# New Veritas® Small Bevel-Up Smooth Plane



## WayneC (Mar 8, 2007)

I just saw that Veritas has added a new #3 sized bevel up plane. Anyone tried one out yet?










http://www.leevalley.com/US/wood/page.aspx?p=67691&cat=1,41182,52515


----------



## lysdexic (Mar 21, 2011)

I've not tried it. I wonder how long it has been available. The blade is not interchangeable which is understandable but requires buying another assortment of irons. I like that fact that the sides are machined square so you use it on a shooting board.

You know I am really enamored with vintage planes and their restoration but I am trying to buy tools that I really need and not become a collector. With this set of planes it is difficult to rationalize putting the $$, time and effort into a full compliment of vintage Stanley planes.

Really, what functional weaknesses does this set have(other than the price difference). The only two that I can think of are:
You may need a # 5 for rough work because of the ease of chambering the blade relative to a bevel up iron
You may need a #8 for jointing because of the longer sole.


----------



## tirebob (Aug 2, 2010)

I was in Lee Valley last week and they let me test drive it on a piece of cherry. I was impressed for sure. It is smaller and lighter (obviously) than the larger BUS, and felt very good in hand. I was thinking the tote would be slightly uncomfortable but was pleasantly surprised that it felt really comfy.. The adjustments are simple and easy. Overall, a great little plane! If I didn't have the regular BUS already, I would buy it. I need a plow plane more at this time… lol


----------



## WayneC (Mar 8, 2007)

I belive it just came out. The web site says August, but I did not see it a couple of weeks ago, so I am guessing late August.

I guess it depends on what your building. The what other planes would you need question is interesting one. Standard Jack planes can be found pretty cheaply. On the jointer front, I think the LN set has the edge.

This looks good for someone who prefers smaller planes and wants a low angle plane.


----------



## WayneC (Mar 8, 2007)

Bob, I really like their little plow planes. They are pretty cool. (Shoulder planes as well)


----------



## tirebob (Aug 2, 2010)

I have both the LV large and small shoulder planes. They are great tools for sure! I can't wait to get the plow however. No question that I will be using that right away!


----------



## jusfine (May 22, 2010)

Wayne, that looks like a very nice little plane, might have to drive over and see one in person…


----------



## racerglen (Oct 15, 2010)

Easy Randy, leave one for the rest of us..

;-)


----------



## mafe (Dec 10, 2009)

Beautiful little plane, looking like a gem.
But some one have to teach them to make some beautiful totes…
To me it is the only thing I do not love about their hand planes.
They could look here:
http://www.cornishworkshop.co.uk/planetote01.html
Best thoughts,
Mads


----------



## WayneC (Mar 8, 2007)

I agree on the totes…


----------



## jusfine (May 22, 2010)

Mads / Wayne, what is the difference? Looks very similar to me.

Ok, I just looked again at the photo again and at the catalog, this one does seem to be a little odd looking compared to the rest, a bit "stumpy".










The totes on my other Veritas planes fit my hand very well, I am more *uncomfortable* with the Lie Nielson plane totes.

*Thanks Glen*, I won't be the first to buy it (just because I noticed it late), but remember one of my favorite sayings "The early bird gets the worm, but the second mouse gets the cheese"…


----------



## mafe (Dec 10, 2009)

Justfine, there are nothing wrong with the totes! I just find them really 'un-designed' they are stumpy, un-elegant and they seems heavy on the planes that I find extremely well designed. I have a giant respect for Veritas, they try to improve, reinvent and do this in both use and design, they are really plane makers, not just producers, but they never really got the design right on the knobs and totes in my taste (and I read this many places so I think I'm not alone). But I repeat in my taste. If I had the money and was not so hooked on the old planes and the history around them I would choose Veritas over LN with no doubt, but I would redesign the totes and knobs and change them since I am really picky on design (I'm an architect not a carpenter). 
Actually I think the biggest problem is they ALMOST look like the old, but they don't really, and they are made from wood in color and style as the old but yet they look not like the old, so they become strangers to us. So I think the right thing was to rethink completely, perhaps carbon fibers would be the thing or a really dark wood, but I think also the shape needs to be rethought… I would be happy to take the job of redesigning them, I feel sure it could be done with success and that they would raise the sales a lot if they got this last thing right, I actually find it sad they are not the no one on the market, they deserve it. To me LN is too 'pling' but in twenty years when they will be on E-bat full of wear and patina they are going to be amazing I think. I think Veritas with some better totes would be even more bad ass, and probably become the new 'Stanley's' that everyone would copy in the future.
It is a discussion that can make noise, but as usual I dear my but - laugh.
Best thoughts,
Mads


