LumberJocks

All Replies on Stanley vs. the other guys....

  • Advertise with us
View Armandhammer's profile

Stanley vs. the other guys....

by Armandhammer
posted 01-16-2014 10:29 PM


35 replies so far

View TheWoodenOyster's profile

TheWoodenOyster

1302 posts in 1745 days


#1 posted 01-16-2014 11:18 PM

I have two miller’s falls and one stanley. I can personally say that I like the stanley better and it seems to be built a little better. That said, I am only comparing 3 planes, but that is my experience.

-- The Wood Is Your Oyster

View Armandhammer's profile

Armandhammer

235 posts in 1436 days


#2 posted 01-16-2014 11:22 PM

Well, experience is certainly worth a lot. My first plane is being shipped tomorrow and it’s a Stanley No. 5. I still need (want) a No. 4 and No. 7 and a block plane to round out the collection. If I went with other than Stanley brands I could probably save 25%+ but not if it’s at the cost of quality.

Thanks for the post.

View TerryDowning's profile

TerryDowning

1070 posts in 1927 days


#3 posted 01-16-2014 11:29 PM

I love my Millers Falls planes
Mine are all the premium line indicted by their respective model numbers.
I have #9 (Stanley 4 size) #14 (Stanley size 5) #22 (Stanley size 7)

a no 75 block plane
a no 07 skew block plane (stanley 140 equal)
a no 85 fillister (Stanley 78)
and the cigar spoke shave.

Easily the equal or better of the Stanley’s from the same time period. (mid 50s mostly, the #22 is world war II era)

-- - Terry

View Mark E.'s profile

Mark E.

387 posts in 3552 days


#4 posted 01-16-2014 11:52 PM

I have a lot of planes go through my shop, so I have had an opportunity to try out planes from many manufacturers . I usually stick to Stanley planes to buy and sell simply because that is what most people want to buy.

The Millers Falls planes with the hinged, three point lever cap are good planes. I have a couple of the No.9 planes in my collection. They are fairly easy to get set up and work very well. A good solid feel. The No.9 is the same size as a Stanley No4.

The V&B (Vaughan & Bushnell) drop forged are also good planes. The drop forged base is said to be less likely to crack if dropped on a hard surface. The frog and frog receiver is a ramped type setup with a lot of surface contact area. The side edges of the frog receiver are raised up and fit into cutouts in the bottom of the frog helping to keep the frog square to the mouth.

I have tried a few Sargent planes and the ones I have used are about comparable to Stanleys. The Sargent planes seem to be a little heavier, more stoutly built.

Some Craftsman planes are good users. The ones that I have tried and liked were made by Sargent. The problem with Craftsman is it is sometimes hard to tell who actually manufactured the plane.

Dunlap was a Sears economy plane. The ones I have used have been difficult to set up to work well. I would stay away from the Dunlap bench planes. Some of the Dunlap block planes seem to be okay.

Fulton is another ‘value’ line from Sears(?). Haven’t used one of them that was worth keeping.

Union planes are hit or miss. They made a good plane but about half of the ones that I have come across were frankenplanes with miss-matched parts. If they have all the correct parts they work as well as the Stanleys.

I tried three or four Shelton planes. They were to fussy to get working right, although they worked good if you did. Same thing with Goodall.

These are all just my opinions based on limited experience. YMMV

-- Mark

View ColonelTravis's profile

ColonelTravis

1628 posts in 1704 days


#5 posted 01-17-2014 12:01 AM

I own two MFs – block (Stanley 120) and the #4 equivalent. I love the bench plane, use it all the time but I had to add a Hock chipbreaker because the one it came with was messed up. Like Mark said, it’s a three point lever cap. No question, it’s of comparable quality to my best Stanleys. Only reason I don’t use the block that much is because I bought a 9 1/2, which is more versatile and comfortable. But the MF block looks very cool restored and is great for quick, no-nonsense stuff.

