# Stanley Screw Sizes Reference



## drsurfrat (Aug 17, 2020)

Stanley Screw Sizes Reference









There is no way in this site to post a table or a viewable reference file, so this is the best I can do. Stanley planes are notorious for non standard thread sizes so this is an attempt to catalogue them by plane number.

Order of data:

*Outside thread dia. … TPI … Description … Measured dia (optional)*

Caveat Emptor
Fractions and decimals are inches. Numbered sizes have the # after the digits.
Formatting doesn't allow me to put the # before the numbered dia.'s.
Anything with [square brackets] is disputed.
Anything with a ? I will fill in if you tell me.
Any plane you have that is not listed, I will put in if you give me measured specs.
Remember, just because it is correctly listed here doesn't mean it is always the case.

Notable Comments
see also DonW's plane notes

*Bailey Bench Planes (No 1-8)*
12# …. 20 …. Knob rod … 0.2050 to 0.2150
12# …. 20 …. Tote rod … 0.2050 to 0.2150
12# …. 20 …. Frog Attachment screws
9/32 …. 24 …. Depth adj post … 0.281
9/32 …. 24 …. Lever cap bolt
1/4 …. 24…. Frog adj bolt w special slot
7/32 …. 24 …. Frog adj clip screw
5/16 …. 18 …. Cap iron screw

*Block Planes (No 9, 15-19, 60-61, 63, 65, 110, 118, 120, 203, 205, 220, etc)*
0.276 …. 24 …. Lever cap post
0.275 …. 24 …. Depth adj post
0.228 …. 18 & 20 …. Knob (changed over time)
0.198 …. 28 …. Dual depth screw (No 220, 60 1/2, etc) . . . and . . . 1/4 …. 28

*No 10, quarter and half*
... ...

*No 11*
0.260 …. 18 …. Round head handle bolts
0.285 …. 24 …. Lever cap bolt
0.209 … 20 … Frog mount screws (very small head)
9/32 …. 24 …. Depth adjusting bolt
5/16 … 18 … "Cap" iron screw (small plate to engage depth yoke)
0.209 … 20 … Toe plate screws

*No 12 & 12 1/2*
0.260 …. 18 …. Round head handle bolts
0.308 …. 20 …. Card / lever cap bolt
0.293 …. 18 …. Angle adjusters (2 nuts)

*No 13, 20, 113 Circular planes*

*No 38, 239, ...*

*No 40 & 40 1/2*
12# …. 20 …. Knob post … 0.213
12# …. 20 …. Tote post … 0.213
0.252 …. 18 …. Lever cap screw

*No 45 (later)*
0.257 …. 20 …. Blade capture bolt
.? …. ? …. Blade capture clip bolt
0.237 …. 28 …. Body rod lock screws
1/4 …. 28 …. Right side depth lock screw … 0.244
0.288 …. 28 …. Right side depth post
1/4 …. 28 …. Slitter/Depth thumbscrew w shoulder … 0.245
1/4 …. 28 …. Blade notch adjuster post … 0.247
1/4 …. 28 …. Sliding section rod lock … 0.247
1/4 …. 28 …. Left side depth thumbscrew … 0.247
8# … 40 …. Nicker screw … 0.162
1/4 …. 28 …. Fence lock thumbscrews … 0.247
0.204 …. 20 …. Captive dual micro-adjust . . . and . . . 1/4 …. 28
12# …. 20 …. Knob post … 0.217
? …. ? …. Cam screw (older pinch style mechanism)
1/4 …. 28 …. Cam screw (Later type 16 w brass pin inside)
0.389 …. N/A …. Rod dia.
0.279 …. N/A …. long depth stop dia.

*No 46 (earlier)* and *47*
12# …. 20 …. Knob … 0.213
0.274 …. 28 …. Rods
0.255 …. 28 …. Blade capture
1/4 …. 28 …. Fence thumb
1/4 …. 28 … Brass depth stop
Slitter mount = Rod
0.194 …. 28 …. Special fence (doesn't match the No 45)
5# ... 40 … Nicker screws

*No 48, 49* swing arm tongue and groove

*No 50*
9/32 …. 28 ….Rods … 0.272
1/4 … 28 …. Wing nut … 0.242
0.173 … 28 …. Depth stop thumbscrews
0.235 … 28 …. Fence thumbscrews
0.206 … N/A …. Depth stop post, no threads

------

*Spokeshaves 
No 51 (early)*
0.206 …. 20 ….Cap post screw … 0.206
0.137 …. 28 ….Lever cap tightener … 0.137

*No 53 (early)*
0.211 … 20 … Cap post screw … 0.211
0.168 … 20 … Lever cap tightener … 0.168

*No 151*
? … ? … Cap post screw
? ….? … Pair depth adjusters

*No 153*
? … ? … Cap post screw
? ….? … Pair depth adjusters
------

*No 55* Oh boy. (see image at bottom of post)
++Main body++
0.389 … N/A … Rods (61)
1/4 … 28 … Rod screw locks (29) ... 0.243
1/4… 28 … Depth adjuster slotted rod (27) ... 0.246
0.188 … 28 … Captive clip screw for blade lock wingnut (near 29)
0.257 …. 20 … Blade holder thumbnut rod (24)
0.283 … 20 … Rt side fixed depth Adj rod (70,71)
0.255 … 28 … depth rod lock screw (not shown)
1/4 … 28 … Slitter lock screw (76) ... 0.245
? … ? … Nicker screw (85)

++Skate w Left Side Arc++
0.250 … 28 … Skate dual thread depth adjuster (37)
and 0.288 … 20
? … ? … Nicker screw (85)
0.4875 … 26 … Two Barrel posts (32)
1/4 … 28 … Rod lock screws (31) ... 0.244
0.247 … 28 … Depth stop lock screw (?)

