# dw- Plane notes from the field



## donwilwol (May 16, 2011)

*dw's plane notes - General*

I started a document on one of my computers for notes I keep on plane information. My issue is I have several work laptops, a few personal laptops and travel a lot so keeping the notes in one place is a challenge. I figured this way, I could get to them from anywhere, including my windows 7 phone when looking at buying a plane, and maybe others would find the information useful as well. I'll try to break up the information into logical units as separate blogs in this series.

As always, comments, additional and questions welcome.

*Some General Stanley timeline information.*

Plastic Nut http://community.middlebury.edu/~harris/typology.html Type 17 l942-5 Wartime. Adj. nut is steel or plastic.

Kidney shaped hole in lever caps introduced in 1933

Adjustment frog screw started in 1910. Stopped on some during WWII.

*Plane Iron Sizes*
Plane - Iron Width
No. 1 - 1 1/4" 
No. 2 - 1 5/8" 
No. 3 - 1 3/4" 
No. 5 1/4" - 1 3/4" 
No. 4 - 2" 
No. 4 1/2 - 2 1/4" 
No. 5 - 2" 
No. 5 1/2 - 2 1/4" 
No. 6 - 2 3/8" 
No. 7 - 2 3/8" 
No. 8 - 2 5/8"

*Overall Plane Sizes* (measured off my set. Slight differences may occur according to type)
Plane - Length - Width
No. 1 - 
No. 2 - 7 5/8" x 1 15/16" 
No. 3 - 8 3/4" x 2 1/8" 
No. 5 1/4" - 11 7/16" x 2 1/8" 
No. 4 - 9 3/8" x 2 3/8" 
No. 4 1/2 - 10 15/16" x 2 13/16" 
No. 5 - 14" x 2 7/16" 
No. 5 1/2 - 15 1/8" x 3" 
No. 6 - 17 11/16" x 2 7/8" 
No. 7 - 21 15/16" x 2 7/8" 
No. 8 - 23 7/8" x 3 1/8"

What a B or S means when cast in the bed?

Thread sizes

Stanley used 12-20 threads for the tote and knob rods. The screw at the front of the tote and the frog screws are also of this

*Thread size and pitch.*
Stanley
12-20 threads for the tote and knob rods. Rod needed is #8 or 13/64" drill rod. 
Frog Screw 12-20
Lever Cap Screw 9/32-24
Adjuster Screw 9/34 Left hand

The rod diameter is 7/32 with a 20 tpi thread. A 1/4" rod diameter is usually associated with 20 tpi (1/4-20) and a 7/32 rod.

When Record went into plane production in the early 1930s they copied Stanley planes of the period, right down to the threads.

Here are the sizes from Recordcollector's site:
http://www.recordhandplanes.com/parts-and-sizes.html

Cap Iron screw : 5/16" 18tpi BSW (I believe this is the only standard BSW thread on benchplanes)
Frog screws : 7/32" 20tpi Whitworth;
Tote & Knob bolts : 7/32" 20tpi Whitworth;
Tote Toe screw : 7/32" 20tpi Whitworth;
Frog Adjusting Plate screw : 7/32" 24tpi Whitworth;
Frog Adjusting screw : 1/4" 24tpi American/Unified;
Brass Adjusting nut : 9/32" 24tpi American/Unified (left-hand thread);
Lever Cap screw : 9/32" 24tpi American/Unified.

If your trying to decifer Stanley thread sizes you need these 2 pdf's

http://www.tttg.org.au/Content/Stanley%20Planes%20and%20Screw%20Threads%20-%20Part%201.pdf

http://www.tttg.org.au/Content/Stanley%20Planes%20and%20Screw%20Threads%20-%20Part%202.pdf

You can buy a tap and dye set here, http://stjamesbaytoolco.com/ look for 12/20 Tap And Die Set $35.00.

I had a question about weights of different type planes, so I weighed a few I had. I thought it would be interesting. Here is what I found. The are all Bailey #4's of different vintages.
type weight 
17 3pds 6.4 ozs 
13 3pds 7.2 ozs 
15 3pds 5.2 ozs 
11 3pds 5.2ozs 
11 3pds 9.2ozs 
10 3pds 7.2 ozs 
6 3pds 4.4 ozs 
4 3pds 5.8ozs 
4 3pds 5.2ozs

If there are 2 of the same type, it just means I had 2 handy.

And if you don't see it here, Check out WayneC's blog as well.


----------



## Bertha (Jan 10, 2011)

donwilwol said:


> *dw's plane notes - General*
> 
> I started a document on one of my computers for notes I keep on plane information. My issue is I have several work laptops, a few personal laptops and travel a lot so keeping the notes in one place is a challenge. I figured this way, I could get to them from anywhere, including my windows 7 phone when looking at buying a plane, and maybe others would find the information useful as well. I'll try to break up the information into logical units as separate blogs in this series.
> 
> ...


DW, do you own a 60 1/2? I bought 4 just to part one together. I really like this plane.


----------



## donwilwol (May 16, 2011)

donwilwol said:


> *dw's plane notes - General*
> 
> I started a document on one of my computers for notes I keep on plane information. My issue is I have several work laptops, a few personal laptops and travel a lot so keeping the notes in one place is a challenge. I figured this way, I could get to them from anywhere, including my windows 7 phone when looking at buying a plane, and maybe others would find the information useful as well. I'll try to break up the information into logical units as separate blogs in this series.
> 
> ...


I don't own a 60 1/2. Send me your extra parts? I have a 61 (no adjustable month). Bought it in a lot.


----------



## WayneC (Mar 8, 2007)

donwilwol said:


> *dw's plane notes - General*
> 
> I started a document on one of my computers for notes I keep on plane information. My issue is I have several work laptops, a few personal laptops and travel a lot so keeping the notes in one place is a challenge. I figured this way, I could get to them from anywhere, including my windows 7 phone when looking at buying a plane, and maybe others would find the information useful as well. I'll try to break up the information into logical units as separate blogs in this series.
> 
> ...


60 1/2 are great little planes…


----------



## FatherHooligan (Mar 27, 2008)

donwilwol said:


> *dw's plane notes - General*
> 
> I started a document on one of my computers for notes I keep on plane information. My issue is I have several work laptops, a few personal laptops and travel a lot so keeping the notes in one place is a challenge. I figured this way, I could get to them from anywhere, including my windows 7 phone when looking at buying a plane, and maybe others would find the information useful as well. I'll try to break up the information into logical units as separate blogs in this series.
> 
> ...


