# Ron Hock Blades and chip breakers



## willy66 (Apr 11, 2011)

Ok, so I am lucky enough (and cursed) to work about 12 blocks away from Tools For Working Wood, in Brooklyn, NY. I'm lucky cuz I get to look at their website, and pick from their high quality tools selection, then go there and touch these things BEFORE I buy them. Plus I don't have to wait for my new toys…uh..I mean tools to ship to me. The curse is that it makes it that much easier to blow a lot of money quickly. So far I've gotten their hold fasts, some dovetail chisels, my Starretts and now a set of Ron Hock Blades and Chip breaker for my Stanley Bailey No. 4 smooth plane.

Now I am pretty new to the whole hand plane scene, and have been buying vintage and restoring. Also new to sharpening, and decided to go with the the Worksharp 3000, mostly because of the lower cost, and ease of use. I am all for doing things the old fashion way, but my thinking was that for something like sharpening, if there is an easier way that is equally effective, use it. That way I can spend more time honing my hand plane skills and dovetailing, instead of honing edges. I have been sharpening my plane irons and chisels with the Worksharp, and it seems to be working well….until I put the Ron Hock Cap and Iron on my #4. WOW. What A difference. A better finish on the wood, easier to use, easier to adjust, finer more consistent shavings. WOW! I will be buying new Caps and Irons for my #5 and #6 as soon as I can save up enough milk money.

This major difference got me thinking though… Is it the old blades that are that much more inferior, or is it the sharpening method? I have yet to sharpen my new blade, so I am not sure. That is the questions I want to (finally) ask all of you who have a little more experience-

What have you heard/experienced with the Worksharp 3000? Has anyone compared this to the old fashion water stone/oilstone methods? Any and all input is welcome.


----------



## PurpLev (May 30, 2008)

It's a combination of both - the hock blades are thicker (and *may or may not* be used of different metal than what you were using before making it capable of a finer edge) this equates to more penetration capability from the blade and less prone to vibration induced into it which results in a better and easier cut.

Also they were probably sharpened and honed to a higher degree then what you are accustomed to when using your worksharp 3000.


----------



## wingate_52 (May 14, 2011)

I have spent some time, flattening then sharpening and honing Record/Stanley vanadium plane blades recently. I have overhauled most of my Bailey type planes and was really pleased with the results. I also have a laminated Japanese blade that I save for ebony (fingerboards). Reading stuff and watching videos on the internet have convinced me to try a Cosman IBC blade and chipbreaker/back iron. With a bit of filing of the frog, not the mouth of the plane and elongating a hole on the breaker, I have the BEST Plane ever in my collection. It is sharp and cuts effortlessly and holds it's edge. If a Hock has similar properties, go for it.


----------



## TheDane (May 15, 2008)

FWIW, I have three planes (a #3, one of my #5's, and my #7) that are fitted out with Hock A2 irons and chipbreakers. My #4 and the other #5 are fitted out with Cosman IBC irons and chipbreakers.

All 5 were lapped and honed on Japanese waterstones, and I can't tell the difference in performance. They are all excellent, and all seem to hold the edge very well.

The irons are thicker, which can present some problems when they are installed in a vintage plane because the mouth may not be large enough. I had that issue on my #4, but corrected it with some careful filing to enlarge the mouth. The other four planes weren't a problem … I get angel hair shavings with them without messing up the mouth of the plane.

-Gerry


----------



## WayneC (Mar 8, 2007)

There was some discussion of this in one of Paul Sellers forum posts about how unnecessary premimum blades were. I was a pretty interesting discussion. Basically there was not an advantage for using premium blades/chipbreakers over the original blades on old planes. I will try to find it and link it back here.

As a disclamer, I use Hock blades/chip breakers in pretty much all of my bench planes and have an IBC blade in my Stanley 62.


----------



## WayneC (Mar 8, 2007)

Some of the discussion was in this thread… http://lumberjocks.com/PaulSellers/blog/23413 It is a good read on handplanes if you have not already read it.

