# Are Bedrock Planes Overated???



## JohnnyQ (Oct 20, 2009)

These days I am spending all my money on diapers and formula for my twin girls so a planer and jointer is not in the budget. I wanted to start working with planes so I have been following the offerings on ebay and doing some research. One comment I found was that the bedrock planes are overated. It does seem they sell for more then the bailey's. Is the extra cost for a bedrock worth it?


----------



## donwilwol (May 16, 2011)

for straight usability, probably. The bedrock planes are more because there are less of them. Read about them at supertool . You can find keen kutters, some craftmans, unions, sargents, and several other cheaper planes that will plane just as well. They are just not worth as much to resell. There are others just as good, like Millers Falls that will cost almost as much.

There are also cheaper "models"of each. Such as stanley's handy man and defiance brands. Most can still be tuned to plane very well.


----------



## Bertha (Jan 10, 2011)

No, not overrated. That's the easiest answer I've ever had to give here! 
They are built on an improved frog design that others have successfuly copied (Lie Nielsen). I don't know about production numbers but their price reflects their superiority over non-bedrocks.

Take this over to the LJ thread handplanes of your dreams and watch the ruckuss you can start.

My two cents at least, and I have MANY of many makers. Bedrock is king.


----------



## richgreer (Dec 25, 2009)

The bedrocks are worth more because other people are willing to pay more. However, if you look at a bedrock and a bailey side-by-side you will see very little difference. There is something different regarding how the frog is attached to the base. That is the only actual difference in construction.

IMO, you cannot sense any difference in the way they work. I have a Bedrock 604, and comparable Bailey 4, a newer Lie Nielsen 4 and a Record 4. If properly tuned, they feel and perform the same. The Lie Nielsen and the Record feel just a little heavier, but that is based on feel. I have not put any of them on the scales.

The Bedrock and the Bailey feel to be the same weight and just slightly lighter than the L-N and Record.


----------



## Bertha (Jan 10, 2011)

^I respect Rich a ton, and I couldn't disagree more.


----------



## donwilwol (May 16, 2011)

I've been through the diapers and formula dilemma, so let me expand my answer a little. I'll by every bedrock I can get a good price on, but I don't buy anymore diapers, I have user planes already, and I can afford to wait. If you have a choice, 2 stanley's or one bedrock, go for the 3 older craftsman.


----------



## Bertha (Jan 10, 2011)

Wow, we couldn't be on more different pages here, but the diapers/formula analogy is fantastic!  Before anyone else says, "it depends on what you'll be doing with it", I'll say it depends on what you'll be doing with it. I've got a 604 and 1/2 dozen well-tuned 4's and I can definitely tell the difference. Now a 607 and a pre-lateral 7, that's a little different. I'm not suggesting paying $500 for a 604 (which is a buy-now price I saw the other day, lol), but like Don says, if you can find one at a reasonable price, it's the low end plane to have (infills, Holteys, and Marcous being the high end, of course). I don't get all frazzled and Twitter my friends when Lie Nielsens name comes up but it's not a bad choice either, considering the recent bedrock prices.


----------



## donwilwol (May 16, 2011)

I feel a little funny disagreeing with Al, for one he knows more about planes than I ever will and two, he wears womens underwear, but I look at it like this, is a delta unisaw better than the old craftsman 113 series I use, answer is yes. Do I need a Delta unisaw, answer is yes. Can I afford a delta unisaw, answer is maybe, am I buying a delta unisaw, answer is not right now, I paid $60 for my craftsman. It does what I need it to do. Is bedrock better, well, let say ÿes"for the sake of argument, will a Stanley look a-like do what you need it to do. You'll need to decide.


----------



## Loren (May 30, 2008)

I've owned a few and almost never touch the frog adjustment - 
it was a gimmick as far as I'm concerned, to create a higher-end
line for people who want "the best" - about 10-20% of the market.

The Bedrocks are a bit more massive than the Baileys and this helps
the cut since concentrated weight leads to better, though more
tiring, planing.

The newer Bedrock copies tend to be heavier than the originals
due to more massive castings. I have a L-N bronze smoother and
while it is a great, heavy plane, the difference in performance
is largely a matter of the good iron. I had a Bedrock smoother
too and I think it was about a pound less than the L-N and worked
pretty close to just as well.