You may want to try something like Google sites to store your lists and other data in the "cloud". I've used it a couple of times and it is pretty cool.


----------



## Bertha (Jan 10, 2011)

donwilwol said:


> *dw's plane notes - General*
> 
> I started a document on one of my computers for notes I keep on plane information. My issue is I have several work laptops, a few personal laptops and travel a lot so keeping the notes in one place is a challenge. I figured this way, I could get to them from anywhere, including my windows 7 phone when looking at buying a plane, and maybe others would find the information useful as well. I'll try to break up the information into logical units as separate blogs in this series.
> 
> ...


Don, I think you'd find that my spare 60 1/2 parts wouldn't be much good to you. Even my Frankenstein has a non-sanctioned depth knob; looks like a drill bit stop or something


----------



## donwilwol (May 16, 2011)

donwilwol said:


> *dw's plane notes - General*
> 
> I started a document on one of my computers for notes I keep on plane information. My issue is I have several work laptops, a few personal laptops and travel a lot so keeping the notes in one place is a challenge. I figured this way, I could get to them from anywhere, including my windows 7 phone when looking at buying a plane, and maybe others would find the information useful as well. I'll try to break up the information into logical units as separate blogs in this series.
> 
> ...


Al, I now have a nice 60 1/2. I bought at an antique store some time ago. I also have another that has some serious mouth damage and is missing the front knob if any of the other parts would get you a functional plane, let me know.


----------



## Ocelot (Mar 6, 2011)

donwilwol said:


> *dw's plane notes - General*
> 
> I started a document on one of my computers for notes I keep on plane information. My issue is I have several work laptops, a few personal laptops and travel a lot so keeping the notes in one place is a challenge. I figured this way, I could get to them from anywhere, including my windows 7 phone when looking at buying a plane, and maybe others would find the information useful as well. I'll try to break up the information into logical units as separate blogs in this series.
> 
> ...


So, 11 years later, I noticed that you said…

Adjuster Screw 9/34 Left hand

9/32 maybe?


----------



## DLK (Nov 26, 2014)

donwilwol said:


> *dw's plane notes - General*
> 
> I started a document on one of my computers for notes I keep on plane information. My issue is I have several work laptops, a few personal laptops and travel a lot so keeping the notes in one place is a challenge. I figured this way, I could get to them from anywhere, including my windows 7 phone when looking at buying a plane, and maybe others would find the information useful as well. I'll try to break up the information into logical units as separate blogs in this series.
> 
> ...



The link http://community.middlebury.edu/~harris/typology.html goes to the wrong place. Perhaps it should be

http://wayback.archive-it.org/6670/20161201175836/http://community.middlebury.edu/~harris/typology.html


The link "What a B or S means when cast in the bed?" seems to be broken.


----------



## donwilwol (May 16, 2011)

donwilwol said:


> *dw's plane notes - General*
> 
> I started a document on one of my computers for notes I keep on plane information. My issue is I have several work laptops, a few personal laptops and travel a lot so keeping the notes in one place is a challenge. I figured this way, I could get to them from anywhere, including my windows 7 phone when looking at buying a plane, and maybe others would find the information useful as well. I'll try to break up the information into logical units as separate blogs in this series.
> 
> ...


This is the problem with links. They change


----------



## donwilwol (May 16, 2011)

*Brands other than Stanley Bailey and some information I have found.*

These are in no particular order, just as I've entered then. This is what I believe to be my opinion in most cases, but often taken from some other source. Use the information as such.

*Miller Falls* - One of my favorite - equal with Stanley.
http://oldtoolheaven.com/

*Record*

*Ritter* (NH)

*Buck Bros.* (sold by Home Depot)

*Capewell* (logo may be from Capewell Horse Nail Company (1904)) (Hartford CT) about 1950's.

*The Consolidated Tool Works* is recorded as having done business in New York City from 1890 into the 1920s. Their mark featured a ships' helm wheel, and is quite distinctive. They also used the brand name, "Simplex." Consolidated sold a number of tools including machinist's tools, drills, iron planes and braces.









*Edgerite* was a line of tools sold by Eaton's Department Store in Canada. Eaton's Department store was founded in 1884 and was the first company in Canada to offer a mail order catalogue. Their catalogues can be found on line and are similar to the early Sears Roebuck catalogues, of the same era, in their offerings. Just as Sears were to the U.S., Eaton's were the primary retailer to thousands of small towns in Canada in the late 1800's and into the mid-1940's when they employed over 40,000 people.

Eaton's was eventually bought by Sears Roebuck in the 1970's. Just like Sears, Eaton's didn't manufacture tools, they contracted with other companies to make them with their store logo. My sources indicate that Sargent Tool Co. made the planes for Eaton's. The cutter is usually marked "EDGERITE" with an anvil logo beneath the name.









*Sears*
*Craftsman
*Fulton (Sold by Sears) Cheaper line of Fulton, Dunlap, Craftsman lines sold by sears.
*Dunlap*(Sold by Sears) Cheaper line of Fulton, Dunlap, Craftsman lines sold by sears
Sears started selling Fulton tools about 1908. I believe the early Fulton's are marked Fulton Tool Co and are just Rebranded Sargent. In 1927 Sears came out with their Craftsman line. At that point the Fulton line was changed to just Fulton and was made a lesser quality tool line, at least when it comes to hand planes.

