# Is the #8 jointer plane to large? Do you use one?



## rkober (Feb 15, 2012)

I've been watching a #8 Lie Nielsen on Craigslist for a while now. He's down to $250 which seems like a pretty good deal. I love my old Stanley #7 and would like to get some LN's in the corral. However that #8 seems like a beast. Thoughts/advice?


----------



## paratrooper34 (Apr 27, 2010)

rkober, I use my #8 (Record) a lot. I would say pretty much on any project I do. Is it too big? Not at all. Jointers should be big to make jointing and flattening easy and more accurate.

I also have a #7 (Record) and here is how I have the #8 and #7 set up: The #7 has a straight blade on it used for finish jointing and on smaller parts. I have the #8 set up with a cambered blade used for rough jointing and long boards. The cambered blade excels at getting the edges square, especially on those that I cut with a handsaw because I am not perfect with long rip cuts.

I highly recommend a #8. In fact, it is not the largest jointer I have. I have a longer, heavier wood bodied one that I break out now and then for some jobs.


----------



## Loren (May 30, 2008)

You'd have no problem reselling it on ebay and recouping
your investment.


----------



## rkober (Feb 15, 2012)

Thanks guys.


----------



## planepassion (Nov 24, 2010)

I'm 5' 6" and I have no trouble with my SB #8. I use it on large panels or to flatten boards. It's larger mass is a big benefit because it pushes through the cut. I do break a sweat with it. But the heft works in its favor.


----------



## gawthrrw (Sep 13, 2011)

I have a number 7 stanley and love the weight of it. I bet it would be less stress on your arms and shoulders with the inertia of the #8. Just my 2 cents.


----------



## donwilwol (May 16, 2011)

I love my 608


----------



## DonBroussard (Mar 27, 2012)

I have and use a Stanley No. 7, but I'm always looking for a good No. 8. I'll pick one up when the time and price are right, clean 'em up, tune 'em up and put 'em to work. I have my No. 7 set up with a camber on the blade. If I do get a No. 8, I'll probably set them up like LJ paratrooper34 has his 7 and 8 set up.


----------



## bandit571 (Jan 20, 2011)

I will use my #8c when doing long boards









and sometimes, even just a table leg. Once you set the plane ON the wood, all you need to do is push it along.


----------



## rkober (Feb 15, 2012)

Thanks again. I'm trying to get a hold of the guy with the plane. I just didn't want to buy a beast that's to big to use.


----------



## ScrubPlane (May 22, 2012)

Several thoughts…

I purchased a #8 two years ago and feared the same thing at first. Then I realized the two most important details. First, plane set-up…a very sharp blade and 'clean' plane bottom. You are, after all, pushing a lot of steel across the wood. The second thought is related to ergonomics. Make sure the height of the working surface is such that you utilize the bigger muscles of your shoulders and legs through the 'push'. This will greatly reduce your back strain.


----------



## HorizontalMike (Jun 3, 2010)

I recently acquired a restored TYPE #2 'Horseshoe' Sargent #424 (Stanley type #8) with re-japanning in original Asphaltum and all the correct early parts. Have no plans on actually putting it to use, but sure love looking at that huge aircraft landing strip sized casting with the Type #1 markings and "dot" on the sole. I got a way too good of a deal to past it up.


----------



## planepassion (Nov 24, 2010)

Don, did your #608 come with the side fence or did you modify it yourself after the fact.

Also, how does that fence work? Is it easier to joint edges with?


----------



## donwilwol (May 16, 2011)

Brad, the 608 came with the holes, I made the fence.

It's easier to keep a true 90 when using it, especially on wider stuff.


----------



## reedwood (Jan 27, 2011)

Nice plane choice for a collection. Those planes go for 3 to 500.00 used, even more with the box.

How much is he asking for it?........wat's his number? he he look out….I'll out bid you!

You can pick up a sweet Stanley # 8 for 60 - 175.00 on E Bay that works just as good if not better because you won't be staring at it or afraid to scratch it. Heck, I would buy both!

Seeing those holes drilled in that Stanley # 608 bedrock made me cringe. I have a no. 7 Type 2 that someone drilled small holes in the side and wondered if it was for mounting on a wall. Now I'm sure it was for a fence like this one. Too bad it destroyed the value by half. If that matters.

It does look like a great set up. I like the knob on the side.

But If I may suggest, find an old craftsman or a pitted stanley to drill into. Save those bedrock planes! You wouldn't drill holes in the Lie Nielson, right? These are just as collectable as the LNs. and going up in value.

Also, save your cardboard boxes your tools come in…. makes them more valuable and very collectable.

