# Stanley No. 4 vs No. 4 1/2



## rbterhune (Jul 31, 2009)

I'm new to handplanes (and woodworking) and I will soon make my first plane purchase. I want a plane that will be a go-to plane for smoothing, flattening, general clean-up etc. Which of these plane models…No. 4 or No. 4 1/2…would be good for this purpose and why do you choose it over the other?

Thanks.


----------



## WayneC (Mar 8, 2007)

For general purpose you may want to look at a #5. 4 and 4 1/2 are a bit short for flattening. Difference between the two above is width and weight of the planes. For smoothing some people also like 5 1/2 or #3s. Depends on how much weight you like, how big your hards are and what is comfortable to you.

Also consider a low angle jack plane. You can get an extra blade and set them up for different types of operations.

Stanley has a new low angle jack and Lee Valley and Lie-Nielson have some very nice versions.

For general clean-up you may want to look at a low-angle block plane.

I would advise staying away from the cheap planes you would find in a Home Depot or Lows (buck and some of the regular Stanleys for example)


----------



## b2rtch (Jan 20, 2010)

I am not directly answering your question but I write to you because you wrote that you are about to buy a plane. 
After shopping around for quite a while last week I finally decided to buy a set of three Footprint planes on Sears.com. 
What decided me is that I read review of this brand which were, if not excellent at least mostly good, and that Sears offers a good deal on these planes.
I thought I let you know.

http://www.sears.com/shc/s/p_10153_12605_00937763000P?keyword=hand+plane
later I shall buy a #6 or #7

I recommend you read this:

http://www.popularwoodworking.com/article/understanding_bench_planes/


----------



## b2rtch (Jan 20, 2010)

Another thing that you need to know is that, except if you have several hundreds dollars to buy a Lie-Nielsen plane, when you get it you are plane is no where near ready to be used. 
You will have to spend several hours tuning your plane and flattening and sharpening the blade.
If you are brand new to hand plane I recommend that you do as I did : I spent about one month reading about hand planes, reading reviews ( read reviews in wood magazines and on amazon)and watching videos on the Internet (wonderful tool) then when ready to purchase you will know what you need, what you want and what to look for.

I chose the Footprint because I read that they are good base to build better planes with and the deal at Sears is quite good. 
After tuning them I shall us the original blades until I have money to buy better blades (the singles most important thing in the plane).
I understand that some planes made in India, on old British molds, are very good and very inexpensive.
Good luck.


----------



## GJP60 (Jan 12, 2010)

I agree with Wayne, but to answer your question I think the big difference between a #4 & # 4 1/2 is personal preference. I've used a 4 1/2 for many years. It's an old Stanley, probably from the 1930's with a corrugated sole (which I dont' think makes much difference in performance.) I like that size because I'm a big guy, and it seems to fit. I bought a LN 4.5 a few years ago and like it a lot. Then during a weak moment I bought the LN low angle jack plane and it is absolutely the one I grab first. It does every job. When I recently flattened my maple bench top I used a #7 and the low angle jack. I'm not going to sell the 4 1/2's but I don't use them much anymore. I took a class with Mario Rodriguez a while ago and he swears by his LN #4. So as I said, much has to do with your preference. I also agree with Wayne about getting what you pay for. A good tool is a pleasure to own and use. A cheap tool may be nothing but frustration.


----------



## bigike (May 25, 2009)

i would go with the #5-1/2 stanley it's the best plane long to flatten u can tune it to take thin shavings for somewhat smoothing but u might have to follow with a #4 u can get one cheap on ebay, david charlesworth's furniture making techniques he explains why this plane is the best for general work and how he uses it all the time. I've been using it alot in my shop for for everything it's the first one i reach for and i have alot of planes from block planes up to the #7. If u need planes i have a post listed on the trade/swap forum here on LJ.


----------



## knotscott (Feb 27, 2009)

I like the extra beef of the 4-1/2. The 4-1/2 also leaves the door farther open for a #3 sometime in the future. For general stuff, I like the 5-1/2 too, and reach for that one more than any of the bench planes.