View Tedstor's profile

Tedstor

1643 posts in 2443 days


#6 posted 01-17-2014 12:09 AM

I have a Stanley #5 and a Record Block plane.
Both are of comparably good quality. I like the blue paint on the Record plane better :)

View NoLongerHere's profile

NoLongerHere

893 posts in 2486 days


#7 posted 01-17-2014 01:25 AM

Check out rexmill.com – Hand plane 101 – Stanley bench plane type study

I collected for along time without really knowing what I was buying – if it looked cool and I didn’t have one, I bought it. fortunately dumb luck would have it..I did OK.

But, man, If I only knew…...like, who the hell keeps the box?

Once you research the history of Stanley, you will learn the History of all the other planes, many of which were consumed by Stanley in a fine example of capitalism and by one of the giants of industry…. a fascinating story.

I thought so anyway. Sure makes collecting more fun when you can see a plane from 4 ft. away sitting on a table at a garage sale and know what type it probably is and what it’s worth. then try and not let them see you drool on it while you make the deal. Ha!

As a collector I would also avoid the Stanley handyman, corsair, great neck, buck bros, sears, new Stanley planes

I also have a tradition: I try to buy one new Lie Nielsen plane every Christmas, from Santa of course.

View Loren's profile

Loren

9546 posts in 3458 days


#8 posted 01-17-2014 01:56 AM

If you are finding Record planes for lower prices than Baileys,
buy them. They are a little nicer in general, imo… a little
heavier.

UK made Baileys are a little heavier too.

I’ve never handled one but the Vaughn and Bushnell
mentioned above look like nice planes and perhaps
undervalued.

View Armandhammer's profile

Armandhammer

235 posts in 1436 days


#9 posted 01-17-2014 02:25 AM

I saw a few records and the prices seemed a little lower or the same as the Stanleys…but they were on ebay with no bids. Didn’t seem to be much interest in them. Perhaps closer to the end of the auction the price goes up with bids…I don’t know. I’ll keep an eye on them though and try to do some research to see what’s what. There’s just so many brand and models and types that it’s really hard to keep up with, especially trying to figure it all out at once. I may just stay with Stanley since that’s what I’ve been researching the most up to this point so I’m a little more comfortable figuring out what they are from pictures. Still unsure on appropriate values. Once I get a few users in the shop I can start branching out to see what else is out there that I can add to the collection.

View knotscott's profile (online now)

knotscott

7749 posts in 3186 days


#10 posted 01-17-2014 10:10 AM

I’ve had quite a few Baileys, Millers Falls, and Records. The overall quality depends a lot on the era they were made. Overall, I tend to prefer the older MF and Record planes….partly because I like the colors, partly because they’re different, and partly because the older ones also feel a bit heftier to me. I even sold my Bedrock plane because it fetches enough money, that I was able to buy a much larger Record plane with the proceeds. The Sargent VBM is right up there too. They’re all capable of being very nice planes…..name recognition is a big deal in the market place, but less important in the shop. Buy what you like the feel of in your hands.

-- Happiness is like wetting your pants...everyone can see it, but only you can feel the warmth....

View cavemancrafting's profile

cavemancrafting

6 posts in 395 days


#11 posted 08-11-2017 08:06 AM

I have both Stanley and Sargent lineup. Personally, I grab my Sargents before I do my Stanleys. I like the thick irons and I’m not particular about having the frog adjuster. I usually set my frog and leave it. The casitngs on my Sargents just feel better. They are thicker, heavier and seem to push easier. That being said, i like Stanley totes better. Ive been spinning my own knobs for a while now so thats not a good comparison. All in all I like Sargent better than Stanley. Plus the fact that they are not as desireable as Stanley keeps the price reasonable.

-- Might as well enjoy the ride

View Don W's profile

Don W

18501 posts in 2378 days


#12 posted 08-11-2017 08:58 PM

I’ve restored a lot of hand planes. The first thing I do after whatever cleanup and or Restoration is needed is sharpen them and try them.