*Shelton* - Shelton made planes from 1932 - 1954. In 1950 they went to a stanley clone design. Example of a Shelton #9 and a post stanley #4 and some history

*Ohio Tool* - (See my Ohio Tool Blog) The Ohio Tool Company was relatively large manufacturer of both wooden and cast iron planes. They were founded in Columbus Ohio in 1851 by Peter Hayden, of P. Hayden & Co. in 1893 the company merged with the Auburn Tool Company of New York, themselves a frequent employer of prison labor. In 1913 the Ohio factory was destroyed by a flood. A new factory was opened in Charleston, WV the following year. The company ceased business in 1920. (Resource http://www.mvr1.com/Ohiowoodenplanes.html ) 
(http://www.davistownmuseum.org/bioAuburn.html)

*New York Tool Works* New York Tool Company was a name used by the *Auburn Tool Company* of Auburn, NY. This name was used from 1864 to 1893. They (Auburn) used several different stamps on their planes. Carefully check the 'o' in Co. If it is the same height as the rest of the letters, it is an earlier example. If the 'o' is rasise so its top lines up with the top of the other letters it is a late production stamp. If there is an underline under the 'o', it is the last stamp that they used during their production years.
(http://www.davistownmuseum.org/bioAuburn.html)

http://www.woodworkingtalk.com/f11/plane-restore-round-3-a-47883/
http://lumberjocks.com/topics/41199#reply-579460









*Union* - Union Mfg. Co. New Britain, Connecticut. 1880-1919. Some believe these are better than Stanley
http://www.brasscityrecords.com/toolworks/FEATURE/union%20frog%20design/union_frog.htm
Union Planes are on par with Bailey but, the "X pattern" Unions, with their double adjusting nuts are perhaps a bit superior. Other history from Brasscity.
In 1957, Millers Falls acquired the Union Tool Company (reference http://oldtoolheaven.com/history/history11.htm)

Anants
http://www.anant-tools.com/iron_bodies_bench_planes.html

*Groz*
http://www.groz-tools.com/

*Kunz* - Manufactured in Germany
http://www.woodcraft.com/Search2/Search.aspx?query=kunz
http://www.traditionalwoodworker.com/Bench-Planes-by-Kunz/products/480/

*Montgomery Wards. *
Wards Master
Lakeside - Lakeside planes were cheaper Stanley-made (mostly) planes that were made for Montgomery Ward and, as such, they're not really worth a lot of money. Montgomery Ward never made their own tools but instead used other makers tools which were then rebranded. The fit and finish isn't quite as good with say a normal Stanley or Sargent plane, and the handle and knob are usually stained beech or another hardwood, rather than rosewood. With some fettling though you can end up with a decent enough worker plane.

*Diamond Edge* - Diamond Edge was a brand name used by the Shapliegh Hardware Co. Many were made by Sargent but other manufacturers may have made them as well. The easiest way is determine a plane's maker is to remove the frog and look at the way the frog mates to the plane.
The correct lever cap could have been plain or it could have had an embossed diamond with DE inside it depending on the age. Several Diamond Edge planes I have seen had a hard rubber (maybe gutta percha) tote.
http://www.thckk.org/history/shapleigh-history.pdf
http://www.maineantiquedigest.com/articles_archive/articles/dec06/simmons1206.htm

*Sargent Planes* - There are a couple of things to look out for with the autosets (the 7 series of planes from Sargent) Firstly they are great planes and work extremely well. Always check the blades for pitting as replacements are quite hard to find. Also take off the levercap - which also doubles as the cap-iron - and use the depth adjuster to wind the blade fully down as far as it will go through the mouth. When it stops, you will have a good idea of how much usable blade there is left. Without doing this you can be deceived into thinking that there is usable blade left when actually it is finished. There is still meat left below the depth adjuster hole in the blade even when the blade is all used up. On the 718 and 722, the front knob is adjustable forward and aft as well as from side to side. There is a cross shaped slot in the domed mount for the knob, and the knob has a concave bottom. Believed to be a good plane and well worth owning.

These planes can vary wildly in value.
David Heckel has a value guide for Sargent planes and he values the 722 at between $150 and $400 depending on condition, and if it is a corrugated version it will be worth more than a flat bottomed plane. I have always found that they can sell in a range below that.
Bob Kaune has a website with Sargent planes for sale including Autosets.
Sargent Tools - Bob Kaune - Antique & Used Tools
http://lumberjocks.com/topics/47190#reply-602276
http://timetestedtools.wordpress.com/2012/08/10/sargent-planes-by-the-numberwith-pictures/

*Keen Kutter* - "Keen Kutter Planes marked with a single letter and then the # size are actually early style Bedrock planes made for them under contract by Stanley. They are of the same high quality and in general much harder to find. These planes date from near the turn of the century to about the teens. Keen Kutter KK series planes were made for them by a few different makers including Ohio Tool Co, and Sargent. Over the years Simmons switched back and forth using different manufacturers at different periods, I suppose because the bid for those years was more attractive. Sargent and later Ohio made the later versions with the Mahogany handles and 4 digit # or the no number varieties to identify the plane."

*Other lines of Stanley (cheaper lines)*
Handyman
Two tone
Four Square
Defiance

*Solar Mfg Co.* I bought one of these but can not find much information. The story is they were made in Worcester MA up to the 70's.

*Tecomaster*

*Victor* Summer 1875 - Leonard Bailey begins development of the 'Victor' plane line to compete with the Stanley/Bailey planes still in production by Stanley. Fighting between Bailey and the Stanley Co. over patent infringement is bitter, Stanley makes every attempt to stop Bailey from producing the VICTOR line of tools.
Reference:http://www.antiquetools.co.uk/articles/stanley2.htm

And from Gore , "Stanley produced a very short-lived frog design during the early 1870's (pictured in the image to the left). This design has a frog that is about 1/2 the length of the normal frog, and is nearly identical to the design that Leonard Bailey was producing when he got pissed off at Stanley and decided to come up with a new line of bench planes, his Victor line."

*Victory*. I can't find much information I Victory, and I'm not even sure they actually made/sold a hand plane, maybe just a replacement iron?

*Vaughan & Bushnell* Short history. 
There are 3 series of V&B planes, the 700, 800 and 900 series. The 700 & 900 series had forged steel bodies and were advertised as being unbreakable. The 800 series are cast iron. All the V&B planes had the bedrock frog design. They are numbered like the Stanley planes but just in the hundreds.. So a V&B 903 would be same as a Stanley #3, a 807 would be a #7 size. The 900 series planes had the flat top sides just like the later Bedrocks and these were considered their premium series.

*Marsh *


----------



## Bertha (Jan 10, 2011)

donwilwol said:


> *Brands other than Stanley Bailey and some information I have found.*
> 
> These are in no particular order, just as I've entered then. This is what I believe to be my opinion in most cases, but often taken from some other source. Use the information as such.
> 
> ...


Thanks for this, DW. I have an interest in Sargents but like you mention, the prices are all over the place.