The other part may be in the monolithic hand plane of your dreams post. I was kind of hoping Paul would see this thead and drop in to pass along a little of his wisdom.

Also, be warned corrigated plane bottoms are the devil's spawn and only fit to fuel the collector's market… : ^ ) (some exageration on my part but Paul has some real good arguments against them as well)


----------



## pierce85 (May 21, 2011)

^ A very good read indeed!

What are Paul's arguments against corrugated bottoms or do you have a link? I'm looking to get a #7 or #8 Bailey and see that quite a few are corrugated. I know that corrugated bottoms have less friction and are supposed to be easier to push through the wood but it would be useful to understand their downside.


----------



## WayneC (Mar 8, 2007)

Paul's argument is in post #73 of this thread. The entire thread is worth reading….

http://lumberjocks.com/topics/27774

The advice is bad, Al. I do not usually intercede between the decisions and advice of others, but I do, in this case, want to go on record with reference to corrugated soles. A friend went against the sage advice of his elder mentor craftsmen and bought one of the corrugated soled versions decades ago. Every time he used it the grooves clogged with wafer thin shavings, just as he had been warned. I mean with every swipe the sole sucked in the shavings on the return stroke as it sometimes does with regular flat soles, but a thousand more times in a day. I wish this maker had done the research and asked a few older woodworkers before going into production. Reduces friction? Maybe some. Ever tried running a chamfer with a corrugated soled plane. It works; but only now and again. Break the corners on a box, sure, but it's risky on a finished piece.
Let me know how you go on. I don't in any way want to hurt any reputations but some people are going to be taken in by a pretty face. Don't ever use a corrugated soled plane on veneer work or fine work. You'll pay the price.

and in post 75

Absolutely. The fact that corrugations are there means that any slight skewing along narrower edges or near the long corners or any slight tilt on the plane causes the corrugation to catch on the corner of the wood and this tears the corner sometimes. No, oftentimes.

Now if you are a collector person, which I hope you are not, this would be a great addition. In fact I strongly recommend that all plane collectors, that is those who merely perceive planes and tools as relics of a past woodworking era to be displayed for entertainment and amusement, should buy up every corrugated plane they can find and amass a wonderful collection. That way we wont have to address this issue ever again except to say these planes are highly sought after collector items equal in use to the woodworker to the Stanley #1.


----------



## pierce85 (May 21, 2011)

Thanks, Wayne. Great stuff!


----------



## WayneC (Mar 8, 2007)

Your most welcome.


----------



## marcfromny (Mar 15, 2009)

I work in brooklyn also and will soon be moving about 10 blocks away on 3rd from TTFW. I cant believe I havent been there yet. i've been meaning to though.


----------



## WayneC (Mar 8, 2007)

I am luck I live all the way a cross the country from TTFW. Otherwise I would be broke….lol Lots of stuff there on my wishlist. (I actually got a package from them this week, awk, Ashley Iles carving tools are too hard to resist)


----------



## JSZ (Jan 5, 2010)

Getting back to the original question:

Even Ron's plane irons need to be touched up before they will give you the best surface on the workpiece. There are almost as many ways to sharpen plane irons (and chisels, for that matter) as there are woodworkers.

Having tried to learn sharpening out of a book, I got frustrated, and one day several decades ago took a class from someone who knew what they were doing with steel and abrasives. That was a watershed day for me. Everything I did in the shop got easier, and my work got better. Now I teach sharpening to others, and I hope they have "Eureka" moments just like I did.

I can't comment on the Worksharp 3000, because I don't own one. I believe they use replaceable abrasive disks for sharpening, which seems to be a never-ending expense. I'm a little more old-fashioned, I suppose. I hollow grind my irons and western chisels on a grinder, and then hone on synthetic waterstones. I don't know how to compare edges between the two systems, but I am satisfied with the surfaces my planes leave behind. I occasionally need to touch up the surfaces with a scraper, but rarely need to sand.