----------



## lysdexic (Mar 21, 2011)

Justfine: I also find the Veritas totes very comfortable. I also agree with Mafe. They just don't look right. I have considered an aftermarket replacements but can't justify the cost. Mafe, your objections to the tote design are accentuated in this #3. it looks even worse. The " hang angle" is differnet. Also, it appears to fasten from the bottom and would require a different approach to replace it.

Cessna: I bought a type 13 Stanley #3 this weekend for the purpose you stated. Even if I had know about tuis new BU Veritas I think I would still buy vintage


----------



## jusfine (May 22, 2010)

Well, hopefully Rob Lee will see this discussion and take some notes from it, and I am sure he will contact you Mads… don't be surprised if he does!

Maybe this is a case of function over form?

I proudly support the Canadian company, and enjoy every tool I have purchased from them over the years…


----------



## mafe (Dec 10, 2009)

I more than respect Veritas, I think they are with no compare the most important plane creators since Stanley set the standard everyone just followed for so long - finally someone who had the will and the courage to go new ways, I am deeply impressed and full of respect.
There has been plenty who 'just' made Stanley planes better than Stanley, and at a higher price, but to make them better and at a fair price, this is a challenge only they have taken and done really impressive.
If you look at the NX60 block plane and the apron plane from Veritas, they kick ass, they are so well designed, here the wood is away, and their modern approach makes sense. The design and the function go hand in hand. But I think also the wood could probably stay, just better designed, but this is all feelings, to make a good design you need production and all the rest of the factors into consideration, and you need hours of feeling when it is right.
Best thoughts,
Mads


----------



## mafe (Dec 10, 2009)

The only Veritas plane I have is the apron plane, and my small Stanleys are really jealous!
Big smile,
Mads


----------



## lysdexic (Mar 21, 2011)

SWEET !!!!


----------



## jusfine (May 22, 2010)

To me that's a sexy looking plane!


----------



## mafe (Dec 10, 2009)

I think also this is sexy.
But I still think they could do even better by looking in different directions, to make a unique Veritas version.


----------



## WayneC (Mar 8, 2007)

Some of the totes seem to me like the 50s cheaper totes when Stanley and the other plane makers moved away from quality materials. This kind of fit and finish feeling has moved me more towards LN planes even if they are a little more money. I think Veritas really becomes appealing when they make true innovation in their plane designs such as with their shoulder planes.


----------



## mafe (Dec 10, 2009)

I think you are not alone on that one Wayne, it is the same I hear all over.
It is like people almost are sad that they can't take the step towards Veritas due to the design (I think at the end the handles). Since a large part of buyers of hand planes are interested in esthetics also I really understand, after all this is what most users of high quality are after, beauty and that function and form meets.
Even on the shoulder plane with wood it does not really balance with the rest of the design I think.
Sorry that the discussion here took a twist, hope it is ok.


----------



## WayneC (Mar 8, 2007)

I am happy to see the discussion. That is the point of the post. I do think this will be a popular little plane.


----------



## lysdexic (Mar 21, 2011)

Mafe, this discussion is pertinent given the fact the the #3 BU plane is the reason why aesthetics came up. I agree with completely. I have the BU LA jack and when I use it I feel the QUALITY in its performance. Yet, every time I see the Lie Nielsen LA jack I regret not getting that one because it is just beautiful and I assume it performs just as well.