++Left Fence++
1/4 … 28 … Two rod lock thumbscrews (58) ... 0.242
0.204 … 28 (lf handed)… Captive microadjust dual screw (?)
and 0.2465 … 20 (rt handed)
0.179 … 28 … Microadjust lock screw (50)
? … ? … Rosewood attachment screws (57)

++Right Fence++
1/4 … 28 … Two rod lock thumbscrews (51) ... 0.242
? … ? … Rosewood attachment screws(52)

++Nosing Attachment++
0.208 … 20 … Depth adjust rod (41)
0.230 … 28 … Depth lock shouldered thumbscrew (43)
1/4 … 28 … Horiz lock shouldered thumbscrew (42?) ... 0.245

++Misc++
0.282 … N/A … Depth stop rod (73)
.? …. ? …. Cam screw (81) (older pinch style mechanism)
1/4 …. 28 …. Cam screw (81) (Later type 16 w brass pin inside)

*No 56 & 57 Chute Plane and Board*

*No 62 Low Angle Jack*
... ...

*No 66 Hand Beader*
0.185 … 28 …. Yoke thumbscrew
0.185 … 28 …. Fence thumbscrew w shoulder and washer

*No 69 Hand Beader*
... ...

*No 71*
12# … 20 … Knobs … 0.2050 to 0.2150
1/4 … 28 … Front foot / Hold down
1/4 … 28 … Height adj
10# … 24 … Fence attach
1/4 … 28 … Depth attach, main body
1/4 … 24 … Depth attach, aux
12# … 24 … Cutter lock screw

*No 72 Chamfer Plane*
... ...

*No 75 Bull Nose*
... ... Lever cap screw
... ... Body gap bolt

*No 78*
[1/4 … 24] … Fence mount rod
10# … 24 … Depth thumb screw
1/4 … 18 … Cap screw
? … ? … Fence lock screw

*No 79 Side Rabbet*
0.1845 … *27* ... Cutter lock thumbscrews, really, 27, not 28 tpi
0.186 … 28 … Two nose mount flathead screws
? ... ? ... Two fence screws

*No 80*
0.245 … 28 … Plate thumbscrews w hole … 0.245
0.245 … 28 … Pressure thumbscrew, no hole … 0.245

*No 90 Bull Nose Rabbet*
? ... ? ... Depth bolt
? ... ? ... Body locking screw

*No 95 Edge Trimming*
? ... ? ...

*No 95 gauge*
0.174 … 28 … Special shoulder bolt …0.174

*No 98 & 99 Side Rabbet*
[12# …. 20] …. Knob rod
[0.1845 … *27*] ... Cutter lock thumbscrews, somebody check theirs
0.186 … 28 … Two nose mount flathead screws
? ... ? ... Depth stop screw (on post 1930 models)

*Tiny Block Planes (100-101+1/2, 201)*
? ... ? ... Lever cap knurled screw

*No 140 Skew Block*
9/32 …. 24 …. Lever cap bolt
0.2525 … 18 … Lever cap wheel
0.198 …. 28 …. and … 1/4 …. 28 … Dual adjustment depth screw (same as No220)
10 … 28 … Side plate screws

*No 146-148 Match Planes*
?... ?... Lever lock thumbscrews

*No 180, 181, 182, 190, 191, 192 Rabbets*
? ... ? ...

*No 196 Curve Rabbet*
? ... ? ... Blade depth rod, captive
? ... ? ... Lever lock thumbscrew
? ... ? ... Lever cap pivot screw
? ... ? ... Fixed depth stop bolt
? ... ? ... Depth rod, captive
? ... ? ... Depth lock wing screw
? ... ? ...Horiz lock wingscrew
? ... ? ... Horizontal fence rod, captive

*238/239*

*279*

*289*

*340*

*387*

*444*
? ... ? ... Blade lock, long
? ... ? ... fence wing nuts
? ... ? ... fence capture. wing bolt, small
9/32 … 28 … fence rods
? ... ? ... Fence locking flathead, small
10 … 28 … chip deflector flathead screws
8 … 32 … Nicker screw

*600's *Bedrocks follow the same schemes as the regular bench planes (No1-8)
------


----------



## DeCe40 (12 mo ago)

Thanks for posting this Mike. A lot of helpful info.


----------



## bandit571 (Jan 20, 2011)

Thanks!


----------



## fuigb (Apr 21, 2010)

Thank you! Very useful: much more useful than some of the chatty marathon threads found here


----------



## DavePolaschek (Oct 21, 2016)

Might want to cross-reference DonW's plane notes somewhere in there.


----------



## HokieKen (Apr 14, 2015)

Excellent Mike! Thanks for posting this. I'll fill in blanks as I can for you/us.

*Edit: Ignore this information on 78 threads. Lazyman's plane was a Craftsman not a Stanley.*
Are you certain on the #78 fence rod thread? My Millers Falls #85 is 1/4-20 and Lazyman asked me to turn him a rod for his 78 so I just duplicated my Millers Falls part and it fit his 78. Just wondering if Stanley may have changed pitch somewhere along the line on the 78 rod…

And, here's another weird one…. Just checked the fence locking screw on my MF 85. #10-30. Yep, that's right. .189" major diameter with 30 tpi and UN thread form. No guarantee Stanley is the same of course.


----------



## 33706 (Mar 5, 2008)

Another parameter to consider is the use of screws with a 55-degree thread angle, as opposed to the standard 60-degree thread angle.

When I read comments about how a screw will thread into a tapped hole and suddenly feel resistance after a few turns, it makes me wonder if there is a Whitworth screw thread on one or the other. My thread gauges are Brown and Sharp, and sometimes only a 55-degree gauge eliminates all daylight on a screw that I know for sure came off an old Stanley.

I once bought a assortment of various Whitworths from a British industrial supplier, and it solved a couple of questions I had in the past.