Baileys are fine for all work. They really are. Fine tools are nice
to own and use, but in terms of bench planes, being able to
sharpen well is more relevant to getting excellent surfaces and
joints than the brand of plane.


----------



## Dcase (Jul 7, 2010)

I am going to agree with Don here. If your on a tight budget then there is no reason to buy the Bedrock planes. I have never actually used one so I cant tell you if they are overrated or not but I can tell you I plane wood just fine with the Stanley Bailey style planes. You can get Stanley Bailey planes for rather cheap or you can do as Don suggest and check out some other brands like Craftsman. I own two Craftsman planes and other then Rosewood and brass screws they are pretty much the same as any Bailey plane.

If you had the money I would say go for Bedrocks, I am sure they are great planes. You can work just fine without them though. The more important thing you will need is the ability to sharpen the blades. The blade does the work, the plane just helps hold it.


----------



## WayneC (Mar 8, 2007)

I like the ability in Bedrocks and LN's to be able to adjust the frog position without having to remove the blade/chipbreaker. That is the main difference from an operational perspective. From a design perspective, the frog makes better contact with the body of the plane and is supposed to reduce chatter.

http://www.supertool.com/stanleybg/stan15.htm

I have 3 Bedrock planes 603, 605, and 608. All 3 have Hock blades and Irons in them and I feel they preform similar to my LN 4. If your using a pre-war Stanley I would say performance is similar given the same blade/chipbreaker setup. Like Al, I like the look of the Hock Blade / Chip breaker.



For reference. WW2 era Stanley Bailey #4 1/2, Lie-Nielson #4, Stanely Bedrock #3, Lie-Nielson #2 and #1.


----------



## Bertha (Jan 10, 2011)

I'm not even sure we're disagreeing, Don I'm a vintage JET guy myself and I absolutely love your saw.

To play devil's advocate with Loren, Blood and Gore( this guy is serious about his material, so I'll provide the entire link: http://www.supertool.com/stanleybg/stan15.htm) says this…

In a world where good enough usually ain't good enough, Stanley decided to produce another series of metal bench planes, called Bed Rock planes. These planes are, for all intents and purposes, nothing but a variation of the more popular Bailey series. They all have an adjustable frog, the brass depth adjustment knob, the lateral lever, a lever cap, rosewood knob and tote, etc., just like the Bailey's. The key difference between the two designs is found in the way the frog mates with the bottom casting. For such a seemingly minor difference, the Bed Rock planes were offered at a premium over the Bailey's, and it was a design that never seemed to be very static nor nearly as popular as Stanley's wildly successful Bailey line.

I like the round sided Bedrocks better than the stylish flat ones, so I must be a REALLY stupid consumer I don't fuss with lateral frog adjustments either and I've admitted it often. I feel like with the bedrocks, I need to RE-adjust the frog less over time. They feel to mate the sole better in my experience. They feel more stable in my hand, although the difference is weight is not great. All I can say is that I've done many side-by-sides in my shop, both with Hock combos, and the Bedrocks work better for me. Is it minimal? Perhaps. Is it worth the premium? To me it is.


----------



## Bertha (Jan 10, 2011)

608 Wayne, really? You need to stop showing me that thing  I need to get a 62 just to compete around here.

If I missed the part about "new to planes" or "limited budget", it goes without saying, buy a Stanley, Record, Clifton, Craftsman, MF, etc. There all great performers. But are Bedrocks worth the price, if you have it, my answer remains "yes".


----------



## parkerdude (Dec 13, 2008)

I've read this thread with some interest, and come away with just 2 concerns.

To Don W…

1. That Al wears woman's underwear.

2. That you know.

Good read!

later,


----------



## richgreer (Dec 25, 2009)

You'll find a lot of discussion about bailey versus bedrock planes at various locations on the internet. The link that Bertha provided above is something that I read over a year ago. I found it a few minutes ago and I was going to post it, but Bertha beat me to it.

FWIW - The only bedrock I have has the round sides and I think that means it is at least 100 years old.


----------



## Bertha (Jan 10, 2011)

^Parker, I'm laughing so hard right now. I like to sneak little gems like that into my posts to see if anyone ever reads them. "blah, blah, blah…oh look, a picture of a tool…I wonder what else is going on…click" 

This is so totally unrelated (no thread hijack) but did anyone see that episode of Dirtiest Jobs when that construction worker had a thong hanging out? I've never laughed so hard in my life.

