# Lie Nielsen vs older Stanley



## johndeereb (Jan 29, 2015)

My Dad and I have older Stanley hand planes that are fixed up. My Dad has most numbers. Was wondering in what way (if any) would new lie nielsen planes be better than stanley ones. I've been reading around on this site and find that lots of people love the lie nielsen planes. Could anyone elaborate on why you love them so much? Do they just work better, feel better in your hands etc? I'm thinking of buying him a lie nielsen as a gift but wanted to make sure it would be worth it. thanks again!


----------



## pjr1 (Jan 28, 2015)

I have one Lie Nielsen plane and it's so beautiful I hate to even touch it and leave fingerprints. Seriously, I need to get over that! Functionally they have noticeably more mass than comparably sized Stanley's and I would think the thicker blade would be less prone to chatter though I don't know that for certain.


----------



## HornedWoodwork (Jan 28, 2015)

There are some LN planes that have improved on their Stanley counterparts, lighter weight, or brass parts versus steel, that kind of thing. But if your dad has a variety of Stanley's most of the counterparts would be pretty much a lateral movement, not that big of an improvement. Don't get me wrong LN makes a fine tool and they are worth having, but they pretty much do the same as their stanley counterparts.

That said LN is making some tools that are really hard to find in useful condition made by stanley. Those specialty tools can be expensive for what they do, so they are best purchased with a specific need in mind.


----------



## RichardHillius (Oct 19, 2013)

As Pjr1 said the mass is the biggest difference in how they feel when in your hand. The thicker blade may make a bit of a difference but i have not noticed anything huge in how they handle. There is also a lot less play in the adjusting threads but I'm not sure that's a big deal.

The Lie-Neilsen's are the modern Bedrocks. They are beautiful planes to use but there is nothing wrong with the older Stanley's either. It comes down to how much time and energy do you want to spend building a good set of used planes vs buying high quality new ones. If someone has already done the work for you than you are set. I personally tend to use Stanley's for the standard size planes and Lie-Nielsen's or Veritas's for the collector planes as I don't want to pay the same for a chance at a good low angle Stanley vs knowing I'm getting a high quality Lie-Nielsen model.


----------



## OSU55 (Dec 14, 2012)

LN's might work a little better than a well tuned Stanley - the thicker blade and breaker will cut with a duller edge vs a Stanley, and they are pretty to look at. The LN bench planes pretty much have the same limitations as the Stanley's - 45° cutting angle is a compromise, and if you deal with reversing, gnarly grain, you need more angle to prevent tear out. If you decide to go LN, get one with a high angle frog.

Another path (and a more flexible one) are the bevel up "bench" planes, which allow you to have about any cutting angle you want. I have blades ground at 25°, 37°, and 50°, and use them for shooting board/end grain, smoothing, and hi angle smoothing. Old Stanley BU planes are more expensive than LN or Veritas, and not as good. Scraping planes are another good method for dealing with tear out.

Personally, for premium planes, I go to Veritas. Though not nearly as pretty, the Veritas planes have design improvements that really do improve function and use, and are a bit cheaper than LN's. Both companies have good quality and customer service. You might check into the new Veritas custom hand planes since this is a gift. You can choose the knob, tote, and frog angle.

I guess to sum up - get him a tool that addresses the shortcomings of his current tools, not just a prettier version of what he already has.


----------



## donwilwol (May 16, 2011)

This debate goes on and on, and at times gets pretty heated. I doubt you will find any real practical advantage. I have both LN and vintage. Dollar for Dollar the vintage is still the best bet in my opinion for standard bench planes. LN's are well built and very nice planes, and only you can justify the cost.

There are times when buying an LN just makes more sense, like buying a #1, or a #62, or a #164, simply because the LN is usually cheaper, and in some of these cases are better users. For instance a vintage #62 has a habit of breaking behind the mouth. The LNs have fixed that.


----------



## JAAune (Jan 22, 2012)

I use both. Though I'm no plane guru, I've not noticed an appreciable difference in performance between a well-tuned, older model Stanley and a Lie Nielsen. The Lie Nielsen is better eye-candy, feels better in the hand and has nice heft but both make identical shavings.


