# Stanley vs. the other guys....



## Armandhammer

Here in the US at least, it seems that Stanley planes are the standard (not best, but most common). I assume it's because there are SO many of them. I'm trying to start my plane collection and of course most classifieds are Stanley and ebay is flooded with them. I have been straying a bit and seeing some others, Millers Falls, Sargent, Record…the prices of these are better but how do they compare in quality? That's all I'm looking for at the moment is quality tools that will work for me for a long time but I'd also like to save some $$$ if I can.


----------



## TheWoodenOyster

I have two miller's falls and one stanley. I can personally say that I like the stanley better and it seems to be built a little better. That said, I am only comparing 3 planes, but that is my experience.


----------



## Armandhammer

Well, experience is certainly worth a lot. My first plane is being shipped tomorrow and it's a Stanley No. 5. I still need (want) a No. 4 and No. 7 and a block plane to round out the collection. If I went with other than Stanley brands I could probably save 25%+ but not if it's at the cost of quality.

Thanks for the post.


----------



## TerryDowning

I love my Millers Falls planes
Mine are all the premium line indicted by their respective model numbers.
I have 
#9 (Stanley 4 size)
#14 (Stanley size 5)
#22 (Stanley size 7)

a no 75 block plane
a no 07 skew block plane (stanley 140 equal)
a no 85 fillister (Stanley 78)
and the cigar spoke shave.

Easily the equal or better of the Stanley's from the same time period. (mid 50s mostly, the #22 is world war II era)


----------



## MarkE

I have a lot of planes go through my shop, so I have had an opportunity to try out planes from many manufacturers . I usually stick to Stanley planes to buy and sell simply because that is what most people want to buy.

The Millers Falls planes with the hinged, three point lever cap are good planes. I have a couple of the No.9 planes in my collection. They are fairly easy to get set up and work very well. A good solid feel. The No.9 is the same size as a Stanley No4.

The V&B (Vaughan & Bushnell) drop forged are also good planes. The drop forged base is said to be less likely to crack if dropped on a hard surface. The frog and frog receiver is a ramped type setup with a lot of surface contact area. The side edges of the frog receiver are raised up and fit into cutouts in the bottom of the frog helping to keep the frog square to the mouth.

I have tried a few Sargent planes and the ones I have used are about comparable to Stanleys. The Sargent planes seem to be a little heavier, more stoutly built.

Some Craftsman planes are good users. The ones that I have tried and liked were made by Sargent. The problem with Craftsman is it is sometimes hard to tell who actually manufactured the plane.

Dunlap was a Sears economy plane. The ones I have used have been difficult to set up to work well. I would stay away from the Dunlap bench planes. Some of the Dunlap block planes seem to be okay.

Fulton is another 'value' line from Sears(?). Haven't used one of them that was worth keeping.

Union planes are hit or miss. They made a good plane but about half of the ones that I have come across were frankenplanes with miss-matched parts. If they have all the correct parts they work as well as the Stanleys.

I tried three or four Shelton planes. They were to fussy to get working right, although they worked good if you did. Same thing with Goodall.

These are all just my opinions based on limited experience. YMMV


----------



## ColonelTravis

I own two MFs - block (Stanley 120) and the #4 equivalent. I love the bench plane, use it all the time but I had to add a Hock chipbreaker because the one it came with was messed up. Like Mark said, it's a three point lever cap. No question, it's of comparable quality to my best Stanleys. Only reason I don't use the block that much is because I bought a 9 1/2, which is more versatile and comfortable. But the MF block looks very cool restored and is great for quick, no-nonsense stuff.


----------



## Tedstor

I have a Stanley #5 and a Record Block plane. 
Both are of comparably good quality. I like the blue paint on the Record plane better


----------



## reedwood

Check out rexmill.com - Hand plane 101 - Stanley bench plane type study

I collected for along time without really knowing what I was buying - if it looked cool and I didn't have one, I bought it. fortunately dumb luck would have it..I did OK.

But, man, If I only knew…...like, who the hell keeps the box?

Once you research the history of Stanley, you will learn the History of all the other planes, many of which were consumed by Stanley in a fine example of capitalism and by one of the giants of industry…. a fascinating story.

I thought so anyway. Sure makes collecting more fun when you can see a plane from 4 ft. away sitting on a table at a garage sale and know what type it probably is and what it's worth. then try and not let them see you drool on it while you make the deal. Ha!

As a collector I would also avoid the Stanley handyman, corsair, great neck, buck bros, sears, new Stanley planes

I also have a tradition: I try to buy one new Lie Nielsen plane every Christmas, from Santa of course.


----------



## Loren

If you are finding Record planes for lower prices than Baileys,
buy them. They are a little nicer in general, imo… a little
heavier.

UK made Baileys are a little heavier too.

I've never handled one but the Vaughn and Bushnell
mentioned above look like nice planes and perhaps
undervalued.