If you buy a Stanley-Bailey, the scenario will typically look like this.
Flatten the sole.
Flatten the frog.
Make sure the frog seats properly
Flatten the back of the iron. This can mean anything from several minutes on the course stone to a ball peen hammer and or a belt sander.

Find a type 4 or type 5 sargent it means
Flatten the back of the iron. Usually about 10 minutes or less.
Use it.

Type 6 sargent. See Stanley list.

Millers Falls. The back of the irons are typically not as bad as the stanley. And the soles are flatter. I’ve heard type 2&3 are the best, but will need to research more Millers Falls planes.

Early craftsman are the same as who manufactured them probably until about 1940ish, then we see a decline faster than the makers models.

V&B I haven’t found enough to comment.

Comparing tolerances in manufacturing you’ll fine the only maker close (and they’re pretty close) to a modern LN is the type 5 sargent and earlier.

That’s my 2 cents worth.

Edit: FYI this is an excerpt from a blog post I hope to post soon on TTT

-- http://timetestedtools.net - Collecting is an investment in the past, and the future.

View TaySC's profile

TaySC

268 posts in 143 days


#13 posted 08-11-2017 09:22 PM

What is a Sargent 409 hand plane?

Think I found the answer. One ad said it was equivalent to the Stanley #4.

View Don W's profile

Don W

18501 posts in 2378 days


#14 posted 08-11-2017 10:33 PM



What is a Sargent 409 hand plane?

Think I found the answer. One ad said it was equivalent to the Stanley #4.

- TaySC

That is correct.

-- http://timetestedtools.net - Collecting is an investment in the past, and the future.

View TheFridge's profile

TheFridge

8126 posts in 1296 days


#15 posted 08-11-2017 11:37 PM

Millers falls made really good planes.

-- Shooting down the walls of heartache. Bang bang. I am. The warrior.

View TaySC's profile

TaySC

268 posts in 143 days


#16 posted 08-11-2017 11:38 PM

http://www.ebay.com/itm/182702518705?ssPageName=STRK:MESINDXX:IT&_trksid=p3984.m1436.l2649

Worth $43.50 with shipping?

I’m trying to get my hands on a few vintage hand planes to get the experience of tearing them down, cleaning them and putting them back together to use.

View TaySC's profile

TaySC

268 posts in 143 days


#17 posted 08-12-2017 12:57 AM

Sorry to have derailed the thread. I did decide to bid on (and won) that Sargent 409 hand plane. Thanks for the information guys!

View bandit571's profile

bandit571

18416 posts in 2493 days


#18 posted 08-12-2017 02:17 AM

Hmmmm.

I think I have all the bases covered?

Maybe?

-- A Planer? I'M the planer, this is what I use

View Smitty_Cabinetshop's profile

Smitty_Cabinetshop

14777 posts in 2428 days


#19 posted 08-12-2017 02:35 AM

Nope. I don’t see a DE.

-- Don't anthropomorphize your handplanes. They hate it when you do that. -- OldTools Archive --

View HorizontalMike's profile

HorizontalMike

7623 posts in 2724 days


#20 posted 08-12-2017 08:20 PM

CLICK ON IMAGE for larger view:

Hmm… Any questions? ;-)

BTW, I have MORE now… 8-)
Also looking for a Type 5 #424. Seen one?

-- HorizontalMike -- "Woodpeckers understand..."

View WayneC's profile

WayneC

13751 posts in 3907 days


#21 posted 08-12-2017 08:28 PM

I would add Union and Ohio to your list. I think that the question is more when was it made than by who. It varies by manufacture but in general the earlier planes are better in quality. For example I like Type 10-15 Stanley. Roughly 1910-1940. They are fully featured and good quality. You can find other manufactures that made planes of Similar or higher quality (Sargent Shaw Patent) for example.