----------



## b2rtch (Jan 20, 2010)

I recommend that you watch this ( there is a lot of background noise yet it is very interesting)


----------



## WayneC (Mar 8, 2007)

I say get one of each. : ^ )


----------



## b2rtch (Jan 20, 2010)

I understand that there are many kinds of people participating on this forum and other forums I am a part of. Mostly I can divide this people in two broad groups: hobbyists and professionals,. 
Of course each group has vastly different requirement when it comes to the tools quality and performance. Nevertheless I am amazed by how much money some hobbyists are able and willing to spend to buy the "best" equipment available.
I am making pretty good money with my job, my wife never stops me to buy what I want and I just cannot afford to buy a Nie-Liesen plane for several hundred dollars. or the other day I was looking at the wood working benches, the one I was looking at goes for $4500!
If I was 30 years younger and a professional I might consider buying one ,but today, there is no way.
Today, rather than best quality ,I shop for best value, sometimes they go hand in hand but not very often.


----------



## WayneC (Mar 8, 2007)

I guess I have a different perspective on the topic. I have a number of LN tools. If I wanted to sell one, I could and would get very close to what I paid for it back on ebay. I expect to use thee tools the rest of my life and be able to pass them along in the family. I also like old tools and I find it rewarding to find an old diamond in the rough and bring it back to life. If I am going to spend my time tuning and lapping a tool this is where I would rather expend the effort.

I think it also comes down to why a person is working with wood. For me it is the experience of doing something with my hands to counter act 12 hour days spent behind a computer and in teleconferences. Quality tools are a joy to use.


----------



## b2rtch (Jan 20, 2010)

I fully agree that quality tools are a joy to use and to keep but for right now I chose quantity (variety ) of tool versus quality. 
When I have most tools I would like to have then I may switch to quality versus quantity.
For example I just bought a set of 3 Footprint hand planes from Sears. 
I was told that the base is quite solid that they require a loft of tuning. 
I shall tune them and use the original blades until I can afford to buy some Hock blades in them.
I rather go this way than to wait to save enough money to buy a Lie-Nielsen even if I would love to own one.
Something else at my level I might not appreciate the difference in quality between both planes. 
I love beautiful objects ( especially beautiful cars) but that does not mean that I would be able to fully appreciate all the possibilities of a Ferrari, Lamborghini or Bugatti.
I am very satisfied with my Subaru


----------



## rbterhune (Jul 31, 2009)

Thanks to those who've replied thus far…your insight will be useful.

My research is leading me away from the #5 and larger planes because although I'm going to flatten some panels with my hobby level work, those panels will generally be less than 24" wide (nightstand, for example).

WayneC…I do like the low angle block plane idea…maybe that is what I need in conjuction with the No. 4 or 4 1/2.

b2rtch…thank you for the links. Good info there.


----------



## b2rtch (Jan 20, 2010)

You are welcome


----------



## dfdye (Jan 31, 2010)

I have to jump in regarding the quality of the footprint planes: they are NOT good out of the box. They take a TON of work to get right, and even then really need a new blade. I am at the end of this process for my #4 footprint, and even though it works well now, the adjustment will always be touchy and I need to spend more on a good blade than I did on the whole plane!

I am very strongly leaning towards the Woodriver planes for their price/quality ratio when I buy my next plane. Having worked with my footprint, I can say that it is more trouble than it is worth-buy a better plane unless you are really up for a challenge


----------



## rbterhune (Jul 31, 2009)

I will probably buy a better plane, but on the cheap via E-bay. Quality was never a question for me because I know, at least in my book, quality is most important to me, even as a beginner. As I mentioned in my original post, I'm new at this…which means I want very little setup or at the very least, once I set it up I want it to stay that way for awhile.

I originally asked about the size and application because I wanted to see how folks were using these tools.

The popular woodworking article b2rtch sent does a good job explaining applications…based on that article I would probably benefit most from a No. 4, especially because I will work on medium to small furniture parts. A No. 4 and a small block plane would probably be the perfect combination. If I get into very curly woods a low angle jack would probably be better than the No. 4 as a good all around tool.


----------



## WayneC (Mar 8, 2007)

Some old Stanleys on ebay (Lot's of choices)

http://cgi.ebay.com/Vintage-Stanley-No-4-Hand-Wood-Plane-3-Pat-Dates_W0QQitemZ250586784422QQcmdZViewItemQQptZLH_DefaultDomain_0?hash=item3a5822e2a6

http://cgi.ebay.com/Vintage-Stanley-Bailey-No-4-Smooth-Plane-Exc-But_W0QQitemZ320492814029QQcmdZViewItemQQptZLH_DefaultDomain_0?hash=item4a9edc3ecd