----------



## Dan658 (Dec 3, 2014)

If he already has a bunch of vintage Stanleys, you could buy him the Veritas cap iron and blade upgrades.

Blades - http://www.leevalley.com/US/wood/page.aspx?p=42607&cat=1,41182,43698,42607

Cap Iron/Cap Iron with Blade - http://www.leevalley.com/US/wood/page.aspx?p=66868&cat=1,230,41182


----------



## JohnChung (Sep 20, 2012)

Comparing LN and Stanley is kind of moot. A more subjective approach is which model to compare…...
I own Stanley,LN and Veritas. Each has it's advantages and weaknesses.


----------



## donwilwol (May 16, 2011)

> Comparing LN and Stanley is kind of moot. A more subjective approach is which model to compare…...
> I own Stanley,LN and Veritas. Each has it s advantages and weaknesses.
> 
> - JohnChung


Isn't that why we compare? To distinguish the advantages and disadvantages of each?


----------



## JohnChung (Sep 20, 2012)

@Don  Here is my lengthy explanation. Most of these discussion generally covers Stanley vs LN or Veritas. It generally omits out which model to compare with. If this discussion was more narrow like Stanley #4 vs LN #4 then we could be more detailed.

The title was "Lie Nielsen vs older Stanley" so it was pretty vague. I do like my Stanley #4 compared to my Veritas #4 in most cases but smoothing *Only smoothing* veritas performs better due to it's weight and on tough woods. If I could I would use the Stanley #4 as it is lighter. But please note that is my preference here.


----------



## donwilwol (May 16, 2011)

Got it. And I guess you and I said the same thing in different ways. I agree it depends.


----------



## JohnChung (Sep 20, 2012)




----------



## Loren (May 30, 2008)

Unbob I believes has a rather dim opinion of old jointers
due to sole warparge. The stress relived ductile iron 
of premium jointers may be preferable unless one wants
to go to some effort to get an old jointer really flat.

That said, for most work with planes other than jointers,
perfect flatness is, imo, not that relevant. With real hard
and figured exotics it can be a different story and there
are people making planes that can work these woods
flawlessly with price tags in the thousands.

You get some more mass with a L-N plane, which helps 
with getting pressure in smoothing cuts.

The argument that thicker irons are better is not convincing
to me. They are easy to sharpen freehand though if
no micro bevel is used. A finely set iron with a honed
and polished chipbreaker performs quite well in a $20
Bailey smoother. A L-N smoother has an enjoyable help
and feeling of quality all 'round and it is perhaps easier
to learn to get fine results with such a well manufactured
plane, but in the end it's that edge of the iron that does
the cutting and the set of the mouth and setup of the
chipbreaker that controls tearout in a standard bench
plane, no matter who made it or what it cost to buy.


----------



## ksSlim (Jun 27, 2010)

Iron--Edge--Tuning-...is the answer.
They'll all get you there.
Its the craftsman in between that that makes the difference.


----------



## unbob (Mar 10, 2013)

Loren nailed the major problems I am dealing with on wood where the grain reverses, or soft punky areas on burls. My old Bailey planes will make the thin chip on straight grain woods like many like to show, but, how they do going against the grain, or riding over hard and soft areas on wood is where I find some work better then others.
I was able to borrow a LN #7 for a few days. I found it worked better going against the grain then the Bailey #7 I was using at the time. I had the sole on the Bailey flat enough, looking at other reasons the Bailey was not performing as good. It came to be it was the mouth area of the Bailey that needed work as Loren said, to get a little less tear out.
I think Loren is also right about more weight being helpful, I am working on a Bailey #8 type 11, that is heavier then the Bailey #8 type 7. It seems it has less problem riding up and glossing over hard spots, that seems to also dull the blade quickly.
Maybe some one that has a LN plane can post a photo of the mouth area?


----------



## derekcohen (Jul 15, 2007)

The advantage of a LN is that it comes 99% tuned and ready for use. Only the blade needs to be honed and the chipbreaker fine tuned. There will be much better build quality, such as far less backlash in the adjusting mechanisms. The sole will be flat. Plus you will have the peace of mind of lifetime service.