Sorry, carry on, bedrock planes.


----------



## knotscott (Feb 27, 2009)

The Bedrocks may be very good, but there are certainly other good planes available for less money. The older Baileys, Millers Falls, Sargent VBM, Record, etc.


----------



## WayneC (Mar 8, 2007)

I would only buy a round side Bedrock if it was priced similar to a normal Stanley. I think they are similar from a feature/performance perspective and the higher prices is more driven by collector value. My driver for going to the square sided Bedrocks is to get the frog design change. If your starting out on a limited budget, my advise is to look for a type 13 to perhaps type 17 Stanley Bailey plane. Type 13s are easy to detect, look for a plane with two 1902 and a 1910 patent date behind the frog (3 patent dates total).

Sizes you would look for would be a 3, 4, 4 1/2, 5 1/2 smoothing plane. Smoothing plane size would depend on how much weight you like to push. A #5 Jack Plane to use for roughing out boards, and a 7 or 8 jointer. Again jointer preference depends on how much mass you want to push. People will also consider the #6 for roughing out boards and in some situations as a jointer.

If your planning on using a shooting board, you could use a #5 1/2 or get a specialized plane such as a LN #9 or #62. (I like the mass of a 5 1/2 in a shooting board). The LN Planes would be pretty expensive.

Also, look for a good adjustable mouth block plane. I prefer low angle planes such as a 60 1/2 or a 65. Standard angle block plane recommendation would be a 9 1/2 or perhaps a #18.


----------



## WayneC (Mar 8, 2007)

I would add Ohio and Keen Kutter to Knotscott's list.


----------



## dbray45 (Oct 19, 2010)

A tuned plane that fits your hand, stays sharp, and doesn't empty your wallet is priceless.


----------



## mafe (Dec 10, 2009)

Just to be a devil…
Who said VERITAS when we talk new planes?
Adjustable mouth… new thought out design and less money than a copy of a old Stanley…?
I never try one, but never heard one negative word except for the womans underware… 'I don't like the design'...
Best thoughts,
Mads


----------



## WayneC (Mar 8, 2007)

Mads, I think we went down the primrose path when we started taking about bedrock designs since LN are modeled after the Bedrocks. Veritas has some very nice planes. And to set the record strait, only select Galoots can be found in woman's underware….


----------



## donwilwol (May 16, 2011)

@ parkerdude - I discovered the underwear thing on the internet. You google Al and womens underwear and see what you come up with!

@ wayneC - I like that set of planes and we're talking about "plane" womens underwear?

@ Mad, what's the negative comments you've heard about womens underwear?


----------



## WayneC (Mar 8, 2007)

The womens underwear comment is related to a comment a fellow LJ made about wearing them himself. And looking at pictures of the tools in his shop, I doubt he likes plain underware.


----------



## donwilwol (May 16, 2011)

Its ok to mention a mans tool*s*. If you mention his tool however, it better be in some form of relationship to womens underwear.


----------



## saddletramp (Mar 6, 2011)

Good Grief!! A forum topic about the relative merits of bedrock planes and no one has drawn any blood yet. Well, that's not entirely true, Don W did draw a few drops of Bertha's blood with revelation regarding Al's lingerie preferences however he did not let us know if Al would rather wear bikinis or thongs. BSEG


----------



## saddletramp (Mar 6, 2011)

Oh, by the way, think transitional.


----------



## saddletramp (Mar 6, 2011)

Planes that is, Transitional planes.


----------



## mafe (Dec 10, 2009)

Hi Guys nothing negative about womans underware, but I do prefare them with out… Ohhh did I tell you Caroline are hre from Paris this weekend, so I have to run.
Jut wanted to add a smile, since the talk started to go from Bedrocks to LN. so I was just trying to brake the ice.
Wayne that picture sure look wonderful.
In fact the only planes I bought from new is Veritas apron plane and the scraper plane, both are wonderful quality tools, but I would acually prefare a old stanley scrape just for the reason that I love old tools, this wonderful feeling of holding history in my hands… I'm a dino, I also have a wall of real books, you know in paper… Yes you are allowed to laugh of this old dino here. 
Best thoughts,
Mads


----------



## donwilwol (May 16, 2011)

SO JohnnyQ. see what you've started. To get back to your question, I would love to own a whole set of bedrock planes, and most of the guys on this list would probably agree. We may disagree a little if they are worth paying the extra at retail, but keep this in mind, many of us successfully use cheaper planes simple because we must. Take out your statement about diapers and formula, and think about resale possibilities, and the answer would be mostly, yes, they are worth the extra.