Just when you thought it was safe to go back in the water….


----------



## HokieKen (Apr 14, 2015)

There's another thread where a guy has a Stanley with a tote rod that appear to have Whitworth threads PK. I know I've measured threads on a Stanley and found a 60 degree form but I don't currently possess any Stanley bench planes so I can't verify. It would be nice if anyone with gauges for both threadforms that has Stanley planes checked them all to see if they're all one or the other or if it's a mix of the two. I can only say for sure that Millers Falls uses the UN form.


----------



## 33706 (Mar 5, 2008)

> There's another thread where a guy has a Stanley with a tote rod that appear to have Whitworth threads PK. I know I've measured threads on a Stanley and found a 60 degree form but I don't currently possess any Stanley bench planes so I can't verify. It would be nice if anyone with gauges for both threadforms that has *Stanley planes checked them all to see if they're all one or the other or if it's a mix of the two*. I can only say for sure that Millers Falls uses the UN form.
> 
> - HokieKen


Yup, I've got some different thread gauges, but you know I got more than a few planes, right? If I still have any English Stanleys, I'd be curious to see if there's any Whitworths hiding in them!

Oh, by the way, I found a rod for a toilet tank, the one that goes between the valve and the float, to be a perfect #12-20, hmmm I also have commercial door fasteners that are also #12-20, and even some marked #14-20, used for lock hardware and for hinges. NOT compatible with 1/4-20. My father, 60 years ago used to bring home fasteners from the machine shop where he worked, and had an abundance of this kind of stuff, but it's long gone now.


----------



## HokieKen (Apr 14, 2015)

Good point PK. I guess checking ALL of their planes would be daunting for some folks ;-) I guess I should say, see if you can identify both threadforms or only one.


----------



## HapHazzard (Jan 9, 2016)

The plane screws you're calling #12 are 7/32. Put a micrometer on the screws and compare them to any other #12 screws and you'll see what I mean. The major diameter of a #12 screw, regardless of thread density, is 12×0.013" + .06" = 0.216" Unless your threads are very worn, they should measure closer to 0.21875". Anything bigger than 0.216 can't be a #12.

If you want to post tables, try Google Docs. You can create and share spreadshets that can be exported to other spreadsheet programs. For example: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1c6ddTyWfRhpT4x61WQqoJLr-QtDrqoFd3HolNZXubto/edit?usp=sharing


----------



## drsurfrat (Aug 17, 2020)

Hap, I used Dropbox, but it isn't local, so I have found external references don't work - for instance, you won't download a .pdf.

Do you want to make a change; tell me specifically what to change. But please don't tell me to measure something I don't have.


----------



## HapHazzard (Jan 9, 2016)

Change the #12s to 7/32. I'm skeptical of the other numeric series sizes too, but I don't have any to measure.


----------



## HapHazzard (Jan 9, 2016)

Cap iron screw for No 5 Type 19 Stanley plane: 5/16-18.


----------



## 33706 (Mar 5, 2008)

> Change the #12s to 7/32. I m skeptical of the other numeric series sizes too, but I don t have any to measure.
> 
> - HapHazzard


*
What size tap should I ask for at the hardware store, if I wanted to thread a hole for a #12-20 screw?*


----------



## CaptainKlutz (Apr 23, 2014)

> *
> What size tap should I ask for at the hardware store, if I wanted to thread a hole for a #12-20 screw?*
> - poopiekat


Last I checked the only place to reliably find/buy Stanley special thread taps was Victor Machinery Exchange:
https://www.victornet.com/subdepartments/Special-Pitch-Taps-up-to-1/2-inch/1260.html

Page for #12-20 > https://www.victornet.com/detail/TAST-12-20.html

If you need #12-20 threading dies - Greenfield and Well Brothers sold 'Little Giant' adjustable dies with replaceable inserts that are easy to find on fleabay, and 1/4-20 can be closed down enough to make perfect #12-20 threads on right diameter rod.








They come in several different die OD sizes, so be sure to buy die same size as die handle, if not buying a set.

YMMV


----------



## drsurfrat (Aug 17, 2020)

Whew, I just measured my No 55 (older, '17 patent on skate). There are a number of 1/4-28 threads. wow, an actual modern standard…


----------



## HokieKen (Apr 14, 2015)

Regarding 7/32 or #12 size screws on bench planes, from what I've read over the years in various places, #12 seems to be the generally accepted size. But as HapHazzard has found, there are always exceptions to the rule! If we look on page 21 of Stanley Planes and Screw Sizes Part I we find Table 2 where the author measured all of the screws from his 4-1/2 plane manufactured around 1950. We see some variation in size of the major diameter even from the same plane. And in the paragraph previous, we see reference to measurements taken on Stanley planes by two other guys that fall within tolerance for #12 screws but vary from one to another by a significant amount.

And though I've read Bates' paper several times before, I never noticed that he notes that, at least on the plane he measured, the threads on the tote and knob rods appeared to be rolled rather than chased or cut. This could contribute to the major diameter being larger on some of these rods. When rolling threads, the material is basically being deformed to the thread shape rather than material being removed to create the threadform. So it wouldn't surprise me for some rolled threads to show out of spec with reference to the measured major diameter. But, that wouldn't necessarily prevent the thread from fitting the tapped threads either. And I'm sure, at least in early production, if it fit, it was good regardless of actual dimensions. Since it wasn't intended to be replaceable by off-the-shelf parts, there was no need to conform to a spec as long as the male fit the female.

As I said before, I'm a Millers Falls guy and that's what all of my bench planes are. So my measurements aren't necessarily valid for this thread. I have found that MF did use the same threads as Stanley and that the parts are interchangeable but when we get down to details like thread form and measured major diameter I doubt I have much to add.