For instance, I was explaining there current market for hand planes to a colleague. I pulled up the LV and LN websites and show him what contemporary USA/Canadian quality manufacturing looks like and cost. He is not into woodworking and his eyes were starting to glaze over until he saw the LN LA Jack. He said "Oooo, now I like that one. Thats cool."

If I remember correctly, Pheadrus in "Zen and The Art of Motorcycle Maintenance" went crazy trying to define QUALITY. But is the sweet spot of objective performance and subjective beauty. The new Veritas LA #3 lacks the later.


----------



## RobLee (May 19, 2009)

Hi all-

Couple of comments on plane handles.

Firstly - we can make any shape we want…and the shape we have designed is ergonomically correct for how we want the force applied by your hand to be directed through the mouth of the plane. We modelled this extensively. The handles are also designed for larger hands, and different bench heights than were used historically.

The handle is a key part of the tool - what it looks like is really secondary to us. It would have been far easier from a marketing standpoint to just copy every other handle shape out there….and settle on something far sexier in shape.

That would completely compromise our design…executed from first principles throughout the line.

Truthfully - you all should be modifying all of your tool handles to suit your own handle preferences in the first place. Any single design will only suit a part or the population in the first place. We put a lot of effort into ensuring handles on many of our tools are easy to replace….

Cheers,

Rob
(on vacation in SC)


----------



## lysdexic (Mar 21, 2011)

Rob,
Thanks so much for responding. That in and of itself adds quality to your brand. I will think of it every time I pick up one of the many Veritas planes that I own.

Just between you and me sir, Mafe started it 

Scott


----------



## WayneC (Mar 8, 2007)

Rob, Thanks as well for dropping in. I really appreciate your company's contributions to the woodworking community. Please continue to innovate.


----------



## lysdexic (Mar 21, 2011)

Mafe,
Humor and tone are so hard to judge in this medium. I just want to be SURE that everyone realizes that the statement above is just light-hearted teasing.
Scott


----------



## TopamaxSurvivor (May 2, 2008)

Rob, In your opinion would the old Stanley design benefit from your style tote?


----------



## racerglen (Oct 15, 2010)

Oh and Rob..
When's your new toy, er tool catalog comming..
Inquiring minds need to budget

;-)


----------



## RobLee (May 19, 2009)

Hi Topamax…

No, I'm not so sure that a Stanley plane would benefit from our tote…but just about any mass produced tote would benefit from a touch of a rasp to change the shape to suit your preference. We're all pretty hesitant to modify what we buy….the more we pay, the less likely we are to change it.

The thing about handles that fit your hand "perfectly" is that they can be very fatiguing to use. You want to ensure you don't apply constant pressure on nerves, vessels, or tendons….for the hand - you want to avoid center of the palm, and try to ensure that force is applied around the periphery of the palm…that's what lead to a more vertical design. A handle should also " massage" the blood through your tissue as you use it…which is why you often see ridges etc on hand tools ( beside ensuring a good mechanical lock )...

Glen - your catalogue should be in the mail now…...

Scott - I had no problem spotting the humor!

I appreciate all of the considered discussion here…. !

Cheers,

Rob


----------



## mafe (Dec 10, 2009)

Hi guys,

I am one big smile no worry Scott I did not take it in any bad way, and I find it wonderful to see Rob is so close to the users, this is admireable.

Rob, I hope it is clear when you read my words that I have a giant admiration for what you guys are doing, I am in the dust, that my critics are purely estetic and due to that fact that I think the rest of the plane is so dam hot that I just feel the handles stand alone, I also agree that the solution will never be to 'just' add a old Stanley shape, I think it would be all wrong even it looked sexy - laugh.

Best thoughts,
Mads


----------



## mafe (Dec 10, 2009)

Quote my self:

*I more than respect Veritas, I think they are with no compare the most important plane creators since Stanley set the standard everyone just followed for so long - finally someone who had the will and the courage to go new ways, I am deeply impressed and full of respect.*

Ohhh yes and I acually have a marking gauge and a Scraping plane from Vritas also.

