LumberJocks

Union mfg co planes

  • Advertise with us

« back to Hand Tools forum

Forum topic by TomiRosso posted 09-08-2015 12:49 PM 1102 views 0 times favorited 4 replies Add to Favorites Watch
View TomiRosso's profile

TomiRosso

3 posts in 455 days


09-08-2015 12:49 PM

Hi,

I think there are some rock solid experts who know everything of Union manufacturing company’s planes. I have bought couple of block planes and I want to know in which period those are. Or is those Union planes at all.

Two at the left have Union Mfg Co Irons. That smallest does not. Propably Iron is not original, but body’s shape is identical to that in the middle.

First body shape and size is suitable with Union 1905 catalog’s block plane number 227, but cap iron is different. Google gives that shaped cap irons and mechanism, when searching Union 227. So I am pretty sure that this is Union. Body have not any marking of manufacturer or size number. This must be newer than that catalog. Perhaps post-Stanley? Any ideas?

Midmost plane suits with catalogs plane number 110. Body have no markings. This could be quite old one? Or something better ideas?

On of the right have identical structure and mechanism than middle. Body have marking 102. No manufacturer. Outher shape fits with catalogs 102. Or have some other manufacturer identical structure?

I have also one Circular Plane No 411. That have Union markings in body and Iron and that knob. I don’t have just now picture of it, but it can be arranged. That was my first plane. It was belong to my grandmother father. Union is quite rare plane in here Finland, so I try to find answer here.


4 replies so far

View Clarkie's profile

Clarkie

380 posts in 1304 days


#1 posted 09-08-2015 01:53 PM

Hello Tommi, as long as you have identified the ones that have the Union cutters, it may be safe to assume they are indeed Union planes, though it is known that the cutting irons can be used on other planes as well. The one on the far right, by the way it is stamped with the 102, could most likely be a Stanley, least by looks. Hope this helps.

View Don W's profile

Don W

17963 posts in 2031 days


#2 posted 09-09-2015 03:14 PM

Finding good Union information is tough. Even Roger Smith didn’t say much in his books. I can find lots of opinions, but so far not much I could verify and quit a bit that seems to have evidence against.

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

View TomiRosso's profile

TomiRosso

3 posts in 455 days


#3 posted 09-10-2015 06:25 AM

Yes I noticed that too, that information is really hard to find and I don’t know good places where find it. And when looking pictures from ebay or some other sources where peoples are selling their planes, many times there are some little differences between each other. For example one Union 227 block plane is identical with that mine, but difference is that it have cast-marking Union and No 227. Same with that 110.

That why I ask you, that do you know if there are always casting markings in union. It’s always possible that iron is Union, but body is not. Quite little risk I think, because body shape is correct, but still. That little one is good example. It’s looks like just Union 102 in 1905 catalog. And body looks like just that 110, but still it looks like Stanley too.

If you know some of those books or web-sites or something where I can find some information of Union planes, I am pleased to hear of those.

View Don W's profile

Don W

17963 posts in 2031 days


#4 posted 09-10-2015 09:32 AM

Here is what I’ve dug up so far. How much of it is true and how it translates to blocks, I don’t know. If you dig anything new up please add it. Eventually I’ll find enough that it makes sense.http://timetestedtools.forumchitchat.com/post/information-on-typing-union-bench-planes-7539560?pid=1288421648

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

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