But, this thread and the other discussing the 12-20 / 7/32 thread have piqued my curiousity. So I'd be interested in knowing the following from anyone willing and able to measure it *for the tote/knob rods AND for the frog screws* since in the referenced paper they appear to be two different forming methods:

Measured major diameter of male threads.
Measured minor diameter of female threads.
Threadform angle (for anyone that has 55 and 60 degree fishtail gauges or if you have a 60 degree, does it fit well or does it appear to be off a bit)
This is probably a stretch but if you have the ability to measure pitch diameter directly (three-wire or screw thread micrometer) it would be interesting to know if the pitch diameter conforms to spec even when the major diameter does not.

Like I said, this is just out of curiosity for me but it would be nice to get some data for a variety of planes/types Stanley made over the years. It would be good to document here on the interwebs for posterity as well.


----------



## HokieKen (Apr 14, 2015)

Mike - I'll try to remember to measure the knicker screws on my 45 and 46 tonight. I had to make one for my 46 and I'm fairly sure it was a #5-40 but I'll verify before you put it in the OP. Not sure about the 45 but I can measure it.


----------



## drsurfrat (Aug 17, 2020)

Thanks Kenny. 
I have measured a bunch of tote/knob rods, and got 0.205 to 0.217. And I have a mix of both rolled and cut. Maybe evenly split (?). When I get a chance I will check some of my long nut (pre 1892) early planes and see what they are.

And thanks for the data Hap.


----------



## 33706 (Mar 5, 2008)

Okay Kenny… here goes:

*Plane A, Stanley #5 1/2 Type 11*

Frog Screw OD .2205, ID .1875, 20 TPI
Cap Screw OD .2755, ID .2475 24 TPI
Knob Screw OD .1855, ID .1830 20 TPI
Tote screw OD .2105, ID .1855 20 TPI
Toe Screw OD .2112, ID .1860 20 TPI

*Plane B Stanley #4 Type 19*

Frog Screw OD .2165, ID .1815 24TPI 
Cap Screw OD .2385, ID .2175 28 TPI 
Tote Screw OD .1875, ID .1855 24 TPI 
Knob Screw OD .1865, ID .1850 24 TPI

All are 60 Degrees

Inside diameters gauged by drill blank inserted in holes and miked. I don't have proper hole gauges.
I chose two divergent plane types for comparison. *Hope this helps!!*


----------



## HapHazzard (Jan 9, 2016)

> What size tap should I ask for at the hardware store, if I wanted to thread a hole for a #12-20 screw?*
> 
> - poopiekat


If you want to cut #12-20 threads, use a #12-20 tap. You can find them all over, but they're not a stock item anywhere as far as I know, so you can order them from Victor (https://www.victornet.com/detail/TAST-12-20.html), zorotools (https://www.zoro.com/drill-america-12-20-hss-plug-hand-tap-dwtst12-20p/i/G1839987/) or Home Depot (https://www.homedepot.com/p/Drill-America-12-20-High-Speed-Steel-Plug-Hand-Tap-1-Piece-DWTST12-20P/305700301). Victor is cheapest, but Home Depot has the fastest delivery and it's free. This is a plug tap, so you have to be really careful getting it started, and it won't work for threading blind holes, so you might want to order three and grind one as a taper tap and one as a bottoming tap.


----------



## HapHazzard (Jan 9, 2016)

The tote and knob rods on my No 5 Type 19 are rolled, which makes it hard to tell the exact screw size because the peaks don't always come up all the way. The rods are 3/16 and, as far as I can tell, the major diameter is supposed to be 7/16, based on the female threads of the brass nuts and the knob and tote receivers. A #12-20 tap fits very loosely in the holes, but it rattles around so much that it's just not possible to believe they were threaded with this tap.

The other reason I keep insisting that these threads have nothing to do with a #12 screw size is this: imagine you're an engineer at Stanley Works, two years after the end of the Civil War, and you want to build these planes. Supplies are scarce, so are standards, but you're a hardware company, so when it comes to screws, the easiest thing to do is to roll (or cut) your own. Are you going to use readily available fractional stock for everything, or are you going to use this arcane formula using integers 0-12, where the major diameter of the screw equals that number times 0.013" plus .06" for everything less than ¼"?

Bear in mind that Sellers had only proposed his system, which was based on a simplified Whitworth thread, three years earlier, and I'm not even sure when the numbered series was added to that standard. It was not part of the Whitworth standard, so it must have been added to Sellers at some point, probably around the turn of the century, but it was an evolving standard, and it would take some time for manufacturers to adopt it, and Stanley had been making these planes for about 30 years by then.

Manufacturers have always been reluctant to adopt new standards. Remember how enthusiastically they all jumped on the metric bandwagon back in the 1970s? And, to this day, when you get a 1" coarse bolt, it will have a 14 tpi thread instead of the 12 tpi density called for by the standard.

One more thing to remember is that Stanley was originally a hinge company. Their claim to fame was that they included screws with their hinges, giving customers everything they needed in one small package and cornering the hinge market in a few years. They were not in the business of helping competing harware companies sell their screws, so why would they want to use screws on their planes that you could replace with screws from another hardware company? That's just not who they were.

But, history and speculation aside, the best argument is to take your mics and gauges out, measure the screws, compare them to known standards, and believe your eyes. Don't try to force everything into the nearest modern standard.


----------



## HapHazzard (Jan 9, 2016)

> If you need #12-20 threading dies - Greenfield and Well Brothers sold Little Giant adjustable dies with replaceable inserts that are easy to find on fleabay, and 1/4-20 can be closed down enough to make perfect #12-20 threads on right diameter rod.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Victor has a #12-20 adjustable die too. https://www.victornet.com/detail/RD-12-20-B.html It fits in a standard 1" round diestock.