----------



## Bertha (Jan 10, 2011)

OK, I have family in at the moment, so give me a bit to respond; in fear of offense, I will go naked until such time is afforded; I love you guys, al


----------



## venicewoodworker (Mar 15, 2011)

I just started collecting and restoring planes. I have my Great-Grandfathers #4 Bailey. With 02 patent dates. Bought a number 5 and six and have bids on a 7 and 8. I love them. I am going to add the Hock blades and chip breakers when I get the funds. I think this is a lot like my brother-in-laws feelings about a dog eating people food. "If a dog ONLY eats dog food, he doesn't know what he is missing." I think that as woodworkers we are easily impressed by what the authors of "Fine Woodworking" tells us or shows us in photos then we believe we must have it. This is also known as the slick trick of the week. I might be all wet on this, but not having used a Bedrock, I believe my planes perform equal, if not better, to my ability. I am just getting into using hand planes. The only other plane that I have tried out is a Veritas. They were at the Woodworkers show and I had the chance to try out a low angle jack. I am hooked on those planes. All of my family has been instructed to skip the cologne and shirts for gifts(I will take care of my own wardrobe and toiletries (sans the women's underwear) just get me Lee Valley gift cards.


----------



## WayneC (Mar 8, 2007)

Well, I'm hooked on people food. : ^ ) It is never safe (for your wallet) to go to a woodworking show.

Always something to be said for good tools. You get a lifetime of use and they hold their value over time. Bedrocks will probably go up in value.


----------



## Loren (May 30, 2008)

Having taught myself woodworking from Krenov and other such
old books, I started making my own planes early on. Eventually
I drifted into using Bailey pattern planes, but it was not because
my wood ones didn't make excellent cuts - it was because the
Bailey-pattern planes were available, easy to maintain, and fun 
to buy, sell and collect.

Get some decent chisels, a few decent planes, and some good
sharpening stones and learn how to get those blades razor-sharp!

The secrets to the craft are largely about marking-out and sharpening.
Learn these skills and a lot of the other stuff becomes much easier.


----------



## derosa (Aug 21, 2010)

My suggestion is 150.00 on a used washing machine, 200.00 on cloth diapers, and use the savings to buy what you need. With only one the wife prefers to breast feed, formula definitely makes sense with twins especially time wise but cloth diapers have really saved our budget. We decided on them at the beginning and only received the old fashion style at the baby shower which are awesome for applying wood finishes and waxing cars, they're terrible as diapers. We tossed down 100.00 for the first round of diapers and about three months ago another 100.00 on the current size which should last another 3-4 months. Washing them each night is smelly but it does save a lot, plus side is the cloth diapers that we use seem to leak through less then disposables based on my sister's experience vs my experience.

Also check out places like babysteals.com for coupons on the formula and disposable diapers to save a lot of money. I've passed my sister an easy dozen 5.00 and 10.00 off coupons for formula. Good luck, with just one I shudder to think of what twins would do to my sleeping habits. But they are fun.


----------



## bubinga (Feb 5, 2011)

I think it is just a better design, and easier to set.
There a lot of physics involved with a hand plane.


----------



## mafe (Dec 10, 2009)

Just a smile from me.
Have a wonderful weekend guys.


----------



## Bertha (Jan 10, 2011)

^I saw that Mads had replied and I rushed over here, expecting to have the debate resolved by a master. Yet, he leaves us in the grey; that's why I love you, Mads


----------



## dbray45 (Oct 19, 2010)

When you step back in time hand planes, hand saws, and chisels are what you had, many variations were your design. If you could not afford the store bought or were not in a place where you could buy one of these devices, there was a blacksmith down the street that had the steel you wanted. The rest was up to you. In some parts of the world, this holds true today. After making a couple of planes, one works great, the other - not so much, you get a lot of respect for these toys. Cleaning and tuning an old plane is really good but getting a feel for what goes into it was very educational.

