - ground it down best i could - not going to worry about it. All in All - pretty good value.

 

[Jacob]

I wouldn't replace any irons until they are worn out. I've never encountered a "poor" iron.
If your new iron doesn't fit just put the old one back in or you might spoil the plane.
You have to watch out as a noob - they are out to sell you all sorts of stuff you just don't need.

 

[Racers]

You will have to file the mouth wider to get a thicker iron to work.
The cap iron should be set very very close to the edge for fine finishing and controlling tear out.
Your old irons can be cambered and used for cleaning up rough boards etc.

Pete

 

[fezman]

Thanks Pete,
this was the conclusion i was coming to, but wanted to seek advice before i committed to an unrecoverable course of action.

What degree of success do others have when widening the mouth of planes to accommodate a thicker iron?

 

[Racers]

Proper use of the cap iron will control tear out far better than a tight mouth, but if you are worried file the back of the mouth.
That way you can still have a tight mouth.

Pete

 

[D_W]

Thanks Pete,
this was the conclusion i was coming to, but wanted to seek advice before i committed to an unrecoverable course of action.

What degree of success do others have when widening the mouth of planes to accommodate a thicker iron?

No problem widening the mouth, just maybe don't do it to an exceptionally valuable plane (if you had a mint never used Sorby metal jointer, for example).

Anything else, you're doing something that you want to do to a common tool - you do what pleases you.

Here's the process - get yourself a metal scribe, marking fluid (or a marker) and a good square, and mark forward about half a millimeter from the current mouth. Mark square from both sides to make sure square is actually square, and then slowly file to it, being careful not to file the mouth wider laterally (it'll look sloppy if you do). Leave the corners for last.

Make your final file strokes so that the front of the mouth slopes away from the frog when looking down at the plane. It'll help if you set the cap iron close when planing...and in general, it will help, period.

If the mouth of the plane is "beat" and you can't accurately mark on the marked area with a metal scribe, mark a bit further away from the front and file a little bit at a time keeping the amount of remaining "colored" metal to the scribe line as even as you can.

 

[D_W]

I wouldn't replace any irons until they are worn out. I've never encountered a "poor" iron.
If your new iron doesn't fit just put the old one back in or you might spoil the plane.
You have to watch out as a noob - they are out to sell you all sorts of stuff you just don't need.

I remember the noob days. There is a little bit of virtue in a thicker iron when you can't get a whole plane set up quite right.

I sort of despise them now and have a jones for that ease of use and quickness of sharpening and grinding from the thin irons (and you can set them up to stop a bulldozer without chatter if you set the cap iron close).

But that stuff may be a bit out of reach when you're just starting to get after it, and a fat hunk of metal sort of blankets some minor problems.

 

[custard]

I read the (limited) reviews and it seemed that these would simply slot in and replace the original irons. The axi's are a bit thicker than the originals, about 1.5mm by my reckoning. So the problem i am finding is that when the blades are extended to cutting depth, they are pretty much at the leading edge (or beyond) of the plane mouth.

Do you mean the replacement irons are 1.5mm thick? That's about the thickness of the Veritas replacement for Stanley/Record irons that Axminster sell, in other words just a shade thicker than the standard irons which are in the region of 1.2mm. The Veritas irons drop in most Stanley/Record planes without any filing, most but not all, I guess there's some manufacturing variation and perhaps the design changed fractionally over the years.

Incidentally, if you are filling then make sure the file has a "safe" edge that you keep up against the side of the plane, and it's much easier to hold the plane body in a vice at the correct angle so that the file is horizontal. But if you do that make sure the lateral web of the plane is taking the vice pressure or you can easily crack the plane body.

 

[Geordie Joe]

Do you mean the replacement irons are 1.5mm thick?

I think he means they are 1.5mm thicker. The ebay listing says they are 3mm thick.

 

[patrickjchase]

Do you mean the replacement irons are 1.5mm thick?

I think he means they are 1.5mm thicker. The ebay listing says they are 3mm thick.

3 mm is pointlessly thick.

The LV/Veritas replacement irons are 0.1" (2.54 mm). The Hocks are in that ballpark as well, or a hair thinner. The originals are somewhere around 0.08" and work perfectly well.

 

[Jacob]

I wouldn't replace any irons until they are worn out. I've never encountered a "poor" iron.
If your new iron doesn't fit just put the old one back in or you might spoil the plane.
You have to watch out as a noob - they are out to sell you all sorts of stuff you just don't need.

I remember the noob days. There is a little bit of virtue in a thicker iron when you can't get a whole plane set up quite right.

I sort of despise them now and have a jones for that ease of use and quickness of sharpening and grinding from the thin irons (and you can set them up to stop a bulldozer without chatter if you set the cap iron close).

But that stuff may be a bit out of reach when you're just starting to get after it, and a fat hunk of metal sort of blankets some minor problems.

I just feel that a noob would be better off concentrating getting a plane working as found, rather than setting about modifying it, about which he has no experience, and/or buying new bits, which is another venture into the dark, bumping into new problems!
As for "poor" irons - I've never had one which wasn't usable, sometimes after a bit of work with the worst of it being the need to form a little back bevel on a rusty old blade.