The 409 is a good plane. Once you have handled a few good planes, you will begin to recognize quality manufacture independent of brand.

I’m surprised Don W did not drop a link to his wonderful website.

-- We must guard our enthusiasm as we would our life - James Krenov

View TaySC's profile

TaySC

268 posts in 143 days


#22 posted 08-12-2017 09:30 PM

What is the front metal type plane?

http://www.ebay.com/itm/Lot-of-7-Vintage-Wood-Planes-Sargent-Dunlap-Stanley-and-others-/182707114799?hash=item2a8a31532f:g:gewAAOSwvv9ZiGaP

I have seen a few online lately, but don’t understand how they are used.

View Clarkie's profile

Clarkie

448 posts in 1651 days


#23 posted 08-12-2017 09:44 PM

Seems no one mentioned the Winchester hand planes. They are a very suitable plane. Stanley has been a world wide conglomorate since the late 1800’s. A lot of planes were made by Stanley for other companies, one being the Ward’s stores. Have fun make some dust.

View Loren's profile

Loren

9546 posts in 3458 days


#24 posted 08-12-2017 10:16 PM



What is the front metal type plane?

http://www.ebay.com/itm/Lot-of-7-Vintage-Wood-Planes-Sargent-Dunlap-Stanley-and-others-/182707114799?hash=item2a8a31532f:g:gewAAOSwvv9ZiGaP

I have seen a few online lately, but don t understand how they are used.

- TaySC

It’s a double spokeshave for shaping things like
wheel spokes and tool handles. I have one.
They are somewhat common.

View rodneywt1180b's profile

rodneywt1180b

154 posts in 196 days


#25 posted 08-13-2017 03:09 AM

Some light reading on Stanley planes.
http://www.supertool.com/StanleyBG/stan0a.html

Old hardware store brands (Shapliegh’s comes to mind) are generally rebranded Stanleys or Sargents. It’s possible to get some good deals on them if people don’t know what they’re looking at.
I have a probably 1950s Craftsman plane that I like. It’s a equivalent to but a little bigger than a Stanley #5 and has heavier castings than my Stanleys. I usually reach for it first.

-- Rodney, Centralia, WA, USA www.etsy.com/shop/ASturdyStick

View WayneC's profile

WayneC

13751 posts in 3907 days


#26 posted 09-11-2017 08:30 PM



Seems no one mentioned the Winchester hand planes. They are a very suitable plane. Stanley has been a world wide conglomorate since the late 1800 s. A lot of planes were made by Stanley for other companies, one being the Ward s stores. Have fun make some dust.

- Clarkie

Are the planes in the photo’s Winchester or Stanley Bedrock?

-- We must guard our enthusiasm as we would our life - James Krenov

View oldwodie's profile

oldwodie

3 posts in 487 days


#27 posted 09-11-2017 11:02 PM

The only plane I have bought that I do not like is the Buck Brothers. Aluminum frame, cheap materials all the way around, in my opinion. I have also found Fulton, Craftsman to work fine for me. I just look at the Baileys and Stanleys mostly, using the lesser preferred brands until someone comes along and wants some of them.

View Just_Iain's profile

Just_Iain

209 posts in 226 days


#28 posted 09-12-2017 01:06 AM



I ve restored a lot of hand planes. The first thing I do after whatever cleanup and or Restoration is needed is sharpen them and try them.

If you buy a Stanley-Bailey, the scenario will typically look like this.
Flatten the sole.
Flatten the frog.
Make sure the frog seats properly
Flatten the back of the iron. This can mean anything from several minutes on the course stone to a ball peen hammer and or a belt sander.

Find a type 4 or type 5 sargent it means
Flatten the back of the iron. Usually about 10 minutes or less.
Use it.

Type 6 sargent. See Stanley list.

Millers Falls. The back of the irons are typically not as bad as the stanley. And the soles are flatter. I ve heard type 2&3 are the best, but will need to research more Millers Falls planes.