http://cgi.ebay.com/VINTAGE-STANLEY-BAILEY-No-4-SMOOTH-PLANE-NICE_W0QQitemZ260558563705QQcmdZViewItemQQptZLH_DefaultDomain_0?hash=item3caa802979

http://cgi.ebay.com/STANLEY-BAILEY-NO-4-SMOOTH-PLANE-TYPE-16-CANADIAN-IRON_W0QQitemZ290408905584QQcmdZViewItemQQptZLH_DefaultDomain_0?hash=item439db83b70

http://cgi.ebay.com/VINTAGE-BAILEY-STANLEY-NO-4-CORRUGATED-WOOD-PLANE_W0QQitemZ350323429439QQcmdZViewItemQQptZLH_DefaultDomain_0?hash=item5190e7503f

Suggestions relative to block planes….

http://www.leevalley.com/wood/page.aspx?c=2&p=46791&cat=1,41182 
http://www.lie-nielsen.com/catalog.php?sku=102

If you can go a bit more the adjustable mouth block planes from these guys are real nice.

For old Stanleys I recommend looking for a number 18, 60 1/2, or a 65. I would stay away from the non-adjustable mouth block planes.


----------



## rbterhune (Jul 31, 2009)

WayneC…I'm actually watching the 3rd item on your list. I like one or two of the others as well. Thank you.


----------



## b2rtch (Jan 20, 2010)

"I have to jump in regarding the quality of the footprint planes: they are NOT good out of the box. They take a TON of work to get right, and even then really need a new blade. I am at the end of this process for my #4 footprint, and even though it works well now, the adjustment will always be touchy and I need to spend more on a good blade than I did on the whole plane!

I am very strongly leaning towards the Woodriver planes for their price/quality ratio when I buy my next plane. Having worked with my footprint, I can say that it is more trouble than it is worth-buy a better plane unless you are really up for a challenge"

FUNNY! I READ A REVIEW ANOTHER PLACE WHICH SAID THE VERY OPPOSITE!
That footprint were better than woodriver.


----------



## rbterhune (Jul 31, 2009)

Ok…another question to throw in the mix. There is a beautiful No. 4 that has a corrugated sole that I may bid on. I've read that some believe the corrugated soles make jointing edges or shooting veneer difficult. I'm not sure I agree with that given that all of the important registration points…toe, mouth, heel…are NOT corrugated.


----------



## WayneC (Mar 8, 2007)

Well, I've not heard those specific complaints before. Thinking about it, if you were shooting the registration points should be against the shooting board and blade would be the part contacting the work. This said, the planes I use on my shooting board all have smooth bottoms so I have not come across this potental problem in use.

I think the simpler answer would be that if you were shooting, you would most likely be using a 5, 5 1/2, 7, miter plane, or a bevel up plane such as a low angle jack (like the 4, vs 4 1/2 or 5 1/2 debate people have their own preferences). I would not worry about corrugation on a #4 because I would use a different plane for shooting. I prefer the mass of a heavier plane (e.g. 5 1/2) for shooting personally.


----------



## marcb (May 5, 2008)

The 4 1/2 was Stanleys somewhat simple minded attempt to compete with the Infill market. Followed up later by the 4 1/2H (For heavy)

As far as Bailey patent planes go the 4 1/2 is probably the ultimate smoother. The extra mass is a benefit in smoothing. My infill smoother is dense enough to plane with just forward pushing (on easier to plane woods), no downward pressure. Mass is good, it reduces chatter, and helps keep the plane moving through grain changes.

The used 4 1/2's run a bit more steep compared to a regular Stanley smoother and the Bedrock versions even more so. I think its well worth it to just buy the Lie Nielson at that point. It really is worth the money.

That said I started moving the infill route and have a Slater smoother and a Norris (dovetailed) panel plane. They really are everything people say they are. Of course 1 of those cost more than every other plane I own put together. And that's the cheap one.


----------



## Gofor (Jan 12, 2008)

People who do not use planes a lot (only for the purpose of writing their review articles) or tune them much (again only for the purpose of writing their how-to articles) seem to skim over the fact that cheap planes have a few other problems that are much harder to correct. Mostly, these problems concern the frog. If the frog is bedded poorly, it is VERY difficult to true up. If the blade is bedded poorly, it also is very hard to true up. Not too many people have or can find the floats needed to accomplish this.

It takes more than a flat sole and sharp blade to make a plane function properly. The blade has to be solid and square to the mouth. If used for shooting, the sides are best perpendicular (this is hard to find in almost any used plane).