 

[MikeG.]

What on earth is this fashion for thicker irons all about? A plane works perfectly well with it's factory supplied blade, so long as it's sharp.

 

[Silly_Billy]

I’m a beginner and upgraded a blade to a Hock. I’m glad I did. The mouth needed a little bit of work with a metal file, but that’s all.

While I wasn’t having a problem with chatter, the Hock blade’s great: I can get a really keen edge on it and it holds the edge well. I’m happy I upgraded.

3 mm is pointlessly thick.

The LV/Veritas replacement irons are 0.1" (2.54 mm). The Hocks are in that ballpark as well, or a hair thinner. The originals are somewhere around 0.08" and work perfectly well.

This seems very good advice - perhaps Fezman’s replacement blade is too thick. Even Veritas’ baldes for Stanley/Record say some filing may be required, but perhaps it’s less filling than the OP’s blade.

 

[Jacob]

I’m a beginner and upgraded a blade to a Hock. I’m glad I did. The mouth needed a little bit of work with a metal file, but that’s all.

While I wasn’t having a problem with chatter, the Hock blade’s great: I can get a really keen edge on it and it holds the edge well. I’m happy I upgraded......

What was wrong with the old blade?

I admit I've been suckered into buying new blades too - a Hock and a Smoothcut. I still prefer the Stanley/Record options - basically much quicker and easier to get a very sharp edge.
Edge "retention" isn't such an issue when you sharpen the old fashioned way (quick and easy).
So is it modern sharpening issues which have generated the blade problems, or modern blade "improvements" which have generated the sharpening issues?
Personally I'm glad I'm free of both of them!
I don't use the Hock - doesn't sharpen easily. The Smoothcut sharpens well but the edge is a bit fragile and tends to chip. Either way they are a waste of time and each cost more than any of my planes (except one.)
PS Hock blades are made in France. Hock just etch on their label. I could do the same - buy the blades, market them with etched on "Jacob's Sharpedge" :lol:

 

[fezman]

Where do i buy these Jacob's Sharpedge blades you speak of ;-)

Thanks for all the input everyone, i will give one of my planes a filing this weekend and see how it goes.

 

[D_W]

I wouldn't replace any irons until they are worn out. I've never encountered a "poor" iron.
If your new iron doesn't fit just put the old one back in or you might spoil the plane.
You have to watch out as a noob - they are out to sell you all sorts of stuff you just don't need.

I remember the noob days. There is a little bit of virtue in a thicker iron when you can't get a whole plane set up quite right.

I sort of despise them now and have a jones for that ease of use and quickness of sharpening and grinding from the thin irons (and you can set them up to stop a bulldozer without chatter if you set the cap iron close).

But that stuff may be a bit out of reach when you're just starting to get after it, and a fat hunk of metal sort of blankets some minor problems.

I just feel that a noob would be better off concentrating getting a plane working as found, rather than setting about modifying it, about which he has no experience, and/or buying new bits, which is another venture into the dark, bumping into new problems!
As for "poor" irons - I've never had one which wasn't usable, sometimes after a bit of work with the worst of it being the need to form a little back bevel on a rusty old blade.

I sure don't disagree with any of that.

 

[D_W]

I agree with the above comment about 3mm being absurd. It'll be an iron that you discard later in favor of a thinner one.

 

[Silly_Billy]

I admit I've been suckered into buying new blades too - a Hock and a Smoothcut.

I guess different people like different things. And wouldn't the world be boring if everyone had similar preferences?

It is very beneficial to replace the standard plane blade with a thick, high quality replacement iron. The new materials available today will hold an edge significantly longer than a carbon steel blade. Cryogenically treated A2 blades by Ron Hock are available from Classic Hand Tools.

 

[Dangermouse 2nd]

I have replaced all my old Stanley / Record plane irons with the Rider Axminister 3mm blades from ebay. Contrary to some "experts" on here it does improve the plane. Gives a better solid feel to the use of the plane, cuts through difficult grain like butter. The stanley / Record blades were good, but made to a price and too thin, indeed I think the chip breakers were next to useless. So Haveing a good thick 01 steel added to a thick rigid chip breaker, I use Workshop Heaven ones, makes an ordinary plane into a joy to use. I also put in a longer yoke , again from Workshop Heaven, which makes ajustment very easy. Also as has been said, you need to widen the mouth by about 2 to 3 mm.
And to be honest, if its good enough for Lie Neilsen its good enough for me!

 

[Jacob]

That Stanley blades were "made to a price and too thin" is the driving myth and simply not true. It would have been insane to skimp on the single most important component of an expensive, heavily constructed and well designed tool.
The whole point and the reason for the great success of the Bailey design was that an easily sharpenable/adjustable/removable thin blade could be made to work as well as an old fashioned thick blade, by virtue of the steel construction and the ingenious design; cap iron, lever cap, engineered frog. Thicker blade adds nothing and defeats the object.
No doubt people get them going well but if they put the same time and effort into a normal plane they'd get better results too, at no extra cost and much easier to sharpen.
PS and many Stanleys and Records had laminated blades - about half of mine I discovered. A very high quality product unlikely to be bettered by Axminster junk!