If you adjust it, you can cut 20 threads/inch on 7/32" stock, but rolling 7/32" threads on 3/16" stock, which is apparently what Stanley did, is a little trickier. What you need to do is force the die onto the round stock from the "wrong" side so the rake of the teeth pushes metal out of the way instead of cutting into it. To make it easier to start you need to taper the rod. You can either anneal the rod and harden it later or use a work-hardening stainless alloy.


----------



## 33706 (Mar 5, 2008)

.


----------



## HokieKen (Apr 14, 2015)

Agreed Hap. I've no confidence that we'll find a standard that these threads conform to precisely. Regardless of whether it was intended to be a #12 or 7/32 (or neither one) it is a special thread by today's standards. The 7/32 threads in the Whitworth system would have a pitch of 24 or 28 (coarse and fine) and #12 UNC/UNF would have the same pitches.

Interestingly, I did find this chart from the American Screw Company showing that 12-20 was a standard thread for some companies in 1916.

And I agree, I don't know why we have to have wire size type standards for screw threads < 1/4". 1/64" isn't that much larger than .013 so I don't know why we didn't increment using X/64 diameters rather than resorting to the numbering system. But, we got what we got I guess…

Regarding the loose tap in the threaded holes, we must remember that the recommended drill size for internal threads assumes a 75% thread. However that isn't always necessary depending on the application and materials used. So it's possible that Stanley drilled the brass nuts and the cast iron bases with different size drills to get different effective thread depths. So an over-sized tap drill doesn't necessarily mean that the threadform itself isn't consistent.


----------



## HapHazzard (Jan 9, 2016)

75% is for brass (or aluminum) but you should use 50% for the cast iron tappings. Also, use cutting oil liberally for cast iron because its brittle. Free-machining brass is somewhat self-lubricating, but I use oil anyway because I hate when it squeals.


----------



## HapHazzard (Jan 9, 2016)

> Interestingly, I did find this chart from the American Screw Company showing that 12-20 was a standard thread for some companies in 1916.


That's great, thank you. It shows what I meant about it being an evolving standard-note the odd sizes, 7 & 9, and how it goes way beyond #12. What surprises me is that there's no #1 or #0. I thought they were there from the get-go. (The 00, 000 and so on are very recent extensions.) I'm also surprised that this standard wasn't more buttoned-down by 1916. But notice that this table has only numeric sizes. The question I'd really like to know more about is when and why this numeric machine screw standard got wedded to the fractional sizes inherited from Whitworth to form what we now know as UTS. I might have to go to an actual library to research that.


----------



## HokieKen (Apr 14, 2015)

By all means, please report back if you do find an answer to why we use the numeric designations rather than fractional sizes. I have been unable to find any references to why the standard evolved that way only that it did so around WWI.

I did read somewhere that the UN thread pitches are defined such that there is a 15% increase in mechanical advantage for a particular size going from UNC to UNF and from UNF to UNEF. Maybe that defined correlation falls apart at smaller fractional sizes without introducing odd number pitch sizes? Just a WAG, I have absolutely nothing to back it up and don't have time to dive into the calculations to see if it proves out. Though it does sound interesting and may do so at some point…


----------



## HapHazzard (Jan 9, 2016)

I'm glad I've found someone who finds this as interesting as I do, because, y'know, when you start talking about it at cocktail parties…


----------



## drsurfrat (Aug 17, 2020)

Knob and tote rod thread diameters for my older planes, all pre 1888. All seem to be cut threads, nothing rolled.
Comma separated if you want to manipulate…

0.2095, 0.2070, cut, type5, No4
0.2070, 0.2050, cut, type5, No4
0.2090, 0.2090, cut, type4, No4
0.2070, 0.2085, cut, type4, No4
0.2215, 0.2205, cut, type2, No4
0.2195, 0.2195, cut, type2, No4

0.2085, 0.2110, cut, type5, No7
0.2050, 0.2060, cut, type5, No7
0.2060, 0.2060, cut, type4, No7
0.2070, 0.2065, cut, type4, No7
0.2065, 0.2040, cut, type2, No7
0.2085, 0.2080, cut, type2, No7


----------



## HokieKen (Apr 14, 2015)

Awesome Mike, glad you have that many early examples  Could you tell whether they were all 60 degree thread forms or if any were 55 degree?


----------



## drsurfrat (Aug 17, 2020)

Sorry, no, my eyes aren't that good.

I did just look at a type 13 (1925-28) rod, and it looked rolled.


----------



## therealSteveN (Oct 29, 2016)

Nothing to add, but thanks to all who added to this thread, some useful info here.


----------



## drsurfrat (Aug 17, 2020)

I'm really curious about the No 79 and 98/99. Is it really 27 tpi? Mine is, and even wierder, my thread gauge has a 27 tpi blade.


----------



## HokieKen (Apr 14, 2015)

That is weird Mike. Unfortunately I don't have any of those planes to check. I was curious about the 27 tpi though since the only threads I knew of with that pitch are tapered pipe threads.

So, first stop, the gearing chart for chasing threads on my lathe:









Low and behold, there is a 27.

So, stop #2 is my shop bible aka The Machinery Handbook (28th edition). Table 1 in the threading section:








Also a 27 there.

So I combed through Table 3 in the Handbook and found there are a handful of UNS (s=special) threads with 27 tpi listed. However, nothing smaller than a 1/4"-27. So your #10-27 is indeed an odd duck. Or, perhaps it's a 3/16-27? Who knows.

If you need to chase those threads though, I found you a tap. Of course just buying a new plane would be cheaper ;-)


----------



## HapHazzard (Jan 9, 2016)

> Knob and tote rod thread diameters for my older planes, all pre 1888. All seem to be cut threads, nothing rolled.
> Comma separated if you want to manipulate…
> 
> 0.2095, 0.2070, cut, type5, No4
> ...


Thanks. Did you happen to measure the diameter of the unthreaded portions of the rods? I'm curious about the stock they used.