I have some old Stanleys that I fixed up, a older Record that was new in the box, a LN BU jointer, and a few others (can't tell you what they are or who made them without looking at them, just know when I want to use them). The only plane that I am looking to buy in the near future (5 years) is a ships plane, adjustable on both ends. There are a few that I may make as I need them - this is all Mads and Divs fault for this, they got me started.

I guess I am not going to be a good collector. To me, is more of a - is this tool going to do what I want or need? I have a lot of respect for all of you that can list all of the features that each of these planes have, doesn't have, should have, etc…


----------



## Bertha (Jan 10, 2011)

David, in fact, your stance is the purest, from a true craftsman perspective. Expecting to discuss the topic at length, I asked a Navy Seal once what his preferred weapon was. He answered, "the one that I can reach that shoots". I felt stupid then, like I feel a bit right now. We have all developed our own particular preferences and nuances (I like BedRocks, for example) but it really nothing more than that.


----------



## dbray45 (Oct 19, 2010)

And there is a problem with this???? You should not feel bad, everyone is more than entitled to their feelings.

It makes things easier for me, I can post a question and get get very specific answers that I would not dream of.


----------



## saddletramp (Mar 6, 2011)

Bertha, I disagree with David. You *should* feel bad ….....just because you're you!

BSEG!!

;^))))

Actually, I am just barely trying to get started with planes and certainly don't have enough experience with them to have establish any kind of reasonable opinion as to the merits or faults of one type over the other but boy, am I ever collecting in my little pea brain a wealth of useful information thanks to you and Mads and Div and all the others that are just to numerous to mention without turning this sentence into a marathon. BTW, even though I have no basis in exerience for my opinion, I too really like my bedrock (605). :^)


----------



## Bertha (Jan 10, 2011)

These are great discussions to have. As I grow older, I become less apologetic for my peculiarities. Do my Witherby chisels work better than my Irwins? Probably not


----------



## donwilwol (May 16, 2011)

I agree with everybody. Is it possible to agree with everybody? I've been using planes for a long time, but only recently decided to really learn how to use them. I don't have a bedrock yet, but "yet" is the key term.


----------



## Bertha (Jan 10, 2011)

Yes, Don, it's very possible in discussions like this. Other topics (you know the ones) require a bit more understanding. I just enjoyed your #7 restore post and noticed that you paid deserved attention to the frog. This makes me worry that you're a BedRock guy Save you pennies and buy the BedRock version of your favorite Bailey and tell me what you think. I think I already know the answer


----------



## bowedcurly (Aug 31, 2013)

I just bought a 605 bedrock and got it scary sharp lapped the frog and chatter is zero zero zero this is one solid plane, I love it, and it cuts dead center first plane I ever had that done that, and I have around 48 various bailey 2s 3s 4s 5s


----------



## Bertha (Jan 10, 2011)

Bedrock FTW


----------



## mafe (Dec 10, 2009)

;-)


----------



## lbpa18 (Mar 9, 2019)

I have and use copies of every numbered size and half size, both in straight number and in the 600 series round top planes. I've been a collector for the purpose of having high-quality sets of users of each tool category. This applies to planes, saws, chisels, etc. Eventually, I end up with more than necessary and someday I'll sell the overage. But its given me the opportunity to explore and understand the differences in designs. I'd rather make shavings than sawdust so I use them quite a bit. I don't personally need every size but they make a nice looking set in each size so I'll likely keep one of each size. I find I use the 3, the 5, and the 7 sizes most, with the 4-1/2 for final flattening of faces. Along with the 40 or 40-1/2, and a few block planes of different configurations, I don't really need more until we talk specialty planes. There is a distinct difference in the use of the plain Bailey metal plane and the Bedrock versions of the same. It lies in the ability to adjust the throat width on the BR without having to disassemble the plane to do so as you do on the Bailey design. The Flat top BR does this even better. But my grandfather didnt have any of those so I dont either. This adjustment is important in highly figured woods, very hard woods, or fine work. Quick work or hogging off I use a deeper blade and a wider throat. I keep them all finely tuned. Some have a more convex shaped blade and some straight. They all work equally well if compared at just one setting. Its the adjusting where the BR makes life easier and more precise. Most users may not understand all the adjustments that can make a plane play more than one song. This includes the lateral adjustment. Learn them and you won't be disappointed. The BR was the final evolution of hand planes before machines took over. Lie-Nielsen simply copies that product and at a premium price. Would I pay twice as much for a BR as a Bailey of the same number? No. But if I can find a reasonable price on a BR series, Id do it first if possible and know I have a more capable plane for life.