For a description of the theory of a sharp edge - and a step-by-step guide to obtaining one you can visit my blog and read through the posts on grinding and honing. Here is a link to the first post.

Good luck, and happy sharpening!!


----------



## need2boat (Jan 11, 2011)

Hello all I have a bit of different question but figured since were on the topic of Hock Blades and chip breakers why start a second thread.

It's about the adjustment of the mouth to the blade. Most of my planes are type 7. 4, 5, 7 where hand me downs and I filled in 6, and 8 with they same types. I've got Hock Blades and chip breakers in 4,5,7 and I find they work great but I have times when I feel like I could use more clearence in the mouth.

It's a tight adjustment, go to far back and the blade does site flat to the frog too far forward and it's no good either. Anyone have a good link on adjusting of the frog with a larger blade.

Is the answer always opening the mouth or can the frog be shaved down or modified?

I'm sure this has been talked about but searched Hock Blades adjustment and really didn't find much.

thanks

Joe


----------



## TheDane (May 15, 2008)

Joe-I have heard of guys milling down the frog, but opening the mouth a bit with a file is a heck of a lot easier. There's a lot more material to deal with on the frog, and if you aren't dead-on you could have a devil of a time getting the plane properly fettled.

-Gerry


----------



## Bertha (Jan 10, 2011)

I'm still rattled from you living so close to that store. I'd be a dead man. I certainly understand the arguments on both sides. I've admitted my faults very transparently on this site and this is one of them. I like the Hocks because they look cool, take a good edge, and feel stable (in that order, admittedly). I've got plenty of period Stanleys that I use and I can't promise the Hocks cut any better. I agree with Paul Sellers on the "chatter" mislabel but the thicker blades just feel a little bit better to me. Can't say why. It may be that many of my period chipbreakers have been fiddled with to the point that they don't address the iron as they should. $100 is a lot to spend on an unnecessary upgrade but I do it all the time.


----------



## Dcase (Jul 7, 2010)

I have a Hock blade and breaker set for one of my planes and I only had to file the mouth slightly wider to give me the extra room. When I file the mouth open I just put a piece of blue painters tape and file until I reach the tape. You shouldn't have to remove much.


----------



## DMIHOMECENTER (Mar 5, 2011)

I found that the blade and chip breaker I need for my Stanley 5 1/2 (2 3/8") is too expensive (for me, anyway) from Hock. I have a set of Stanley coming from Australia for $35 shipped.


----------



## donwilwol (May 16, 2011)

and if you order just the thicker blade, what do you do for a screw? Is it long enough with the thicker blade. I picked up a thicker blade at a flee market for a 5 1/4 but the chip breaker screw was to short? I haven't seen where you can get longer screws.


----------



## saddletramp (Mar 6, 2011)

David, do you have an internet address for the place that you ordered your stanley blades? I ordered a Hock blade and chipbreaker for a 605 and it doesn't fit without opening the mouth which I don't particularly want to do. Then I won a 4 1/2 on ebay and the blade and chipbreaker were both so badly pitted as to be useless so remembering the too thick Hock blade, I ordered a blade and chipbreaker from Lee Valley (Veritas) that I thought (silly me, there I go thinking again) would be thinner. Still too thick and the same file or find a thinner blade dilemma. So now I have both a 4 1/2 and a 605 sitting it out waiting for new iron. If you could pass on that address it would be much appreciated. Thanks

If anyone else has any info as to where to buy quality Stanley blades and chipbreakers or other quality blades and CBs of the proper size and thickness, I would look into that also. Thanks

I suppose as a last resort, I could file the mouths of both plane but I really don't want to do that if I don't have to.


----------



## pierce85 (May 21, 2011)

Saddletramp, This might be the site that David is referring to:

http://www.hansbrunnertools.gil.com.au/


----------



## DMIHOMECENTER (Mar 5, 2011)

@saddletramp, Sure. Here you go…

http://www.hansbrunnertools.gil.com.au/

I swapped a few emails with Hans and he seems quite helpful. Good luck.


