LumberJocks

sargent plane, how old and is it original?

  • Advertise with us

« back to Hand Tools forum

Forum topic by derosa posted 551 days ago 2175 views 0 times favorited 8 replies Add to Favorites Watch
View derosa's profile

derosa

1536 posts in 1467 days


551 days ago

Picked this up today for a 20.00, I believe it is a sargent 414c plane.
the cap says sargent vbm while the blade says sargent as well. There are no other identifying marks that I can find on the body or the frog. So does anyone know if the frog and body are meant to go with the blade and cap? Also if this is the complete piece just how old it is?

-- --Rev. Russ in NY-- A posse ad esse


8 replies so far

View Tim's profile

Tim

1244 posts in 593 days


#1 posted 551 days ago

Sargent made planes with the VMB moniker from 1907 or 1908 (depending on your source) to 1918, so if that lever cap is original from the plane thats its age. If you could tell what the blade engraving looked like that could help you tell if it was an original iron. My 414 VBM has a frog marked 409 on the underside. I don’t know if that was a case of using up an extra part they had on hand (apparently a common practice) or if all their planes of that size and that time used that frog number. You could pull your frog out and see what number it has under it. If it is an intact VBM, it’s age makes it not particularly valuable but a high quality user plane.

If you really want to know a lot about your plane you could pick up a copy of the SARGENT PLANE BOOK D. Heckel IDENT & VALUE GUIDE Credit to Don for that tip.

This Sargent site is good for more info too.

View Don W's profile

Don W

14874 posts in 1199 days


#2 posted 550 days ago

+1 on the book and the site. I’ve also added a blog trying to put together pictures of all the Sargent planes.

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

View HorizontalMike's profile

HorizontalMike

6925 posts in 1545 days


#3 posted 550 days ago

I have almost worn my copy out already! Good info… Here Russ, this might help.

IMO, the ‘brick’ type frog seems to predate the VBM cap. VBM frog on the right:

THIN Casting on my 414 Type2:

Comparison of 418 and 422s. Thin casting on left:

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

View derosa's profile

derosa

1536 posts in 1467 days


#4 posted 549 days ago

Took the frog off, one screw wouldn’t willingly move and I didn’t want to break anything. The frog does have 409 stamped in it like Tim suggests. I wonder Mike with the frog style and the cap having the overlapping year of 1910 if this wasn’t a factory slap together of left over parts. Interestingly the frog seems to be as offset ground on the bottom as the one in your picture marked 409.414, just poor quality control? Overall it seems like a stury plane, some sharpening, polishing and a new tote and it should be a good user.

-- --Rev. Russ in NY-- A posse ad esse

View HorizontalMike's profile

HorizontalMike

6925 posts in 1545 days


#5 posted 548 days ago

These early planes, while made of similar parts, were put together/fitted on a one-by-one basis. Of the three #414s that I recently picked up, two are thin castings and one is a thicker casting with a mouth ‘step’ for the frog to sit on. If you look at my triple image above of the mouths, you can see where the center 418 mouth was ground down to match the frog being used with that particular plane. Some of these parts are simply NOT as interchangeable as we would like to believe.

Case #1:
I have a ‘cap’ screw on my Type2 #414 frog that WILL NOT fit into any of the other frogs. The other frog’s cap screws will fit the Type2 frog but NOT the other way around. It is that close, but no bananas. These screws were machined one at a time and are “supposed” to be 1/4-24 machined screws, however, when I ordered a hand full of 1/4-24 screws from Flatland Motorcycle Co (restoration of old Harleys), they fit way TOO loosely to be of any good. The Sargent screws are actually 0.260in in diameter and not 0.250in as the SHOULD be. I did measure this and it is frustrating to say the least.

Case#2:
One of the frogs for the three imaged above (422, 418, 418VBM) will NOT fit one of the other plane beds, because the plane bed was machined down to the proper depth for that one particular frog, and that particular frog only. Modern assembly line production was still in its infancy when these planes were produced, and Sargent was NOT part of that modernization effort until much later. Sometimes parts were/are interchangeable and sometimes they were/are not. Fun stuff huh… ;-)

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

View Don W's profile

Don W

14874 posts in 1199 days


#6 posted 548 days ago

Fun stuff for sure Mike!!

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

View Fred Hargis's profile

Fred Hargis

1728 posts in 1125 days


#7 posted 548 days ago

This is a great thread for me! I just picked up a VBM last week, a 408. Thanks guys!

-- Our village hasn't lost it's idiot, we sent 'em to Washington.

View HorizontalMike's profile

HorizontalMike

6925 posts in 1545 days


#8 posted 547 days ago

”...I wonder Mike with the frog style and the cap having the overlapping year of 1910 if this wasn’t a factory slap together of left over parts….”

Russ,
I just re-read this thread and noticed that I missed one of your questions. Yes, prior to the VBM Series much ”...factory slap together of left over parts…” occurred, especially in the early 1900s, as I understand it.

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

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

Latest Projects | Latest Blog Entries | Latest Forum Topics

GardenTenders.com :: gardening showcase