My experience has been that older (pre WWII) planes are easier to tune than new poorly made items, as this area was better machined, even in the less expensive planes of the time.

If I bought new, I would go with Lee Valley quality or better. If used, I would look for pre WWII. Stanleys/Baileys are good, Miller Falls are okay, Some Craftsman (i.e Fulton, etc) in the 40's are not too shabby. I have not tried any of the newer Stanley "made in UK" premium ones that are starting to hit the market, so cannot comment on those.

As for corrugated soles, they are a double edged sword. For the larger planes (#6 & 7), they greatly reduce friction. They are much easier to flatten as there is less metal to remove. The other side is that if they were sorely used, they also wore more.

Caveat emptor. Don't spend more than you can afford to lose.

Go


----------



## rbterhune (Jul 31, 2009)

I love this site…so much info.

Gofor…the corrugated soled plane I'm watching looks barely used. It looks so good that it will probably go for much higher than I want to pay. The same guy has owned it 20 years and apparently his dad had it before that. The handles look like they were put on yesterday and all of the metal parts look superb. We'll see how it turns out. Thanks.


----------



## cut3times (Mar 3, 2010)

There are three planes I would recommend. A #60 1/2 block plane, #4 1/2, and a #7. These three planes will a allow you to accomplish about any smoothing, squaring, or jointing task. I also would suggest eventually getting a good scraper plane (#80, #112, #212).


----------



## rbterhune (Jul 31, 2009)

cut3times…I like your suggestions but I have a question about the #4 1/2. Why do you choose the No. 4 1/2 over the No. 4?


----------



## cut3times (Mar 3, 2010)

Hi rbterhune. I find the width of the 4 1/2 gives me more stability/less rocking for hard woods (especially burled). I even use it on end grain. It is by far my most go to plane I own. I find I hardly ever use my #4 or #3. I have a big collection of user planes that I have restored (see my project I submitted today).

Hope this helps


----------



## rwyoung (Nov 22, 2008)

Corrugations in and of themselves have absolutely NO effect on the coefficient of friction. Friction is independent of surface area in rigid materials. In the range of forces you or I could apply to a handplane while planing and to the material they are "rigid". Yes, they can bend but for surface area to play a part in the coefficient of friction, the materials must deform laterally, that is to say squish out to the sides. Think you can press down hard enough to do that?

You can use a corrugated plane on a narrow edge, just skew the plane.

You can use a corrugated plane on a shooting board. Even if the bed of the board was thin and aligned with the "valley", the corrugations do not extend tip to tail on the plane nor edge to edge. There will always be "sole" in contact with the edge of the shooting board.

Sales gimmick to sell more planes. Nothing more, nothing less.

In some cases, the corrugated Stanleys (and other makers) planes are more expensive on the used market due to scarcity (fewer produced). And in other cases, they cost less than their flat-bottomed cousins simply because they have this odd reputation as inferior.


----------



## rbterhune (Jul 31, 2009)

cut3times…I noticed your collection earlier. You have a nice collection and I like your cabinet. Your post does help because I had wondered about the maneuverability of the larger size, particularly around joined corners or on narrow stock. You also mention that you've used it on end grain. If I wait to purchase the block plane, think it would clean up dovetailed drawer sides well?

Sorry for the questions…new to all this.


----------



## cut3times (Mar 3, 2010)

rbterhune, the block plane will do the job. But I normally use a well honed chisel first then move to the #4 1/2.


----------



## dfdye (Jan 31, 2010)

Bert,

I cannot fathom how somebody who has held both the Footprint and the WoodRiver could possibly come to the conclusion that the Footprint is better. The Woodriver is better finished, has a better blade, better chip breaker, and a finer depth adjustment mechanism. My Footprint was badly out of flat, the steel in the blade is mediocre at best, and the quality of the wood in the handles is quite poor. That being said, my Footprint now works like a champ, but it was NOT a good plane out of the box!

I would really like to read the review you referenced to see why the had that opinion-could you post a link please? They may have gotten the magic sample and I got the dog. Who knows!

David


----------



## Gofor (Jan 12, 2008)

rwyoung: If you really think corrugation does not make a difference on hand planes, I suggest you do a real time test with a #6 or larger plane on a 5' work bench top made of kiln-dried white oak. Of course, you may be younger and stronger where it seems of little consequence, but my scrawny butt found quite a bit if difference. LOL

And yes, you can depress wood fibers enough where they "squish out".

Go


----------