Early craftsman are the same as who manufactured them probably until about 1940ish, then we see a decline faster than the makers models.

V&B I haven t found enough to comment.

Comparing tolerances in manufacturing you ll fine the only maker close (and they re pretty close) to a modern LN is the type 5 sargent and earlier.

That s my 2 cents worth.

Edit: FYI this is an excerpt from a blog post I hope to post soon on TTT

- Don W

I need to print this out and save it as I’m likely 70% Stanley to 30% Record.

-- For those about to die, remember your bicycle helmet!

View Lemwise's profile

Lemwise

70 posts in 427 days


#29 posted 09-12-2017 06:28 PM


Flatten the frog.

Flattening the frog is useless. When you tighten down the cap iron screw the blade is pulled against the cap iron (in the case of a stock thin blade) creating a hollow. This hollow is part of the design. It keeps the blade in a stressed state making it stiffer. This hollow is what rests on the frog and thus the blade only makes contact at the top and bottom of the frog.

View HokieKen's profile

HokieKen

4457 posts in 948 days


#30 posted 09-12-2017 07:37 PM

I have Stanleys and Record but I’ve become a big fan of the Millers Falls planes. They take less time to bring up to working condition than most Stanleys and, IMO, are better users once there. The exception is the only type 5 Millers Falls I’ve had. It was a fine user but, was a LOAD of work to bring it up to snuff.

-- Kenny, SW VA, Go Hokies!!!

View Smitty_Cabinetshop's profile

Smitty_Cabinetshop

14777 posts in 2428 days


#31 posted 09-12-2017 08:10 PM


Flatten the frog.

Flattening the frog is useless. When you tighten down the cap iron screw the blade is pulled against the cap iron (in the case of a stock thin blade) creating a hollow. This hollow is part of the design. It keeps the blade in a stressed state making it stiffer. This hollow is what rests on the frog and thus the blade only makes contact at the top and bottom of the frog.

- Lemwise

I disagree.

The hollow is pressed out when the level cap is engaged, meaning the cutter/cap iron combination should consistently make full contact with the frog. That said, it isn’t often that frog lapping is truly needed to make work possible.

-- Don't anthropomorphize your handplanes. They hate it when you do that. -- OldTools Archive --

View TheFridge's profile

TheFridge

8126 posts in 1296 days


#32 posted 09-12-2017 09:12 PM

He could be speaking of the seats as well.

-- Shooting down the walls of heartache. Bang bang. I am. The warrior.

View Smitty_Cabinetshop's profile

Smitty_Cabinetshop

14777 posts in 2428 days


#33 posted 09-12-2017 09:36 PM

Frogs with paint on their seats are of the ‘debil, ‘tis true!

-- Don't anthropomorphize your handplanes. They hate it when you do that. -- OldTools Archive --

View bandit571's profile

bandit571

18416 posts in 2493 days


#34 posted 09-12-2017 09:55 PM

It is not so much flat along the length of the frog’s face….it is more about ACROSS the frogs face. If there is a slight “hump” in the middle, the iron can twist to one side or the other….sometimes both in the same cut….instead of slicing along, it kind of wiggles it’s way along. Have had more than a few come through the shop with a high spot in the middle of the frog’s face.

See how many you can ID in this one….

-- A Planer? I'M the planer, this is what I use

View Don W's profile

Don W

18501 posts in 2378 days


#35 posted 09-12-2017 11:08 PM


Flatten the frog.

Flattening the frog is useless. When you tighten down the cap iron screw the blade is pulled against the cap iron (in the case of a stock thin blade) creating a hollow. This hollow is part of the design. It keeps the blade in a stressed state making it stiffer. This hollow is what rests on the frog and thus the blade only makes contact at the top and bottom of the frog.

- Lemwise

I’d suggest reading the patents.

-- http://timetestedtools.net - Collecting is an investment in the past, and the future.

Have your say...

You must be signed in to reply.

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