----------



## Dcase (Jul 7, 2010)

donwilwol said:


> *Brands other than Stanley Bailey and some information I have found.*
> 
> These are in no particular order, just as I've entered then. This is what I believe to be my opinion in most cases, but often taken from some other source. Use the information as such.
> 
> ...


I would like to get some Miller Falls planes, I have seen a few on ebay lately sell for a decent amount.

I have two or three Wards planes and the ones I have all had Rosewood handles. Mine are identical to the Stanley Bailey planes with the only difference being the Lever Cap. My Wards Master planes have a plated lever cap. I restored one and the others were used for parts.

I also have some older Craftsman planes and IMO they are right on par with the Bailey planes. They are the same design they just don't look as nice.


----------



## donwilwol (May 16, 2011)

donwilwol said:


> *Brands other than Stanley Bailey and some information I have found.*
> 
> These are in no particular order, just as I've entered then. This is what I believe to be my opinion in most cases, but often taken from some other source. Use the information as such.
> 
> ...


I bought my first #6 size was a Millers Falls #18. I love it but since then the prices have been outrageous.


----------



## RGtools (Feb 18, 2011)

donwilwol said:


> *Brands other than Stanley Bailey and some information I have found.*
> 
> These are in no particular order, just as I've entered then. This is what I believe to be my opinion in most cases, but often taken from some other source. Use the information as such.
> 
> ...


Great list. I am so glad you mentioned Auburn tool co.


----------



## planepassion (Nov 24, 2010)

donwilwol said:


> *Brands other than Stanley Bailey and some information I have found.*
> 
> These are in no particular order, just as I've entered then. This is what I believe to be my opinion in most cases, but often taken from some other source. Use the information as such.
> 
> ...


I hadn't come across this post before Don. The theme is excellent, notes from the field. And given the decided lack of information, or difficulty finding it, on planes other than Stanley, I appreciate you taking the time to put this list together. I hope that during the cold, snowy evenings, you're able to add content and links to it as you come across new material.


----------



## donwilwol (May 16, 2011)

donwilwol said:


> *Brands other than Stanley Bailey and some information I have found.*
> 
> These are in no particular order, just as I've entered then. This is what I believe to be my opinion in most cases, but often taken from some other source. Use the information as such.
> 
> ...


Thanks Brad


----------



## waho6o9 (May 6, 2011)

donwilwol said:


> *Brands other than Stanley Bailey and some information I have found.*
> 
> These are in no particular order, just as I've entered then. This is what I believe to be my opinion in most cases, but often taken from some other source. Use the information as such.
> 
> ...


Thanks for taking the time to post all the info DonW.

A definite favorite. U da man.

Your efforts are appreciated.


----------



## 33706 (Mar 5, 2008)

donwilwol said:


> *Brands other than Stanley Bailey and some information I have found.*
> 
> These are in no particular order, just as I've entered then. This is what I believe to be my opinion in most cases, but often taken from some other source. Use the information as such.
> 
> ...


*DonW:* you encouraged me to go buy a "Ritter" block plane… and I'm glad I did:










I can't resist the oddball manufacturers, like 'Este', Rapier, National, Brillant, Franklin, Rae, Falcon-Pope, Woden, and more recently, 'Jordan'. I've got at least one of each of these makers, and probably a few others that haven't made it to my checklist yet. *Thanks for a great blog, Don!!*


----------



## anneb3 (Feb 23, 2014)

donwilwol said:


> *Brands other than Stanley Bailey and some information I have found.*
> 
> These are in no particular order, just as I've entered then. This is what I believe to be my opinion in most cases, but often taken from some other source. Use the information as such.
> 
> ...


Well, well, i thought I was adding something new to plane makers but a search though Lumberjocks mentions Consolidated Tool Works, and the Net even shows a pic of one of their planes, The one that drifted in to my shop is the same size as my #5 from Stanley, but with the Consolidatd marking on the lever cap

A search through EBAY shows just the lever cap for sale at 24.50 so someone must have some parts or something involved with Planes made by this company.
Will have to drift down to the shop and see just what the blade is marked maybe STANLEY who I though made all the plane blades… kidding, I have one plane with a miller falls blade.

.

t


----------



## donwilwol (May 16, 2011)

*dw's Plane Resource sites*

NOTE: I edit this and add sites from time to time. Also note I am *not* associated with most of these in any way. Also, just because its listed, *It is NOT a referral*, some I've used, some I have not. Use it as if you found it on your own.

Please take a look at my blogs
Plane Restoration How to


Tips for Setting up a bench plane

And many more

*General:*
The mother of all Stanley information http://www.supertool.com/StanleyBG/stan0a.html
http://www.cs.cmu.edu/~alf/en/antique-tool-faq.txt Antique Tools FAQ (as of 11/97)
http://www.handplane.com/
https://home.comcast.net/~stanleyplanes/planes101/planes101.htm
http://www.cianperez.com/Wood/WoodDocs/WoodHowTo/INDEXHowTo.htm

http://www.hyperkitten.com/tools/stanleybenchplane/
The Hardware Companies Kollectors Klub - http://www.thckk.org/history.htm
flatten the soles of planes http://www.tablesawtom.com

WayneC also has a set of really good reference sites.

*Millers Falls* here-http://oldtoolheaven.com/bench/bench.htm

*Other Reference Sites*
http://www.cianperez.com/Wood/WoodDocs/WoodHowTo/INDEXHowTo.htm
A great site for general information - http://vintagemachinery.org
----example - here is the Craftsman OEM List - 
Stanley Planes by the numbers.