----------



## therealSteveN (Oct 29, 2016)

> ^I respect Rich a ton, and I couldn t disagree more.
> 
> - Bertha


Bertha. I share your thoughts on this topic. They started with more metal, mass in a hand plane will win out over lightweight. The improved frog design makes them winners. Now add a Hock blade, and some work, and a fellow wouldn't need bother himself with spending LN kinda $$$$.


----------



## Bertha (Jan 10, 2011)

I have a lot of Lie Nielsens because you can get on the internet and have one in a couple days. I'm a big fan of the high-angle versions there. When I reach, I reach for the bedrock. To suggest setting them side-by-side to a Bailey will reveal little difference, I believe is subjective. Like you suggest, I observe remarkable differences. If you believe in maximizing gluing surface, why wouldn't you believe in maximizing frog contact surface?

I understand the market demand and it clearly affects price. I simply think that superiority drives the market demand. Very few people I know own bedrocks because of their relative rarity. If I could have one plane, it would be a round wall corrugated bedrock 605 wearing Hock.

PS: a similar argument could be had for corrugation. In this case, I don't think it changes much. Less surface area=less friction (sound familiar?) I see it as less metal to remove during flattening.


----------



## JeffHeath (Dec 30, 2009)

You really get an opportunity to see where a Bedrock plane, with it's extra bedding surface and frog adjustability, shines when you are working with difficult-to-plane hardwoods. If you're planing pine, poplar, or cherry, you're hardly going to notice any difference between the two style of planes.

Another good question that could be asked in this thread (sorry, I didn't read all 50 replies) is how many people actually go through the trouble of properly tuning and fettling the Bedrock plane? These planes were not machined well by the manufacturers. If you're using it, as found, there's a high probability that it isn't set up properly. On my Bedrock planes ( I have owned a complete set of users for 20 years), not one was properly tuned when I bought each one. You need to file the bed and bottom of frog to mate. The more diligent you are, the better the plane works.

There's a darned good reason why Tom Lie Nielsen chose the Bedrock line to duplicate, and IMPROVE, instead of the Bailey line. He knew he could cast and machine a better quality plane that was ready to use right out of the box, and he knocked it out of the park.

All that extra mating surface between the bottom of the frog, and the bed, when properly machined to mate, provides a much better, vibration and chatter free tool than with the standard frog. You won't see the differences on poplar or cherry, but you certainly will see it when planing white oak, locust, osage, mesquite, or persimmon.

A Bailey pattern plane can be tuned up to do a very nice job, and they are still excellent planes in most uses. The Bedrocks were designed for a reason, and it was NOT a gimmick. Against the tougher species of timber, they are a better choice for the job, and can take a bigger cut, which promotes getting the job done faster. This matters when you're working for a living. Most hobbyists, just having an enjoyable day in the shop, might not care about that, and understandably so.

I have outfitted all my Bedrock planes with Hock irons and chipbreakers. A very nice upgrade. I had to very carefully file open the mouth on my 606 and one of my 604's, but it was worth the effort. Hock O1 irons are fantastic upgrades.


----------



## Moai (Feb 9, 2009)

all Stanley blades have the same thicknesses no matter if its from a chevy or a Cadillac, making all of them weak and prompt to shattering. So all this fuss about bedrock planes is just pure nostalgia and reminiscence about old tools.
I understand your budget dynamics right now, I was in that road before, but let me tell you this: I can sell today all my Lie Nielsen planes for more what I pid for, and all of them work WAY much better than all the crapy mass produced Bed Rock crappy planes.