----------



## drsurfrat (Aug 17, 2020)

whoa. Fortunately, they are in good shape. I am sure somebody with a 79 or 98/99 will chime in.


----------



## drsurfrat (Aug 17, 2020)

Added bare rod diameters

0.2095, 0.2070, cut, type5, No4, 2065
0.2070, 0.2050, cut, type5, No4, 2050
0.2090, 0.2090, cut, type4, No4, 2065
0.2070, 0.2085, cut, type4, No4, 2040
0.2215, 0.2205, cut, type2, No4, 2080
0.2195, 0.2195, cut, type2, No4, 2075

0.2085, 0.2110, cut, type5, No7, 2090
0.2050, 0.2060, cut, type5, No7, 2045
0.2060, 0.2060, cut, type4, No7, 2060
0.2070, 0.2065, cut, type4, No7, 2055
0.2065, 0.2040, cut, type2, No7, 2055
0.2085, 0.2080, cut, type2, No7, 2070

The No 4 type 2 stands out, but doesn't look rolled to me:


----------



## drsurfrat (Aug 17, 2020)

> Awesome Mike, glad you have that many early examples
> - HokieKen


I really enjoy holding a tool that was made a couple years after the Civil War (even tho made by Yankee Carpetbaggers). Cast in a foundry before personal deodorant, ground flat by a master craftsman, exotic wood from far away countries piece-worked at 3 cents per, when coffee cost $1.20/lb, and there was a 3 cent nickel minted for postage…
I hated history in school, but have an unexpected fondness now.


----------



## HokieKen (Apr 14, 2015)

I agree Mike. It is very cool to think of the history of some of these old tools when you put them to task. Every time I chase a thread on my South Bend lathe, I think "wow, somebody made a screw the same way nearly a century ago on this same machine" )

For rolling a thread that size, the blank rod would typically be .004-.005" smaller in diameter than the major thread diameter. For a cut thread, you expect the rod size to be the same as the major diameter. Of course threads also take some deformation when tightened and some corrosion can increase the measured diameter too. So, if those were new rods, I'd say they were rolled based on the measurements. But being 150 years old, who knows. Rolled threads would have been uncommon in the 1800s outside of shops only making fasteners though. Stanley had their spoons in a lot of bowls though so it's entirely possible they had the tooling somewhere. It's also possible that they purchased the threaded rods rather than producing them in-house.


----------



## HapHazzard (Jan 9, 2016)

The ones where the rod diameter is between the major & minor diameter are textbook rolled. Cutting only removes metal, while rolling raises the threads by pushing down the valleys. Technically this is called forging. It moves metal instead of cutting it away.

I honestly don't know what to make of the ones where both the major & minor diameter are bigger than the rod they started out with. I've never seen anything like that except, back in the dark ages when I used to work on Volkswagens and Porsches, some of the Porsche engines and the type IV VW engines had these cylinder head studs that were thicker at the threaded ends than in between, but this had to do with reducing thermal expansion while retaining anchoring strength. Planes don't operate at those temperatures, so I'm really at a loss.

I suspect all these threaded rods were made in house. Fasteners were their bread and butter, and if Stanley was making drills for the home market at the same time, they would have had dies for drawing wire in all the fractional sizes from 1/16" to ¼".


----------



## HapHazzard (Jan 9, 2016)

I'm tempted to walk into Home Depot, plunk down $36.97 for a brandy-new No 4 smoothing plane so I can take off the plastic knob and tote and see if they're still using these same threaded rods. Then I could get some measurements that would pretty much remove field wear from the equation. With a little work I might even be able to make a decent plane out of it.


----------



## 33706 (Mar 5, 2008)

> I m tempted to walk into Home Depot, plunk down $36.97 for a brandy-new No 4 smoothing plane so I can take off the plastic knob and tote and see if they re still using these same threaded rods. Then I could get some measurements that would pretty much remove field wear from the equation. With a little work I might even be able to make a decent plane out of it.
> 
> - HapHazzard


I can't say for sure, but I'd expect to see 'oval head' machine screws rather than threaded rods with barrel nuts on later Stanley planes.


----------



## HapHazzard (Jan 9, 2016)

> I can t say for sure, but I d expect to see oval head machine screws rather than threaded rods with barrel nuts on later Stanley planes.
> 
> - poopiekat


It'd be just my luck if they finally got around to using metric.

Turns out the only way I can get this is to order it, so I can't check it out in the shop first. $36.97 isn't a lot, but I already have a Buck Bros. No 4, so it would be somewhat redundant.


----------



## HokieKen (Apr 14, 2015)

Some interesting stuff in this blog post I stumbled across from WayneC. According to his info, Record planes used Whitworth thread forms (makes sense being made in England) for the knob and tote rods.



> ...
> I honestly don t know what to make of the ones where both the major & minor diameter are bigger than the rod they started out with. ...
> 
> - HapHazzard


I think Mike's measurements are the major diameter of the threads measured on both ends of the rod rather than major/minor diameters.


----------



## HapHazzard (Jan 9, 2016)

> Some interesting stuff in this blog post I stumbled across from WayneC. According to his info, Record planes used Whitworth thread forms (makes sense being made in England) for the knob and tote rods.


Whitworth was also widely used in the US in the late 18th century. It was the first widely accepted standard, and served as the basis of Sellers's proposed standard.



> I think Mike s measurements are the major diameter of the threads measured on both ends of the rod rather than major/minor diameters.
> 
> - HokieKen


Oh, that does make more sense. Whew. That was making my brain hurt.


----------



## HapHazzard (Jan 9, 2016)

> Whitworth was also widely used in the US in the late 18th century.


I meant 19th. Only off by 100 years.


----------



## HokieKen (Apr 14, 2015)

Yeah, I knew where you were going ;-) Record didn't start making planes until well into the 20th Century though, around 1930. So had they been in the US, it would have been odd for them to use Whitworth at that time. But being an English company, I guess it wasn't that abnormal to still use those threads even at that time.


