LumberJocks

Stanley No. 4 & No. 5 - My first hand planes!

  • Advertise with us
Blog entry by jboehle posted 12-19-2011 06:59 AM 1900 reads 0 times favorited 19 comments Add to Favorites Watch

Picked these up at a nearby antique shop this weekend. The No. 5 Bailey is in pretty good shape. The No. 4 looks to have all the pieces, just needs some sweat & tears to make it pretty.

The No. 5 Bailey:

The No. 4:



19 comments so far

View ShaneA's profile

ShaneA

5446 posts in 1343 days


#1 posted 12-19-2011 07:10 AM

Nice score, the first of many to come. It can become a sickness…

View Mike's profile

Mike

66 posts in 1127 days


#2 posted 12-19-2011 07:55 AM

They look great, but if you dont mind me asking what did you give for the no.4 ? because I caught the sickness over the summer whith a baily no.4 that im restoring (slowly)

-- But hon I need this tool.......

View felkadelic's profile

felkadelic

195 posts in 1285 days


#3 posted 12-19-2011 08:20 AM

What are your goals for these planes? Fully restore them, or just turn them into good usable tools?

View drfunk's profile

drfunk

223 posts in 1421 days


#4 posted 12-19-2011 09:09 AM

The #4 has a Stanley Blade, but I believe it might be an old Millers Falls body. I do not believe Stanley ever labeled their planes with an 0 in front of the 4. Also, the corrugations seem to be aftermarket. Not trying to belittle – it looks like a very serviceable plane – if not uncommon.

View Bertha's profile

Bertha

12951 posts in 1438 days


#5 posted 12-19-2011 03:10 PM

^I’m with Doc; nice planes but the #4’s a bit of a Frankenstein (like many of my planes). The cap is much older than the iron. I’ve never seen a Stanley labeled with “04” but the Miller’s Falls planes always seem to have the front knob much closer to the toe. I’m not sure what it is. Is there a frog adjustment screw? Either way, they’ll both work hard for you. Congratulations!

-- My dad and I built a 65 chev pick up.I killed trannys in that thing for some reason-Hog

View jboehle's profile

jboehle

24 posts in 1099 days


#6 posted 12-19-2011 04:35 PM

toymike: I gave $37 for the No. 5 and $15 for the No. 4 (which sounds like it’s not all Stanley parts).

felkadelic: I just want to turn them into good usable tools, I’m not trying to collect them (yet, LOL).

drfunk & Bertha: Thanks for helping identify that No. 4. Guess I should’ve compared it to one of the other Stanley No. 4 planes that was in the shop. Looked up some of the Miller Falls stuff this morning and I can’t find any reference to a “No 04”, although I read that they did paint their bodies a bright red, and you can tell that at one point it was definitely painted red. Sounds like Miller Falls labeled their bodies with the length of the sole, not the Stanley equivalent? Or maybe this was a really early Miller Falls model? Here’s a couple more pics of the fronts & backs of all the parts:

View Bertha's profile

Bertha

12951 posts in 1438 days


#7 posted 12-19-2011 04:54 PM

It’s a very nice plane but most of it isn’t Stanley. Of course, your plane (and maybe you) doesn’t care who made it. The lateral adust on the frog isn’t Stanley, so that settles that part, at least. No frog advancement screw, but that’s no big deal to me (I’m the set it and forget it type). For the good news, it looks like a lot of bedding surface between the frog and body. The wood is in really good shape. Tons of iron left but you might not be entirely satisfied with that vintage of Stanley iron. The depth slot on the chipbreaker doesn’t look Stanley to me, no big deal. I’m a little concerned about the tip of the chipbreaker; it looks a bit irregular and possibly chipped. You should be able to grind that up for a nice mating. The front knob still seems a bit posterior for a Miller’s Falls. I’d have to defer to the experts on those planes, as I am certainly not.
.
In sum, it looks like a very nice plane to me. If I were you, I’d be proud to tune it up and have it as a member of the team;)

-- My dad and I built a 65 chev pick up.I killed trannys in that thing for some reason-Hog

View jboehle's profile

jboehle

24 posts in 1099 days


#8 posted 12-19-2011 05:03 PM

Looks like the main body might be from Ohio Tool Company:

http://lumberjocks.com/topics/13471

I also turned up some other pics (but none of a “No 04”) on Google, I saw one marked “No 03” that was claimed to be an Ohio Tool Company plane.

Regardless, I plan on keeping it and tuning it up and making good use of it. :)

View Bertha's profile

Bertha

12951 posts in 1438 days


#9 posted 12-19-2011 05:08 PM

I can’t see the pictures but I think you might be right. Here’s an Ohio two:

I can’t see the lateral adjuster in this pic, which may be helpful to identify. I hope for your sake that it is an Ohio smoother. The fact that I can’t even find one on Google makes it more desirable to me, lol;)

Edit: also look at the front of the rear tote, where it engages the bed. Looks elongated compared to a Stanley, much like in the picture of yours.

-- My dad and I built a 65 chev pick up.I killed trannys in that thing for some reason-Hog

View Don W's profile

Don W

15519 posts in 1312 days


#10 posted 12-19-2011 06:15 PM

I’m thinking the #4 is a Union. It’ll be a really sweet user and I love the looks of it.

-- Master hand plane hoarder. - http://timetestedtools.com

View Bertha's profile

Bertha

12951 posts in 1438 days


#11 posted 12-19-2011 06:21 PM

^that’s a great thought, Don. I’m impressed with the frog:bed mating. As a Stanley guy, the twisted lateral adjuster grates on my soul, but it looks like a very nice little plane. I love that beefy knob.

Hmmm, though, I don’t know, Don; the lateral adjuster is definitely supporting your theory.

-- My dad and I built a 65 chev pick up.I killed trannys in that thing for some reason-Hog

View Don W's profile

Don W

15519 posts in 1312 days


#12 posted 12-19-2011 06:27 PM

I’d shine that puppy up and throw an IBC or Hock blade in it (just so it doesn’t say stanley) and it would be sweet. I’m not a big fan of replacing blades just to replace them, but I have a thing about knowing its the wrong one.

-- Master hand plane hoarder. - http://timetestedtools.com

View Bertha's profile

Bertha

12951 posts in 1438 days


#13 posted 12-19-2011 06:28 PM

^I’m the same way, lol. There’s the added complication that the supplied blade is a later model. I can almost see the swirling and crosshatching from here. I’d throw an IBC set in there just because I’ve become more interested lately.

-- My dad and I built a 65 chev pick up.I killed trannys in that thing for some reason-Hog

View ratchet's profile

ratchet

1304 posts in 2532 days


#14 posted 12-19-2011 06:29 PM

Nice scores!

View Don W's profile

Don W

15519 posts in 1312 days


#15 posted 12-19-2011 06:31 PM

I’ve almost concluded that I’m putting an IBC set in my 604. The SW blade is almost gone, so it’ll get set off to the side and labeled as such.

-- Master hand plane hoarder. - http://timetestedtools.com

showing 1 through 15 of 19 comments

Have your say...

You must be signed in to post the comments.

DISCLAIMER: Any posts on LJ are posted by individuals acting in their own right and do not necessarily reflect the views of LJ. LJ will not be held liable for the actions of any user.

Latest Projects | Latest Blog Entries | Latest Forum Topics

HomeRefurbers.com

Latest Projects | Latest Blog Entries | Latest Forum Topics

GardenTenders.com :: gardening showcase