*Refinishing:*
http://www.majorpanic.com/SlideShow.htm
https://home.comcast.net/~rexmill/planes101/japanning/japanning.htm

*Plane Parts:*
http://stores.ebay.com/New-Hampshire-Plane-Parts
http://stjamesbaytoolco.com/
http://antique-used-tools.com/
http://www.highlandwoodworking.com/search.aspx?find=stanley+plane+parts
http://www.stanleytoolparts.com/planes.html
http://www.brasscityrecords.com

*Restoration:*
http://lumberjocks.com/donwilwol/blog/25464
http://timetestedtools.wordpress.com/bench-plane-restore-the-dw-way/
http://lumberjocks.com/WayneC/blog/series/40
http://lumberjocks.com/Dcase/blog/series/3462
http://www.majorpanic.com/handplanerestor1.htm
WKFinetools

*Engraving*
http://www.catharinekennedy.com/
http://www.toolengraver.com/
www.cajunhandplanes.com

Frog Comparison (to ID manufacturer)
Brass City quick plane ID

Frog Comparison (to ID Stanley Type frog)
antique-used-tools.com frog comparison

*Dating References:*
Rexmills type Study
Plane dating flow chart
http://primeshop.com/access/woodwork/stanleyplane/DataMisc.htm
http://homepages.sover.net/~nichael/nlc-wood/stanref-num.html
The MegaChart http://primeshop.com/access/woodwork/stanleyplane/
http://www.tooltrip.com/tooltrip9/stanley/stan-bpl/bailey-types.htm
Metal Router Type Study Page
http://www.hansbrunnertools.gil.com.au/Stanley%20by%20numbers/Stanley.htm
http://www.oldtooluser.com/TypeStudy/type_studies.htm

*Record hand plane dating.*
http://www.recordhandplanes.com/dating.html

*Typing the #45*
Typing Stanley #45s

*Typing (dating) Bedrock* includes *Keen Kutter*
http://www.antique-used-tools.com/brtypes.htm

*Typing (dating) Millers Falls*
http://homepage.mac.com/galoot_9/MF_type1.html
http://oldtoolheaven.com/bench/benchtypes.htm

*Dating Block Planes*
http://virginiatoolworks.wordpress.com/tools/stanley-planes/date-your-block-plane-type-study/

*Dating a #113*
http://www.oldtooluser.com/TypeStudy/StanNo113cpTypestudy.htm

*Sharpening*
Rexmills sharpening
WayneC resources
Scrub Plane Iron Cambering
antiquetools.com A Guide to sharpening

*Antiques tools for sale and Auctions*
Meeker's Mechanical Nature Antiques
Martin J. Donnelly Antique Tools
http://antique-used-tools.com/
Supertools List
www.sydnassloot.com
www.finetoolj.com
http://www.brasscityrecords.com/toolworks/new%20tools.html

*Sargent Planes*
http://www.sargent-planes.com/
Sargent Hand Planes by the number-with pictures
Sargent Planes - Additional Dating Information NOT in Heckel's 2nd Ed. Guide by HorizontalMike
and http://www.horizontalheavens.com/418vs418VBM%20Comparison.htm

*Japanning*
http://libertyonthehudson.com/
http://lumberjocks.com/JayT/blog/series/5621

References for Stanley #45s
http://lumberjocks.com/Mosquito/blog/32951

*precision grinding*
http://www.tablesawtom.com/plane.htm

*Buying*
http://timetestedtools.wordpress.com/tools-for-sale/
http://www.shop.roseantiquetools.net/408a-Stanley-39-3-4-Dado-Plane-408a.htm":http://www.shop.roseantiquetools.net/408a-Stanley-39-3-4-Dado-Plane-408a.htm

*Infill Making*
Smoother kit http://sturnella.com/tools/
Norris Style Adjuster http://www.toolsforworkingwood.com/store/item/MS-NADJUST/Search/adjuster/Adjuster_for_Norris_Style_Infill_Planes
http://user.xmission.com/~jry/ww/tools/a13/a13-bom-BP.html
http://www.petermcbride.com/metal_plane_making/
http://www.stjamesbaytoolco.com/
http://www.macpherson.co.nz/shop_made_planes.htm
http://www.supertool.com/oldtools.htm
http://hyperkitten.com/tools/ForSale/Tools_FS.php
http://andersonplanes.com/
http://www.inthewoodshop.com/toolrestorations/renovating%20an%20infill%20smoother1.html
http://www.daedtoolworks.com/blog/?cat=6
http://www.handplane.com/67/the-norris-adjuster/
http://benchcrafted.blogspot.com/2012/01/winter-smoother-monday.html
http://www.handplane.com/30/making-planes-dovetailing-infill-planes-101/
http://billcarterwoodworkingplanemaker.co.uk/5.html 
http://www.holteyplanes.com/tech_A13.html
Making a jointer, http://americanwoodworker.com/blogs/projects/archive/2012/01/18/aw-extra-making-an-infill-jointer-plane.aspx
With adjustable mouth http://www.ukworkshop.co.uk/forums/an-infill-project-with-a-modern-twist-t65983.html 
rebate - http://www.petermcbride.com/planemaking/bench_rebate1.htm 
Smoother with bolted sides http://www.infillplane.co.uk/?paged=2 
brass-body-block-plane.pdf - ShopNotes
http://www.petermcbride.com/planemaking/spiers_dovetails.htm
http://www.traditional-handplanes.com/index.php


----------



## WayneC (Mar 8, 2007)

donwilwol said:


> *dw's Plane Resource sites*
> 
> NOTE: I edit this and add sites from time to time. Also note I am *not* associated with most of these in any way. Also, just because its listed, *It is NOT a referral*, some I've used, some I have not. Use it as if you found it on your own.
> 
> ...


Great set of references. Thanks for Posting. I have a blog specifically for reference materials. Has some info on books and videos for example… There may be some stuff of interest in there for ya.

http://lumberjocks.com/WayneC/blog/series/43


----------



## Brit (Aug 14, 2010)

donwilwol said:


> *dw's Plane Resource sites*
> 
> NOTE: I edit this and add sites from time to time. Also note I am *not* associated with most of these in any way. Also, just because its listed, *It is NOT a referral*, some I've used, some I have not. Use it as if you found it on your own.
> 
> ...


Don thank you so much for this great set of resources. One for my favourites for sure.


----------



## superdav721 (Aug 16, 2010)

donwilwol said:


> *dw's Plane Resource sites*
> 
> NOTE: I edit this and add sites from time to time. Also note I am *not* associated with most of these in any way. Also, just because its listed, *It is NOT a referral*, some I've used, some I have not. Use it as if you found it on your own.
> 
> ...


Great links Don his should keep me busy for a week. Thanks.