----------



## DavePolaschek (Oct 21, 2016)

> I m tempted to walk into Home Depot, plunk down $36.97 for a brandy-new No 4 smoothing plane so I can take off the plastic knob and tote and see if they re still using these same threaded rods. Then I could get some measurements that would pretty much remove field wear from the equation. With a little work I might even be able to make a decent plane out of it.


I've got a new-old (NOS) global #3 or two. The rods for the knob and tote were threaded 12-20 (or 7/32-20) with barrel nuts. I routinely replace the rods with 1/4-20 all-thread after running a tap through the female bits.

They're model 12-163, if that helps. Cost $37.50 new in blister-pack, shipped from Canada.


----------



## 33706 (Mar 5, 2008)

> Yeah, I knew where you were going ;-) Record didn t start making planes until well into the 20th Century though, around 1930. So had they been in the US, it would have been odd for them to use Whitworth at that time. But being an English company, I guess it wasn t that abnormal to still use those threads even at that time.
> 
> - HokieKen


Somewhere, it was said that Stanley dumped tons of parts on postwar England to build planes with, all of their surplus stuff and leftover junk, just to get the Brits going on their reconstruction period.


----------



## HapHazzard (Jan 9, 2016)

A lot of British companies are still using Whitworth. They officially adopted ISO, but it's too EU for some.


----------



## HapHazzard (Jan 9, 2016)

> Somewhere, it was said that Stanley dumped tons of parts on postwar England to build planes with, all of their surplus stuff and leftover junk, just to get the Brits going on their reconstruction period.
> 
> - poopiekat


I have a Stanley block plane that was made in England. I'm still trying to figure out what model it is. I think I bought it around 25-30 years ago, but it has no model number or patent number on it, just "STANLEY" on the lever cap, "ENGLAND" under the iron, and "PATENTED" on the lever. It's a low angle, bevel up design and, unlike most of the Stanley block planes I've seen, the throat is not adjustable.


----------



## MikeB_UK (Jul 27, 2015)

> A lot of British companies are still using Whitworth. They officially adopted ISO, but it s too EU for some.
> 
> - HapHazzard


You can tell we never took all this modern stuff to heart.
Most common sheet size 2.44×1.22 meters (8×4 foot)
Boards are still 2×4, 1×6 etc, but listed in mm

Anyway, we don't still use whitworth - we renamed it as British Standard Whitworth (BSW) to keep it modern, acronym and everything 

Terry Pratchett covered it best about money in Good Omens with this footnote.
"NOTE FOR YOUNG PEOPLE AND AMERICANS: One shilling = Five Pee. It helps to understand the antique finances of the Witchfinder Army if you know the original British monetary system:

Two farthings = One Ha'penny. Two ha'pennies = One Penny. Three pennies = A Thrupenny Bit. Two Thrupences = A Sixpence. Two Sixpences = One Shilling, or Bob. Two Bob = A Florin. One Florin and One Sixpence = Half a Crown. Four Half Crowns = Ten Bob Note. Two Ten Bob Notes = One Pound (or 240 pennies). Once Pound and One Shilling = One Guinea.

The British resisted decimalized currency for a long time because they thought it was too complicated."


----------



## HapHazzard (Jan 9, 2016)

Still driving on the wrong side of the road? ;-) When they started talking about building a tunnel across the channel I envisioned the massive pileup at the point where the British traffic met the continental traffic, but they seem to have pulled it off somehow.

Learning currency is hopeless. Just when we master the official denominations, you lot throw us a curve by talking bobs and quids and whatnot.


----------



## MikeB_UK (Jul 27, 2015)

> Still driving on the wrong side of the road? ;-) When they started talking about building a tunnel across the channel I envisioned the massive pileup at the point where the British traffic met the continental traffic, but they seem to have pulled it off somehow.


It's all by train, all the crashes happen in france after we drive off 



> Learning currency is hopeless. Just when we master the official denominations, you lot throw us a curve by talking bobs and quids and whatnot.
> 
> - HapHazzard


Look, it's simple.
A bob = 1 shilling (or 2 sixpences in old money)
In new money a shilling is 5 pence, so ten bob (still a phrase in use) is 50p.

If that's too hard, don't go to london, if you end up where they speak cockney then you need to learn some terms for bees and honey (money)
deep sea diver = £5
score = £20
pony = £25
bullseye = £50
ton = £100 
monkey = £500.
grand = £1000


----------



## HapHazzard (Jan 9, 2016)

It's like I was saying to my trouble & strife, those Cockneys have a different word for everything!


----------



## Foghorn (Jan 30, 2020)

> It s like I was saying to my trouble & strife, those Cockneys have a different word for everything!
> 
> - HapHazzard


Working Saturday's in my Dad's shop way back when. Norman Peters, a Brit was showing me how to do things. He says "open the bonnet". I'm like, WTH are you talking about womens hats for!


----------



## HapHazzard (Jan 9, 2016)

> Working Saturday s in my Dad s shop way back when. Norman Peters, a Brit was showing me how to do things. He says "open the bonnet". I m like, WTH are you talking about womens hats for!
> 
> - Foghorn


Did he ask you for a spanner?


----------



## HokieKen (Apr 14, 2015)

Okay, the knicker screws on my 46 are #5-40. And best I can tell the knicker screws on my 45 are #8-40. It's .162 major diameter and the 40 tpi gauge seems to be the best fit. 32 and 36 don't fit but there's less than 2 threads on the little bastard so it's hard to gauge.

Apparently it's also hard to hold onto. I dropped it and have been combing for it for the last 75 minutes. I turned some steel parts right before so there are chips all over the floor roughly the same size as the damn screw. I believe it's gone into the ether dammit. Grrrr.