A vintage Stanley can be an unknown quantity. The longer the plane, the harder the tuning/lapping, if needed. Blades do not hold their edge as long as A2, but for some they are easier to hone. But, if you are up to it and know what to do, once the sole, frog and chipbreaker have been set up you can achieve as high a level of performance as the LN.

The issues of performance depend very much on the type of wood you are working - straight grained and soft woods will not test the performance of a plane. A sharp blade is then 90% of the tuning needed. However, working interlocked grain will test the tuning of the chipbreaker, if it is used to control tearout. And the flatness of the sole, especially around the mouth, will be tested when taking fine shavings. Coarse shavings are often needed, but they are not a test of tuning.

Here is a recent article that will demonstrate how well a vintage Stanley compares with a new Custom Veritas ..

http://www.inthewoodshop.com/ToolReviews/VeritasCustomPlanes1.html

Regards from Perth

Derek


----------



## unbob (Mar 10, 2013)

Hopefully this photo will show the pretty ragged forward edge on the mouth of this #8 Bailey plane. I am working it flat, at the same time the mouths edges are becoming more crisp and not rolled over.
There is one point the LN #7 I was able to try was much better, the sole was finished in such a way that the edges were sharp. I believe this helps with tear out. I have many more questions then answers on this subject.


----------



## RB61 (Nov 30, 2012)

I have a 605 1/2 that has been machined by TableSaw Tom. It planes as well as my LNs but is not as easy/quick to adjust because of the backlash.


----------



## ColonelTravis (Mar 19, 2013)

Derek, great write up. 
Love that West Australian Fiddleback Marri - looks like flamed mesquite and would definitely drive you nuts without an optimal setup. Do you use it much?


----------



## unbob (Mar 10, 2013)

> I have a 605 1/2 that has been machined by TableSaw Tom. It planes as well as my LNs but is not as easy/quick to adjust because of the backlash.
> 
> - Ray


 It would seem so to me, the Bedrock planes have the frog with more contact to the sole. Maybe some day I can stumble on to one, a rare item in my area. From photos only. It looks like early ones with round sides are thinner castings, where the flat side ones appear to be thicker castings like the Bailey type 11 and later.
Most of the Bailey planes I have, are the the C type sole, I didn't seek them out that way, just what I came up with locally.

The photo above of the not so good mouth area of a Bailey #8 type 11-plain sole, that plane has a really coarse, what I think is a belt sanded finish. Its really nasty and crude, and it also rolled sides over extending close to 1/4" inboard the full length of the plane on both sides. Along with a slight over all crown, with a few dips and bumps, this plane would rock side to side leaving marks from the blades outer edges, and doing a general crappy job. Well, maybe a blessing, as its a 100yr old plane still in good shape because it never worked very well. Fixing it, was not so easy, but it got it. Just don't ask how long it took!


----------



## emart (Mar 16, 2011)

One thing I will say is it's nice having a plane that is already coated in rust for one reason. you dont feel bad if you forget to clean it. My old stanley bench plane has had more than its fair share of humidity here especially when i have to work outside.


----------



## johndeereb (Jan 29, 2015)

thanks for all the replies, this helped a lot!


----------



## mramseyISU (Mar 3, 2014)

I'm no plane guru like some guys around here but I do find myself using them more and more.

I've come to the decision that if I can't find a vintage Stanley (or whoever) after 6 months of looking locally I'm going to buy a new Veritas or Lie-Nielson. I like the old Bailey's I have (never held a bed rock) but there comes a point unless you're into it for a collection it's not worth my time. I know some guys love combing through antique stores and sales but I'd rather spend my time in the workshop. I know you can always go the eBay route to find these old planes but I've been screwed on eBay a couple times and find it hard to pull the trigger on there anymore.


----------



## Kentucky (Feb 9, 2015)

I really like my old stanleys..I have a few type 14's and a type 11 smoother..great planes but before I would pay that over premium price tag for something like a Stanley 140 skew/block plane Id go ahead and buy the LN or Veritas version..Id hate to pay $130 for a Stanley 140 only to get one that has a too large or crooked mouth and has to be lapped within an inch of its life, etc..


----------