----------



## donwilwol (May 16, 2011)

donwilwol said:


> *dw's Plane Resource sites*
> 
> NOTE: I edit this and add sites from time to time. Also note I am *not* associated with most of these in any way. Also, just because its listed, *It is NOT a referral*, some I've used, some I have not. Use it as if you found it on your own.
> 
> ...


thanks to KSslim for the Craftsman OEM List


----------



## donwilwol (May 16, 2011)

donwilwol said:


> *dw's Plane Resource sites*
> 
> NOTE: I edit this and add sites from time to time. Also note I am *not* associated with most of these in any way. Also, just because its listed, *It is NOT a referral*, some I've used, some I have not. Use it as if you found it on your own.
> 
> ...


http://www.tablesawtom.com/plane.htm added.


----------



## donwilwol (May 16, 2011)

donwilwol said:


> *dw's Plane Resource sites*
> 
> NOTE: I edit this and add sites from time to time. Also note I am *not* associated with most of these in any way. Also, just because its listed, *It is NOT a referral*, some I've used, some I have not. Use it as if you found it on your own.
> 
> ...


added http://www.hansbrunnertools.gil.com.au/Stanley%20by%20numbers/Stanley.htm


----------



## donwilwol (May 16, 2011)

donwilwol said:


> *dw's Plane Resource sites*
> 
> NOTE: I edit this and add sites from time to time. Also note I am *not* associated with most of these in any way. Also, just because its listed, *It is NOT a referral*, some I've used, some I have not. Use it as if you found it on your own.
> 
> ...


updated for typing MF.


----------



## thedude50 (Aug 13, 2011)

donwilwol said:


> *dw's Plane Resource sites*
> 
> NOTE: I edit this and add sites from time to time. Also note I am *not* associated with most of these in any way. Also, just because its listed, *It is NOT a referral*, some I've used, some I have not. Use it as if you found it on your own.
> 
> ...


Well done Don I wonder how I never found this blog before Shame on me


----------



## Bertha (Jan 10, 2011)

donwilwol said:


> *dw's Plane Resource sites*
> 
> NOTE: I edit this and add sites from time to time. Also note I am *not* associated with most of these in any way. Also, just because its listed, *It is NOT a referral*, some I've used, some I have not. Use it as if you found it on your own.
> 
> ...


I don't know how I'm just now finding this. Watched.


----------



## donwilwol (May 16, 2011)

donwilwol said:


> *dw's Plane Resource sites*
> 
> NOTE: I edit this and add sites from time to time. Also note I am *not* associated with most of these in any way. Also, just because its listed, *It is NOT a referral*, some I've used, some I have not. Use it as if you found it on your own.
> 
> ...


I want to thank all those who contributed to my research. We've compiled quite a list.


----------



## superdav721 (Aug 16, 2010)

donwilwol said:


> *dw's Plane Resource sites*
> 
> NOTE: I edit this and add sites from time to time. Also note I am *not* associated with most of these in any way. Also, just because its listed, *It is NOT a referral*, some I've used, some I have not. Use it as if you found it on your own.
> 
> ...


Don we need Miller Falls Links.


----------



## donwilwol (May 16, 2011)

donwilwol said:


> *dw's Plane Resource sites*
> 
> NOTE: I edit this and add sites from time to time. Also note I am *not* associated with most of these in any way. Also, just because its listed, *It is NOT a referral*, some I've used, some I have not. Use it as if you found it on your own.
> 
> ...


search millers falls Dave, they are there.


----------



## Brit (Aug 14, 2010)

donwilwol said:


> *dw's Plane Resource sites*
> 
> NOTE: I edit this and add sites from time to time. Also note I am *not* associated with most of these in any way. Also, just because its listed, *It is NOT a referral*, some I've used, some I have not. Use it as if you found it on your own.
> 
> ...


Thanks for putting this together Don. It's a great resource.


----------



## donwilwol (May 16, 2011)

donwilwol said:


> *dw's Plane Resource sites*
> 
> NOTE: I edit this and add sites from time to time. Also note I am *not* associated with most of these in any way. Also, just because its listed, *It is NOT a referral*, some I've used, some I have not. Use it as if you found it on your own.
> 
> ...


updated with some infill references.


----------



## donwilwol (May 16, 2011)

*How to set a bench plane chip breaker.*

A while ago on the "Hand Planes of your Dreams" thread there was a video pointed out that showed how the angle of the chip breaker affected the planes performance. The thing it didn't show was how the mouth affected performance as well. It showed that a 80 degree angle on the chip breaker works better than a 50 degree. I checked and most of the planes I have were pretty close to an 80 degree bevel anyhow. At some point I'd like to see if the angle really makes a difference.

I have noticed a big difference if the chip breaker is not smooth. I always polish the ends of the chip breaker. Pitting doesn't seem to have a huge affect, as long as its not deep, and its cleaned and well polished.

I did a little testing on the relationship between the gap between the breaker and the blade, and here is the results I came up with. I've been asked a lot about how to set the chip breaker. Here is a proven answer.

First I started with a no name plane, without a frog adjuster nut. Why? I'm not sure. Remember this guy? This proves no frog adjuster is needed to be successful and a no-name plane can produce superb results.

Next I made sure the front of the chip breaker was honed at 80 degrees. It was already pretty close, so it didn't take a whole lot of work.

Now this probably isn't the most scientific experiment you've ever seen. I used my $1 flea market calipers. Its more important to watch the relationship than the actual numbers.










First I sharpened the blade and set it like I normally would.










I buckled up a piece of pine and gave it a try. Not bad, but not perfect either.

At this point the mouth is .06" and the gap between the blade and breaker is .09". The results are not terribble but I can feel the plane is not working as it should. The plane is hard to push and the shavings are inconsistent.










So lets open up the gap between the blade and breaker to .20". You'll notice moving either moving the gap wider or narrower or raising and lowering the blade changes the width of the mouth, so it takes a little trial and error to get it right.

Now the mouth is .07 and the gap is .20"




























This isn't working all that well. I can feel the plane is hard to push. The shavings are a little inconsistent and I can't get an even cut. So I closed the gap between the breaker and the blade. I could immediately feel that plane was working easier.










I started to see as the gap between the chip breaker and the mouth were closer to the same measurement, the shavings came easier and thinner and more consistent.





































I found if the measurements were close to the same the plane worked ok, but as the measurement grew so did the thickness of shavings. I found if the mouth was wider or narrower than the gap between the breaker and the blade, then the plane pushed harder and the shaving were inconsistent.

I then grabbed the bedrock 604 and set the mouth to .03" and the gap to .03". It was already pretty close to that anyhow, it didn't take much movement of either measurement.



