----------



## HapHazzard (Jan 9, 2016)

> I dropped it and have been combing for it for the last 75 minutes. I turned some steel parts right before so there are chips all over the floor roughly the same size as the damn screw. I believe it's gone into the ether dammit. Grrrr.
> 
> - HokieKen


At least #5-40 is a standard size. If you have a good pair of wire strippers it should have a cutter for shortening small machine screws. If it's the #8-40… good luck finding it. I usually sweep the floor with a pickup magnet and pick through the chips. I usually find a couple screws I didnt realize I'd dropped before I find the one I'm looking for. If you do your wood & metal work in the same shop like I do, it makes the search so much more interesting.

Sometimes it seems like a shop floor is a portal to another dimension for small parts.


----------



## 33706 (Mar 5, 2008)

> Okay, the knicker screws on my 46 are #5-40. And best I can tell the knicker screws on my 45 are #8-40. It's .162 major diameter and the 40 tpi gauge seems to be the best fit. 32 and 36 don't fit but there's less than 2 threads on the little bastard so it's hard to gauge.
> 
> Apparently it's also hard to hold onto. I dropped it and have been combing for it for the last 75 minutes. I turned some steel parts right before so there are chips all over the floor roughly the same size as the damn screw. I believe it's gone into the ether dammit. Grrrr.
> 
> - HokieKen


That's a short trip down memory lane for me! Remember slot cars from the 1960's? The axles were all generally a 5-40 thread. In a homemade chassis you could bore a 1/8" hole, perfect for passing the axle through. I had taps and dies nabbed from Dad's shop for creating all kinds of ridiculous slot car stuff. The bare axle looked exactly like the plane tote rods, just a bit skinnier. Brings a nostalgic smile to my face.


----------



## drsurfrat (Aug 17, 2020)

> Apparently it's also hard to hold onto. I dropped it and have been combing for it for the last 75 minutes. I turned some steel parts right before so there are chips all over the floor roughly the same size as the damn screw. I believe it's gone into the ether dammit. Grrrr.
> - HokieKen


Tha is why there was no data. I wasn't about to risk dropping it when I count have measured threads anyway.

Guess what? I have one nicker screw extra. It has the 0.162 diameter. which one did yo drop?


----------



## HapHazzard (Jan 9, 2016)

> Remember slot cars from the 1960 s?


 1/32 and 1/24th scale. We used to build chassis out of soldered brass tubing and wire, throw a plastic body on them, and take them to the track and let those little Mabuchi motors scream!


----------



## HokieKen (Apr 14, 2015)

> Apparently it's also hard to hold onto. I dropped it and have been combing for it for the last 75 minutes. I turned some steel parts right before so there are chips all over the floor roughly the same size as the damn screw. I believe it's gone into the ether dammit. Grrrr.
> - HokieKen
> 
> Tha is why there was no data. I wasn t about to risk dropping it when I count have measured threads anyway.
> ...


The .162 diameter is the one Mike  (The one from the 45) I actually made the smaller one for my 46 because it was MIA when I got the plane. But it's a round head and was pretty easy to make other than trying to measure #5 threads with 3 wires and a micrometer… I appreciate it! Andre was going to send me his extra but he's in Canada so if you have one, I'll put the border crossing on hold


----------



## Foghorn (Jan 30, 2020)

> Working Saturday s in my Dad s shop way back when. Norman Peters, a Brit was showing me how to do things. He says "open the bonnet". I m like, WTH are you talking about womens hats for!
> 
> - Foghorn
> 
> ...


A ring spanner actually. Ha!


----------



## drsurfrat (Aug 17, 2020)

Anyone able to measure the blank tools up there, it would be appreciated. I know that there are a couple 444's out there.


----------



## 33706 (Mar 5, 2008)

Anyone able to measure the blank tools up there, it would be appreciated. I know that there are a couple 444 s out there.

- drsurfrat
[/QUOTE]

*I wonder, when I had a ton of listings in Ebay, I would get weird requests asking for specific dimensions, etc. I always answered them promptly. Typically, never an acknowledgement of any kind, once the favor was granted. Never a bid from them either.

Ditto specific photo details requested for for whatever reason, are they writing a book? Or are they just in need of info for use on another discussion board?

Now I wonder if we could return the favor and ask Ebay sellers with Stanley listings to go get a micrometer and measure specific components for us!! How sinister would that be? Nyuk, nyuk.*


----------



## drsurfrat (Aug 17, 2020)

That'd be good one.


----------



## HokieKen (Apr 14, 2015)

> Anyone able to measure the blank tools up there, it would be appreciated. I know that there are a couple 444 s out there.
> 
> - drsurfrat


I just made some fence rods for the 444 for a fella. Are you ready for it?... 9/32-28. Luckily he had one original for me to copy 'cause I'd have never gotten the size right if all I had was a female thread.

Is the "chip deflector" the same thing as the spur block on the 444? If so, the two threads that secure it to the main body are #10-28 and the thread for the knicker screw is #8-32.

And on the #140, the screws that secure the side plate are #10-28.


----------



## drsurfrat (Aug 17, 2020)

beautiful, thanks Kenny


----------



## HokieKen (Apr 14, 2015)

Mike, I just bought a depth attachment for my #71 off Ebay. It came with the thumbscrew that holds the foot on the rod but I don't have the one that holds the rod in the body. However, I took the one from the foot and tried it in the main body and it fits perfectly.

I notice though in the OP that you have two different pitches for those screws. On my plane and depth attachment they are both 1/4-28. My plane is a Type 8 according to hyperkitten.

And now that I go back and re-read, it looks like the 1/4-24 you have is for the "auxiliary" depth attachment. And that probably means the long one that incorporated the depth attachment and the cutter collar into one? So nevermind  I'll leave this post though in case it provides clarity for someone else in the future!


----------