Best thoughts,
Mads


----------



## RobLee (May 19, 2009)

Hi Mads-

No worries…. We like to hear everyone's views…That's the most critical part of product development - using your ears, before using what's between them!

Cheers,

Rob
( enjoying happy hour at the campground in SC ….. After spending the day at Brookgreen Gardens )


----------



## mafe (Dec 10, 2009)

Have a nice vacation Rob.
Best of my thoughts,
Mads


----------



## mafe (Dec 10, 2009)

Rob, today I was playing in the work shop and used my dovetail saw, or shall I say your dovetail saw…
It is a Veritas, and I could not help thinking about you, that saw handle is so new and so beautiful I think.









If that can be ergonomic, then it must be possible to learn from that and transfere to the handplanes.









I also fixed a broken handle on one of my old Record planes and took that chance to cusomize it to me.
What I don't like on the old is that the top is too low angel and too sharp edge so it hurts the hand after some time, and also it is not balanced in design, it has no real end to it.
I think my new top made it more balanced, at least it is now a pleasure to work with…









Here after the update.

Best thoughts,
Mads


----------



## Arminius (Dec 27, 2007)

From very limited use, this plane will probably correct the sense that some users of the fullsize Bevel Up Smoother that there is a little too much weight in front. I have never personally had that complaint, so this gorgeous little smoother rates a 'nice to have' for me. I like it, but I have a bigger one already…


----------



## WayneC (Mar 8, 2007)

Hmmm. Gift for the fiancee?


----------



## tom427cid (Aug 21, 2011)

If only to add a bit to the conversation-The handle/tote/knob on the tool is the link between the tool and the user. And most importantly the tool needs to become an extension of the users hand. If the handle is uncomfortable the tool will not give good consistant results. years ago my wife gave me a beautiful brass backed saw.The handle was most uncomfortable and I wound up not liking the saw. Some time later I had the extrordinary good fortune to purchace($6) an English dovetail saw. The user was left handed and the moment I held the saw(it fit my hand like an old familiar glove) I had to have it. I also decided to copy the handle and install it on the brass backed saw. Today I use the saw regularly because now it is an extension of my hand.
And yes I understand that mass produced items sorta have to aim for a middle ground-but if a little fine tuning or as in my case rehandling makes to tool comfortable to use,bottom line you will do better work.
tom


----------



## lysdexic (Mar 21, 2011)

garypr said: "I am not sure exacly why I would need a #3 bevel up smooth plane but I will find a use for it when I get it."

Love your attitude!


----------



## KLD (Oct 13, 2011)

I've just bought one of the #3 sized bevel up planes and am very pleased with it. However, one aspect of its design is confusing. The trailing edge of the moveable nosepiece has a 45-degree chamfer about 20 thou (0.5 mm) wide across its whole width. I've always thought that edge should be sharp, otherwise it's difficult to achieve the very narrow mouth required for fine work, particularly in difficult timbers.

Before I take a file to it, has anybody any thoughts regarding why I should leave it there? I would be particularly interested in Rob's views, of course.

Many thanks for your help.

Kevin


----------



## NANeanderthal (Jun 2, 2011)

KLD,
I wouldn't take a file to the body of a Veritas tool with making sure its needed. Use it, does it not close good enough to work well? If it works, I would touch it unless you hear from Robin the its a mistake and should be flat. Matter of fact, just email Lee valley before you start filing on it.


----------



## KLD (Oct 13, 2011)

Newage Neanderthal,

Many thanks for your comments. I did hear from Rob and he said that the chamfer on the trailing edge of the toe is not supposed to be there. Details can be found in his reply to my post "Mouth widths on Veritas bevel-up planes" on the Hand Tools forum on www.ukworkshop.co.uk

In that reply, he says that early buyers of the plane will be contacted and replacements shipped.

Kevin


----------



## WayneC (Mar 8, 2007)

Good to know Kevin, thanks for the info.


----------