I found that .03" produce the best results. Any less than that for the mouth and the shavings didn't want to come through, and any less on the gap between the breaker and the blade and it started to make dust instead of shavings.

That's all I had time for today. When I get some more time I'm going to add a few more test and see how hardwood changes things.

A few other points to note. When you planing for real, you'll want to skew the plane a bit, so don't expect you shavings to all be nice and even and always consistent. The most important point is no tearout.

Also note, this is for a smoothing plane, but could apply to a jointer as well.

As always, comments welcome, good bad or indifferent.

Day 2, lets try some hardwood.

So I grabbed my favorite restore project, my Millers Falls #10. Its the primary plane from this blog. The first thing I did was give it a try on a piece of red oak.

The chip breaker was set to .05" 
the mouth was .07" 
It push hard and I could tell it was going to do well

I left the chip breaker set to .05" 
I moved the mouth to .04" 
it got better, but was still hard to push. Its oak so I expected a little harder than the pine, but you can tell when its cutting like it should.










Next I moved the chip breaker as close as my eyes allowed. I think it wound up about .015" to .02".
I set the mouth at .02. As you can see, it worked really well




























I then took a half turn on the adjustment screw to open the mouth up a little










I tried the same setting on a piece of pine. Its still working well.



















So I know know that the chip breaker set close works well on hardwood as long as the mouth is set close as well.

To verify this I grabbed one of my latest #3e restores. I set the chip breaker as close as i could. I noted the chip breaker had a concaved end, which meant it was set close on the outside edges, but not the center.










It was ok, but not great, so I took the chip breaker out, and went to the stones to straight out the chip breaker. When I was done, it was square.










I made sure it was square, at about 80 degrees and polished. I've known the polish makes a difference.

So after the fix, set thew chip breaker about .015" - .02 and the mouth about the same.



















Tried the same setting on the pine. Love those sweet shavings.



















 
Here is a few tips on bench plane setup


----------



## ShaneA (Apr 15, 2011)

donwilwol said:


> *How to set a bench plane chip breaker.*
> 
> A while ago on the "Hand Planes of your Dreams" thread there was a video pointed out that showed how the angle of the chip breaker affected the planes performance. The thing it didn't show was how the mouth affected performance as well. It showed that a 80 degree angle on the chip breaker works better than a 50 degree. I checked and most of the planes I have were pretty close to an 80 degree bevel anyhow. At some point I'd like to see if the angle really makes a difference.
> 
> ...


Thanks Don, useful info.


----------



## RussellAP (Feb 21, 2012)

donwilwol said:


> *How to set a bench plane chip breaker.*
> 
> A while ago on the "Hand Planes of your Dreams" thread there was a video pointed out that showed how the angle of the chip breaker affected the planes performance. The thing it didn't show was how the mouth affected performance as well. It showed that a 80 degree angle on the chip breaker works better than a 50 degree. I checked and most of the planes I have were pretty close to an 80 degree bevel anyhow. At some point I'd like to see if the angle really makes a difference.
> 
> ...


Informative. I'll have to read this again, been making merry tonight.


----------



## Smitty_Cabinetshop (Mar 26, 2011)

donwilwol said:


> *How to set a bench plane chip breaker.*
> 
> A while ago on the "Hand Planes of your Dreams" thread there was a video pointed out that showed how the angle of the chip breaker affected the planes performance. The thing it didn't show was how the mouth affected performance as well. It showed that a 80 degree angle on the chip breaker works better than a 50 degree. I checked and most of the planes I have were pretty close to an 80 degree bevel anyhow. At some point I'd like to see if the angle really makes a difference.
> 
> ...


Don, good stuff! Thank you for posting your findings!


----------



## AnthonyReed (Sep 20, 2011)

donwilwol said:


> *How to set a bench plane chip breaker.*
> 
> A while ago on the "Hand Planes of your Dreams" thread there was a video pointed out that showed how the angle of the chip breaker affected the planes performance. The thing it didn't show was how the mouth affected performance as well. It showed that a 80 degree angle on the chip breaker works better than a 50 degree. I checked and most of the planes I have were pretty close to an 80 degree bevel anyhow. At some point I'd like to see if the angle really makes a difference.
> 
> ...


Thank you Don.


----------



## mafe (Dec 10, 2009)

donwilwol said:


> *How to set a bench plane chip breaker.*
> 
> A while ago on the "Hand Planes of your Dreams" thread there was a video pointed out that showed how the angle of the chip breaker affected the planes performance. The thing it didn't show was how the mouth affected performance as well. It showed that a 80 degree angle on the chip breaker works better than a 50 degree. I checked and most of the planes I have were pretty close to an 80 degree bevel anyhow. At some point I'd like to see if the angle really makes a difference.
> 
> ...












The throath holds down the shave as you see in my first drawing, thismakes the shave break at the chip breaker.

In the second drawing you can see the mouth is too open so the shave breaks on the wood surface and in this way the plane digs in and makes tearout.

Does it make sence?

Best thoughts,
Mads


----------



## donwilwol (May 16, 2011)

donwilwol said:


> *How to set a bench plane chip breaker.*
> 
> A while ago on the "Hand Planes of your Dreams" thread there was a video pointed out that showed how the angle of the chip breaker affected the planes performance. The thing it didn't show was how the mouth affected performance as well. It showed that a 80 degree angle on the chip breaker works better than a 50 degree. I checked and most of the planes I have were pretty close to an 80 degree bevel anyhow. At some point I'd like to see if the angle really makes a difference.
> 
> ...


thanks for the picture Mads.


----------



## Smitty_Cabinetshop (Mar 26, 2011)

donwilwol said:


> *How to set a bench plane chip breaker.*
> 
> A while ago on the "Hand Planes of your Dreams" thread there was a video pointed out that showed how the angle of the chip breaker affected the planes performance. The thing it didn't show was how the mouth affected performance as well. It showed that a 80 degree angle on the chip breaker works better than a 50 degree. I checked and most of the planes I have were pretty close to an 80 degree bevel anyhow. At some point I'd like to see if the angle really makes a difference.
> 
> ...


I LOVE those watercolor illustrations. Awesome, Mads!