That's what I discovered recently after 2 months researching the history of hand planes followed by a spending spree on E bay. I also collect and restore planes for fun.

edit - I just noticed this post is 33 days old. Did you buy it?


----------



## donwilwol (May 16, 2011)

Mark, I would have never put those holes in that 608. But being they were there made it easy.


----------



## reedwood (Jan 27, 2011)

Hey Don, no slight intended. I read that you didn't drill the holes. I also would guess you probably already knew this. BTW - your bench is awesome!

I just thought it might be a good idea to mention what I learned about planes recently in case someone wanted to do the same thing to their grand father's hand me down # 608.


----------



## donwilwol (May 16, 2011)

No slight taken and a good call out. I'd rather drill a hole in a Lie Nielson (not that I would). At least they are still making those.


----------



## rkober (Feb 15, 2012)

reedwood - yes I did get it. I paid $250 and it looked to have been used very little so I'm pretty happy. Unfortunately I don't have any pics though. My timing was pretty good as I had a couple shop tables to build with built up 4×4 legs and 2x stringers so the #8 was the ticket. I'm very happy with it, and like some said earlier, it works well with the #7.


----------



## stevenmadden (Dec 10, 2009)

*rkober*: I have the Lie-Nielsen #7 and #8, and while the #7 is my go to jointer, I do use the #8 on occasion. I prefer my #7 because it has the 55 degree high angle frog. If Lie-Nielsen ever produces a 55 degree high angle frog for the #8, that would definitely become my go to jointer.

Steven


----------



## paratrooper34 (Apr 27, 2010)

Steven, I have to ask, why do you prefer the high angle frog on a jointer?


----------



## stevenmadden (Dec 10, 2009)

*paratrooper34*: First of all, I would like to say that I am no expert on Common Pitch (45 degree), York Pitch (50 degree), and Middle Pitch (55 degree) and their differences. I happen to have the 55 degree high angle frog on my #4, #4 1/2, #5 1/2 (which I use most often), and my #7 (all Lie-Nielsen). I guess I prefer the high angle frog (Middle Pitch) because it seems to perform better for me in the woods that I use most often; cherry, maple, mahogany, and walnut (in that order). It is definitely harder to push, but I very rarely have problems with tear-out of any kind (even in gnarly grain or switchback, etc.). If the #8 had a high angle frog, then I think it would have all of the high angle frog benefits plus it would be hard to stop once it got going (easier to push). I very rarely use soft woods such as pine; the west coast is not known for its pine. On the occasion that I am working with pine (or something like it), I have an old (1908, I believe) Stanley Bailey #5 1/2 that I picked up at an estate sale and rehabbed (didn't need much, it still has the original blade and everything), and it works great.

I don't see any difference between a board planed with a standard angle frog and the 55 degree high angle frog, so the high angle frog offers better performance (for me) with the only downside being that it is harder to push (I consider it a good workout).

As an aside, I have the Lie-Nielsen Low Angle Jack Plane which I use mostly for roughing out stock. The blade I use most with this plane has a heavy camber and I can adjust the mouth to take a very aggressive cut, plus it is very easy to push (bevel up). After that, I follow up with my #7 (with the 55 degree HAF) and almost don't need to go to my #4 or #4 1/2. The only reason I do follow up with a smoother is to lessen the valleys created by the camber on my jointer (my smoother also has some camber, but it is very slight). I have the toothed blade for my Low Angle Jack and have never used it, any problems created during the roughing stage are quickly solved once I switch to my jointer. The reason I originally switched to using planes with the 55 degree HAF had to do with one of the spare blades for my Low Angle Jack; I sharpened the secondary bevel on that blade to 50 degrees which made the overall angle 62 degrees (the blade is bedded at 12 degrees). The results spoke for themselves, so I made the switch.

Sorry for the long winded reply; someone who is more educated about the differences in frog angles would have probably given a more concise reply.

Steven


----------



## paratrooper34 (Apr 27, 2010)

Steven, I appreciate the long winded reply. Makes total sense as to me now why you use them. Thanks!


----------



## donwilwol (May 16, 2011)

I was going to ask the same question Mike. The high angle is sweet as a smoother. I'll bet that #7 is great on table tops.


----------



## kokomoron (Feb 25, 2013)

I have a 608 . I love it and use it a lot.


----------



## kokomoron (Feb 25, 2013)

Reedwood.. I appreciate your concern, but 608s are not particularly rare pieces of our cultural heritage. I'd say if a guy wants to drill holes for a fence, it is a tool after all. A lot of the hole drilling was done before the baby boomers got into the market and turned tools into relics.


----------



## reedwood (Jan 27, 2011)

This # 7 SW was worth around 75.00 before someone drilled it.

... maybe worth 15.00 for parts now.


----------