----------



## Armandhammer

I saw a few records and the prices seemed a little lower or the same as the Stanleys…but they were on ebay with no bids. Didn't seem to be much interest in them. Perhaps closer to the end of the auction the price goes up with bids…I don't know. I'll keep an eye on them though and try to do some research to see what's what. There's just so many brand and models and types that it's really hard to keep up with, especially trying to figure it all out at once. I may just stay with Stanley since that's what I've been researching the most up to this point so I'm a little more comfortable figuring out what they are from pictures. Still unsure on appropriate values. Once I get a few users in the shop I can start branching out to see what else is out there that I can add to the collection.


----------



## knotscott

I've had quite a few Baileys, Millers Falls, and Records. The overall quality depends a lot on the era they were made. Overall, I tend to prefer the older MF and Record planes….partly because I like the colors, partly because they're different, and partly because the older ones also feel a bit heftier to me. I even sold my Bedrock plane because it fetches enough money, that I was able to buy a much larger Record plane with the proceeds. The Sargent VBM is right up there too. They're all capable of being very nice planes…..name recognition is a big deal in the market place, but less important in the shop. Buy what you like the feel of in your hands.


----------



## cavemancrafting

I have both Stanley and Sargent lineup. Personally, I grab my Sargents before I do my Stanleys. I like the thick irons and I'm not particular about having the frog adjuster. I usually set my frog and leave it. The casitngs on my Sargents just feel better. They are thicker, heavier and seem to push easier. That being said, i like Stanley totes better. Ive been spinning my own knobs for a while now so thats not a good comparison. All in all I like Sargent better than Stanley. Plus the fact that they are not as desireable as Stanley keeps the price reasonable.


----------



## donwilwol

I've restored a lot of hand planes. The first thing I do after whatever cleanup and or Restoration is needed is sharpen them and try them.

If you buy a Stanley-Bailey, the scenario will typically look like this.
Flatten the sole.
Flatten the frog.
Make sure the frog seats properly
Flatten the back of the iron. This can mean anything from several minutes on the course stone to a ball peen hammer and or a belt sander.

Find a type 4 or type 5 sargent it means
Flatten the back of the iron. Usually about 10 minutes or less.
Use it.

Type 6 sargent. See Stanley list.

Millers Falls. The back of the irons are typically not as bad as the stanley. And the soles are flatter. I've heard type 2&3 are the best, but will need to research more Millers Falls planes.

Early craftsman are the same as who manufactured them probably until about 1940ish, then we see a decline faster than the makers models.

V&B I haven't found enough to comment.

Comparing tolerances in manufacturing you'll fine the only maker close (and they're pretty close) to a modern LN is the type 5 sargent and earlier.

That's my 2 cents worth.

Edit: FYI this is an excerpt from a blog post I hope to post soon on TTT


----------



## TaySC

What is a Sargent 409 hand plane?

Think I found the answer. One ad said it was equivalent to the Stanley #4.


----------



## donwilwol

> What is a Sargent 409 hand plane?
> 
> Think I found the answer. One ad said it was equivalent to the Stanley #4.
> 
> - TaySC


That is correct.


----------



## TheFridge

Millers falls made really good planes.


----------



## TaySC

http://www.ebay.com/itm/182702518705?ssPageName=STRK:MESINDXX:IT&_trksid=p3984.m1436.l2649

Worth $43.50 with shipping?

I'm trying to get my hands on a few vintage hand planes to get the experience of tearing them down, cleaning them and putting them back together to use.


----------



## TaySC

Sorry to have derailed the thread. I did decide to bid on (and won) that Sargent 409 hand plane. Thanks for the information guys!


----------



## bandit571

Hmmmm.









I think I have all the bases covered?









Maybe?


----------



## Smitty_Cabinetshop

Nope. I don't see a DE.


----------



## HorizontalMike

CLICK ON IMAGE for larger view:




  






*Hmm… Any questions? ;-)*

BTW, I have MORE now… **
Also looking for a Type 5 #424. Seen one?


----------



## WayneC

I would add Union and Ohio to your list. I think that the question is more when was it made than by who. It varies by manufacture but in general the earlier planes are better in quality. For example I like Type 10-15 Stanley. Roughly 1910-1940. They are fully featured and good quality. You can find other manufactures that made planes of Similar or higher quality (Sargent Shaw Patent) for example.

The 409 is a good plane. Once you have handled a few good planes, you will begin to recognize quality manufacture independent of brand.

I'm surprised Don W did not drop a link to his wonderful website.


----------



## TaySC

What is the front metal type plane?

http://www.ebay.com/itm/Lot-of-7-Vintage-Wood-Planes-Sargent-Dunlap-Stanley-and-others-/182707114799?hash=item2a8a31532f:g:gewAAOSwvv9ZiGaP

I have seen a few online lately, but don't understand how they are used.


----------



## Clarkie

Seems no one mentioned the Winchester hand planes. They are a very suitable plane. Stanley has been a world wide conglomorate since the late 1800's. A lot of planes were made by Stanley for other companies, one being the Ward's stores. Have fun make some dust.