----------



## Bertha (Jan 10, 2011)

Francisco, we apparently have solid dissenter. We can agree to disagree, I hope. Unlike modern politics, you raise some issues worth debate and not to be dismissed out of bias. I'm guessing you meant casting? I certainly agree with you that all Stanley *blades *are crap. I don't have a Stanley blade in any plane I own, of any vintage. And yes, I''m guilty of respecting them more because they're old; why else would I prefer the round-walled variety, which clearly offers no advantage. Admitted vanity. I don't agree that LN are that miraculous, other than they are quality copies and you can get them quickly. The price is outstanding for what they represent, as is a Holtey or a Carter. I don't find them superior in any respect to a well-tuned bedrock. I think the bronze ones are pretty, though. More admitted vanity. Their materials are modern and they could have made them out of polymer like everything else lol. Not everything new is better. Just my opinion, having many.


----------



## bandit571 (Jan 20, 2011)

Had a square top 606 in the shop…for about a week, as I had promptly sold it…

L. Bailey came up with the thin iron idea….because the chipbreaker used. between the two, IF set up properly, are just as stiff as those new-fangled, vanity blades everyone seems to like. Thin blade? Well, between the face of the frog, that little ramp at the opening of the mouth, and the chipbreaker…blade has no where to move to….

Just a note, FWIW…I have NEVER had any Millers Falls plane chatter, with a stock iron on-board…and all my 60-110 yr old Stanley Baileys use their OEM irons…without issues…..

Maybe it is more it the way one sets up their plane…..?


----------



## Sludgeguy (Jan 24, 2018)

I'm not a huge plane guy but I get pretty decent performance out of two restored No. 5 Bailys with Hock blades. Not too expensive. Fixing up the old planes was satisfying.


----------



## diverlloyd (Apr 25, 2013)

I ended up giving away my L.N. No.5 my 605c bedrock does the same job and i like it a lot more. I like it enough that it stays in the house under my tv when its not in use. Also bought it at a auction for $5 it had surface rust so if I sold it I know it would be a nice profit margin.

Francisco how many bedrocks have you owned?


----------



## Bertha (Jan 10, 2011)

And are LN planes superior to infills?


----------



## Bertha (Jan 10, 2011)

Bandit, I've never had any luck keeping clog out of the native iron/chipbreaker potential space. On, the other, or both might have been bent at some point in history. I'm not sure whether I like the newer irons' mouth-filling thickness (that's for Christef) or the fact that they're dead flat. Tuned properly, a $hit plane can work wonderfully. I tend to be rough on planes, even the pretty ones, so the stockier ones work best for me.

And the 606 is an unsung hero. I've got to file out the dents on mine b/c I treat it so roughly. It's like a jack on steroids and with a bit of camber, it will go to town faster than Stormy Daniels.

And diver, that's that nasty nostalgia described above. I love it, admittedly. It won't substitute for performance but when you have both, it's glorious. I'm relatively sane, but I think some kind of energy is stored in tools. I suspect that Bandit agrees there's something there.


----------



## diverlloyd (Apr 25, 2013)

Bertha I figure it's great to use and has helped make many beautiful projects it's earned a place in the house. Plus it's nice to look at.


----------



## bandit571 (Jan 20, 2011)

Prefer the baileys, and the Millers Falls…









The #3c has 3 patent dates….the #9 behind was from just after WW2….









#3s up to a Type 9 No. 7c…..


----------



## beal (May 7, 2019)

New guy here entering the fray. I use Baileys with Hock blades as my daily drivers and own a few LNs. I agree with Loren who said that performance is largely dependent on a welll-sharpened plane iron. But there are clear differences in feel.

The first time I used a #4 LN, I was stunned - easier to adjust, heavier, glided effortlessly, felt better in my hands, and I didn't know what sharp really was. I was able to reproduce the sharpness to match that feature in terms of results but not quite match the other features of the LN in the same way.

So while a well-sharpened blade is probably the #1 necessary condition in performance, it's not a sufficient condition when comparing overall performance between alternatives. I can reproduce the wispy shavings of a well-tuned LN with my Baileys, but the experience of getting there will be different.


----------



## bandit571 (Jan 20, 2011)

Stanley No. 3c, Type 11/12…with a "new" SW iron…..flattening a piece of Ash….









Millers Falls No. 11, Type 2, with OEM iron….also working over a bit of Ash…









Groovy, man…..top to bottom: #3c, #4c, #6c, and a #7c….can't really tell any difference between these, and their smooth soled relatives….

YMMV


----------

