# Six Baileys



## BubbaIBA (Nov 23, 2011)

Over the last couple of months I've been putting together a full working set of Stanley Bailey pattern planes, the only rules were: These are for me to keep so get good ones, no type 16 (1933-1941) or later, and forget the #1 and #2 Baileys, I would guess for someone they would be in their working set but what the hey it's my post and my working set .

Bottom row working right to left is a #3 type 13 (1925-1928), a #4 type 13 and a #5 also a type 13.

Top row working left to right is a #6 type 9 (1902-1907), a #7 type 9, and a #8 type 8 (1899-1902).

All have Hock irons and chip breakers. In my opinion you can not buy a better set of planes, not a Bedrock, LN, Clifton, or LV. YMMV.


----------



## BubbaIBA (Nov 23, 2011)

Another view:


----------



## BubbaIBA (Nov 23, 2011)

Last one:










Just want to add: They are setting on my almost finished Roubo bench. Just need to install the leg vise, cut the tenons on the legs and stretchers and then draw bore it all together.


----------



## waho6o9 (May 6, 2011)

Very nice set BubbaIBA, looks like they found a good home, good job.


----------



## ShaneA (Apr 15, 2011)

You have chosen well sir. Very nice collection, indeed. Happy planing!


----------



## ShipWreck (Feb 16, 2008)

Ahhhhhh….. The Battleships, Cruisers, Frigates …........... all in port at the same time.

Nice looking fleet Bubba!

+1 on the Hock blades as well.


----------



## helluvawreck (Jul 21, 2010)

You have a beautiful set of planes and I know that you are proud of them. Congratulations.

helluvawreck
https://woodworkingexpo.wordpress.com


----------



## donwilwol (May 16, 2011)

well done.

It would be intersting to know how they are tuned. As in the #5 is sharpened with a camber with a wider mouth for a jack, the #8 is sharpened square but the #7 has a camber, etc. I like to hear the differnt opinions on how and why they get set up.


----------



## BubbaIBA (Nov 23, 2011)

Thanks guys, they came to me as the usual collection of rust and grime. I think they cleaned up nicely. This is the first time I've bought with a goal in mind, usually I just see one that I think will clean up and make a good user with no thought as to if I have one like it already or where it would fit with the rest of my planes, if it looks good I buy it….it is just a short step to the slippery slope of collecting instead of just buying and rehabbing for fun. I noticed I have 3 type 13s, only need 3 more to have a type 13 collection or for that matter only 4 more for a type 9 collection .

Don,

I'm off to work, will answer your question once I'm back home.


----------



## BubbaIBA (Nov 23, 2011)

Don,

I have a couple of scrub planes for quick hogging if needed, so none of this bunch has a lot of camber. The 5 is set up to work as a Jack with the ends of the iron relived and a relatively open mouth, the irons of the rest are pretty straight with tight mouths. I have a couple of electrical apprentices to do the heavy lifting of truing and dimensioning, so the planes are mostly for finish work.

ken


----------



## donwilwol (May 16, 2011)

so I have to ask one last question. Do you consider your set complete, or are you still building the collection?


----------



## ShipWreck (Feb 16, 2008)

Don… I dont think he could answer that without fibbing.


----------



## donwilwol (May 16, 2011)

oh, I already know the answer, I was trying to see if he does.


----------



## BubbaIBA (Nov 23, 2011)

Ship, ain't that the truth .

Don,

The set is complete in it is what I planned, a set of working planes that are the most common for hand tool use. It is incomplete in it is of different "types". I expect I will over time build out sets with only the same "types" and I will add specialty planes as well. Or I could just forgo building sets and just add to my collection where I'm short in numbers i.e. specially planes and I only have a couple of #8s and #7s where if you dug around I expect you could find more than a dozen #3s and #4s stuck in corners of the shop.

In short, planes are an addiction so no collection is complete….just the original goal is finished for now.


----------



## donwilwol (May 16, 2011)

well said. You've done a nice job on the restores. Its a great looking set, complete or otherwise.


----------



## cjwillie (Sep 6, 2011)

Nice collection, Bubba! I like the Jeep too!!!


----------



## BrandonW (Apr 27, 2010)

Great collection. You probably have just as much if not more invested in the chipbreakers and irons as in the planes themselves.


----------



## BillWhite (Jul 23, 2007)

"Over the last couple of months I've been putting together a full working set of Stanley Bailey pattern planes, the only rules were: These are for me to keep so get good ones, no type 16 (1933-1941) or later."

Gotta ask the dumb questions? Why none from that era, and did ya have to modify all the plane sole (mouths) to fit the Hock irons?
Great collection there fella.
Bill


----------



## BubbaIBA (Nov 23, 2011)

Thanks cj, they are great town cars.

Brandon, the planes are cheap. The Hock irons and chip breakers, no so much. I use OEM irons and chip breakers as well, they can be be very good, but I thought on this set I would go with the best.

Bill,

Not a dumb question. The changes made to the type 16 planes were the beginning of the end of quality planes from Stanley. The type 16 and even the early post war planes were not bad and can be made to work very well, the real falling off the quality cliff came in the 60's. The major reasons for using a type 16 cutoff are they are easy to spot from photos, the cap iron hole was changed from a keyhole shape to a comma shape with the type 16 and the most important reason, not as easy to spot but more important, was a change in the frog. Earlier type frogs will not fit type 16 and later planes nor will type 16 or later frogs work with earlier planes..










The pre-type 16 frog is on the left with a post type 16 frog on the right. As you can see there is more contact area for the iron and the way the frog fits the center rib is better on the earlier frogs. I think the frog/sole/iron contact of early Bailey pattern Stanleys are as good as and maybe better than that of the Bedrock pattern Stanleys. The type 16 and post….not so much.

The Hock Irons and chip breakers fit fine with no mouth mods needed.


----------



## woodworker59 (May 16, 2012)

very nice set of planes, use them well and enjoy every shaving. Don't forget to post pics of the bench when completed….


----------



## BubbaIBA (Nov 23, 2011)

Thanks, Will do. I hope to have time to finish it next weekend….which means In a couple more .


----------



## BrandonW (Apr 27, 2010)

Although the WWII era Baileys suffer from the changes you point out, they do have nice thick castings for the sole. Not only is the added weight a bonus (though some would disagree here), but the soles are pretty robust-built like a tank. Thus, type 17s have a special place, but on the whole I, like you, prefer the pre 16s.


----------



## 33706 (Mar 5, 2008)

Great looking collection!
From the look of your workspace, it seems you favor Southern Yellow Pine.
Would your choices for planes, setup, cutters be different if you worked primarily with exotics and hardwoods?


----------



## BubbaIBA (Nov 23, 2011)

Poopie,

Thanks.

The SYP is for work benches because it is stiff, heavy, and very cheap. SYP's only real downside for making benches is its propensity for doing stupid wood tricks if given a chance. For other uses there are woods I like better i.e. maple, hickory (love the look but what a PITA to work), poplar for painted work, ash, teak, and mahogany. You will even find some ebony and bubinga in my wood pile , but most of the time I work with domestic woods.

I have thought about building the CinC a painted pine roll-around kitchen hutch from the left over SYP. I just have to get the work bench finished first.


----------