----------



## Loren

> What is the front metal type plane?
> 
> http://www.ebay.com/itm/Lot-of-7-Vintage-Wood-Planes-Sargent-Dunlap-Stanley-and-others-/182707114799?hash=item2a8a31532f:g:gewAAOSwvv9ZiGaP
> 
> I have seen a few online lately, but don t understand how they are used.
> 
> - TaySC


It's a double spokeshave for shaping things like
wheel spokes and tool handles. I have one. 
They are somewhat common.


----------



## rodneywt1180b

Some light reading on Stanley planes.
http://www.supertool.com/StanleyBG/stan0a.html

Old hardware store brands (Shapliegh's comes to mind) are generally rebranded Stanleys or Sargents. It's possible to get some good deals on them if people don't know what they're looking at.
I have a probably 1950s Craftsman plane that I like. It's a equivalent to but a little bigger than a Stanley #5 and has heavier castings than my Stanleys. I usually reach for it first.


----------



## WayneC

> Seems no one mentioned the Winchester hand planes. They are a very suitable plane. Stanley has been a world wide conglomorate since the late 1800 s. A lot of planes were made by Stanley for other companies, one being the Ward s stores. Have fun make some dust.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> - Clarkie


Are the planes in the photo's Winchester or Stanley Bedrock?


----------



## oldwodie

The only plane I have bought that I do not like is the Buck Brothers. Aluminum frame, cheap materials all the way around, in my opinion. I have also found Fulton, Craftsman to work fine for me. I just look at the Baileys and Stanleys mostly, using the lesser preferred brands until someone comes along and wants some of them.


----------



## Just_Iain

> I ve restored a lot of hand planes. The first thing I do after whatever cleanup and or Restoration is needed is sharpen them and try them.
> 
> If you buy a Stanley-Bailey, the scenario will typically look like this.
> Flatten the sole.
> Flatten the frog.
> Make sure the frog seats properly
> Flatten the back of the iron. This can mean anything from several minutes on the course stone to a ball peen hammer and or a belt sander.
> 
> Find a type 4 or type 5 sargent it means
> Flatten the back of the iron. Usually about 10 minutes or less.
> Use it.
> 
> Type 6 sargent. See Stanley list.
> 
> Millers Falls. The back of the irons are typically not as bad as the stanley. And the soles are flatter. I ve heard type 2&3 are the best, but will need to research more Millers Falls planes.
> 
> Early craftsman are the same as who manufactured them probably until about 1940ish, then we see a decline faster than the makers models.
> 
> V&B I haven t found enough to comment.
> 
> Comparing tolerances in manufacturing you ll fine the only maker close (and they re pretty close) to a modern LN is the type 5 sargent and earlier.
> 
> That s my 2 cents worth.
> 
> Edit: FYI this is an excerpt from a blog post I hope to post soon on TTT
> 
> - Don W


I need to print this out and save it as I'm likely 70% Stanley to 30% Record.


----------



## Lemwise

> Flatten the frog.


Flattening the frog is useless. When you tighten down the cap iron screw the blade is pulled against the cap iron (in the case of a stock thin blade) creating a hollow. This hollow is part of the design. It keeps the blade in a stressed state making it stiffer. This hollow is what rests on the frog and thus the blade only makes contact at the top and bottom of the frog.


----------



## HokieKen

I have Stanleys and Record but I've become a big fan of the Millers Falls planes. They take less time to bring up to working condition than most Stanleys and, IMO, are better users once there. The exception is the only type 5 Millers Falls I've had. It was a fine user but, was a LOAD of work to bring it up to snuff.


----------



## Smitty_Cabinetshop

> Flatten the frog.
> 
> Flattening the frog is useless. When you tighten down the cap iron screw the blade is pulled against the cap iron (in the case of a stock thin blade) creating a hollow. This hollow is part of the design. It keeps the blade in a stressed state making it stiffer. This hollow is what rests on the frog and thus the blade only makes contact at the top and bottom of the frog.
> 
> - Lemwise


I disagree.

The hollow is pressed out when the level cap is engaged, meaning the cutter/cap iron combination should consistently make full contact with the frog. That said, it isn't often that frog lapping is truly needed to make work possible.


----------



## TheFridge

He could be speaking of the seats as well.


----------



## Smitty_Cabinetshop

Frogs with paint on their seats are of the 'debil, 'tis true!


----------



## bandit571

It is not so much flat along the length of the frog's face….it is more about ACROSS the frogs face. If there is a slight "hump" in the middle, the iron can twist to one side or the other….sometimes both in the same cut….instead of slicing along, it kind of wiggles it's way along. Have had more than a few come through the shop with a high spot in the middle of the frog's face.










See how many you can ID in this one….


----------



## donwilwol

> Flatten the frog.
> 
> Flattening the frog is useless. When you tighten down the cap iron screw the blade is pulled against the cap iron (in the case of a stock thin blade) creating a hollow. This hollow is part of the design. It keeps the blade in a stressed state making it stiffer. This hollow is what rests on the frog and thus the blade only makes contact at the top and bottom of the frog.
> 
> - Lemwise


I'd suggest reading the patents.


----------