----------



## WayneC (Mar 8, 2007)

Tramp, I surprised your having trouble with a Hock blade in a 605. Is it a round side model? I have one in my square sided 605 that works great….


----------



## saddletramp (Mar 6, 2011)

No Wayne, it's square sided. I think you've been using a little VooDoo on it. I swear that I have tried to assemble that thing half a dozen times with that Hock blade and it was a no go each time. After I just read your reply I went down and tried it again and it went just fine, cuts paper thin peels like it knew what it was doing (strange eerie music). You want to try a bit of your VooDoo on the 4 1/2 too 'cause it's still a no go with the Veritas blade and CB.


----------



## saddletramp (Mar 6, 2011)

Thanks David and Pierce. I still need iron for the 4 1/2.


----------



## need2boat (Jan 11, 2011)

Just as an FYI Woodcraft is having a 10% off power tools and 15% on everything else Fri/Sat only. They do sell Hock or at least the store does by me.

Joe


----------



## WayneC (Mar 8, 2007)

Tramp, I really like my 605. I cut's wonderfuly with the Hock Iron/Breaker in it. I'm glad the VooDoo worked for ya.

Re: the 4 1/2, I've not tried the Veritas blades. You have moved the frog back on it? I have a Hock Blade / Breaker in my ww2 era 4 1/2 and do not have any mouth issues.


----------



## saddletramp (Mar 6, 2011)

Wayne, I am truely at a loss to explain why I could not get the Hock blade to work in the 605 until yesterday. Obviously I must have been doing something stupidly wrong but I don't have a clue as to what. As to the 4 1/2, I have tried every possible position for the frog and all it does is change the spot where the cutting edge hits the front edge of the mouth.


----------



## need2boat (Jan 11, 2011)

Sandtramp,

You can also check out Jim Bode tools He deals in antique tools mostly for collectors but there are some really good finds and not everything is $$$ If you click on the Stanley link and view all hes got a few NOS irons. It's just him and his wife so emails can be slow but he's always been helpful for me.

Joe


----------



## willy66 (Apr 11, 2011)

Thanks to all for responding! Haven't had a chance to get back into my shop to play with my new tools more. I'm still on the fence about continuing to use the worksharp 3000 exclusively. As I said, I thought the worksharp was making my planes super sharp, until I got the Hock blade. I'm considering getting some oil stones of a higher grit and use them strictly for honing. The worksharp gives a very square, accurate edge to the blade…whether or not it could get sharper with hand honing I will hopefully find out.

The Hock blades being a bit thicker, seem to make a difference. It just seems logical to me. Also the chip breaker seems to make more sense too. Though I must say that for many years amazing furniture was built without all this fanciness. We should remember however, that the forefathers of woodworking that we read about, learn from, and hope to be like (in some ways), weren't necessarily hobbyists like myself (and most of us) are. They went through apprenticeships for years. Though I would like to go that route, I'm stuck with a mortgage and family, (and have a good job), and must make the money for that. Basically what I am saying, is that because I don't have one year to sweep floors and sharpen edge tools, I will learn to use the tools in the most efficient way I can afford. As much as I believe in learning and respecting the old ways, I should spend more time feddling my tools than using them. I guess its a balancing act.

For those of you envious to my location so close to TFWW, don't be. Its like a ghost that haunts my every moment at work. On rainy days or when things are quiet, the urge to take a quick ride over there and blow my days pay, is ever weighing on me. I suddenly know what a gambling addict feels like who lives to close to a casino. Actually, no that I think about it, I might take a ride right now.

Thanks all !!!!!!!!


----------



## Bertha (Jan 10, 2011)

^I would need a serious intervention if I lived near that shop. I lived next to a popular computer supply retailer in Albuquerque and I picked up building computers, having known nothing of it before. That's the draw of a great shop. Moderation, my friend


----------