----------



## mafe (Dec 10, 2009)

donwilwol said:


> *How to set a bench plane chip breaker.*
> 
> A while ago on the "Hand Planes of your Dreams" thread there was a video pointed out that showed how the angle of the chip breaker affected the planes performance. The thing it didn't show was how the mouth affected performance as well. It showed that a 80 degree angle on the chip breaker works better than a 50 degree. I checked and most of the planes I have were pretty close to an 80 degree bevel anyhow. At some point I'd like to see if the angle really makes a difference.
> 
> ...


Smiles here.
Best thoughts from my heart,
mads


----------



## mochoa (Oct 9, 2009)

donwilwol said:


> *How to set a bench plane chip breaker.*
> 
> A while ago on the "Hand Planes of your Dreams" thread there was a video pointed out that showed how the angle of the chip breaker affected the planes performance. The thing it didn't show was how the mouth affected performance as well. It showed that a 80 degree angle on the chip breaker works better than a 50 degree. I checked and most of the planes I have were pretty close to an 80 degree bevel anyhow. At some point I'd like to see if the angle really makes a difference.
> 
> ...


Great experiment Dan, I need to check my chipbreakers and see how they are set up. Look forward to your test on different woods.


----------



## Brit (Aug 14, 2010)

donwilwol said:


> *How to set a bench plane chip breaker.*
> 
> A while ago on the "Hand Planes of your Dreams" thread there was a video pointed out that showed how the angle of the chip breaker affected the planes performance. The thing it didn't show was how the mouth affected performance as well. It showed that a 80 degree angle on the chip breaker works better than a 50 degree. I checked and most of the planes I have were pretty close to an 80 degree bevel anyhow. At some point I'd like to see if the angle really makes a difference.
> 
> ...


Great post Don. I missed this one when you posted it. Thanks for doing this. It makes it so much easier for the rest of us to dial in our smoothers.


----------



## TechRedneck (Jul 30, 2010)

donwilwol said:


> *How to set a bench plane chip breaker.*
> 
> A while ago on the "Hand Planes of your Dreams" thread there was a video pointed out that showed how the angle of the chip breaker affected the planes performance. The thing it didn't show was how the mouth affected performance as well. It showed that a 80 degree angle on the chip breaker works better than a 50 degree. I checked and most of the planes I have were pretty close to an 80 degree bevel anyhow. At some point I'd like to see if the angle really makes a difference.
> 
> ...


Good stuff Don

I watched those experimental videos but forgot to test on my planes. Glad you did and refreshed my memory


----------



## donwilwol (May 16, 2011)

donwilwol said:


> *How to set a bench plane chip breaker.*
> 
> A while ago on the "Hand Planes of your Dreams" thread there was a video pointed out that showed how the angle of the chip breaker affected the planes performance. The thing it didn't show was how the mouth affected performance as well. It showed that a 80 degree angle on the chip breaker works better than a 50 degree. I checked and most of the planes I have were pretty close to an 80 degree bevel anyhow. At some point I'd like to see if the angle really makes a difference.
> 
> ...


content added with some hardwood test.


----------



## b2rtch (Jan 20, 2010)

donwilwol said:


> *How to set a bench plane chip breaker.*
> 
> A while ago on the "Hand Planes of your Dreams" thread there was a video pointed out that showed how the angle of the chip breaker affected the planes performance. The thing it didn't show was how the mouth affected performance as well. It showed that a 80 degree angle on the chip breaker works better than a 50 degree. I checked and most of the planes I have were pretty close to an 80 degree bevel anyhow. At some point I'd like to see if the angle really makes a difference.
> 
> ...


Just plain fascinating.
Thank you for posting.
when you say that the chip breaker has to be at 80 degrees, where do you taker the measurement?


----------



## donwilwol (May 16, 2011)

donwilwol said:


> *How to set a bench plane chip breaker.*
> 
> A while ago on the "Hand Planes of your Dreams" thread there was a video pointed out that showed how the angle of the chip breaker affected the planes performance. The thing it didn't show was how the mouth affected performance as well. It showed that a 80 degree angle on the chip breaker works better than a 50 degree. I checked and most of the planes I have were pretty close to an 80 degree bevel anyhow. At some point I'd like to see if the angle really makes a difference.
> 
> ...


----------



## b2rtch (Jan 20, 2010)

donwilwol said:


> *How to set a bench plane chip breaker.*
> 
> A while ago on the "Hand Planes of your Dreams" thread there was a video pointed out that showed how the angle of the chip breaker affected the planes performance. The thing it didn't show was how the mouth affected performance as well. It showed that a 80 degree angle on the chip breaker works better than a 50 degree. I checked and most of the planes I have were pretty close to an 80 degree bevel anyhow. At some point I'd like to see if the angle really makes a difference.
> 
> ...


Thank you Don.
You are a excellent teacher I just which that I could find planes where I live as you do.


----------



## gmc (Jun 30, 2012)

donwilwol said:


> *How to set a bench plane chip breaker.*
> 
> A while ago on the "Hand Planes of your Dreams" thread there was a video pointed out that showed how the angle of the chip breaker affected the planes performance. The thing it didn't show was how the mouth affected performance as well. It showed that a 80 degree angle on the chip breaker works better than a 50 degree. I checked and most of the planes I have were pretty close to an 80 degree bevel anyhow. At some point I'd like to see if the angle really makes a difference.
> 
> ...


Thanks Don,
Well written and illustrated, even I could understand it. Great job, thanks for taking the time to educate us!


----------



## OSU55 (Dec 14, 2012)

donwilwol said:


> *How to set a bench plane chip breaker.*
> 
> A while ago on the "Hand Planes of your Dreams" thread there was a video pointed out that showed how the angle of the chip breaker affected the planes performance. The thing it didn't show was how the mouth affected performance as well. It showed that a 80 degree angle on the chip breaker works better than a 50 degree. I checked and most of the planes I have were pretty close to an 80 degree bevel anyhow. At some point I'd like to see if the angle really makes a difference.
> 
> ...


Question - I think you left the blade projection the same and varied the chip breaker set distance and mouth opening and measured chip thickness. Is this correct? I don't remeber seeing mention of adjusting cut depth.


----------



## donwilwol (May 16, 2011)

donwilwol said:


> *How to set a bench plane chip breaker.*
> 
> A while ago on the "Hand Planes of your Dreams" thread there was a video pointed out that showed how the angle of the chip breaker affected the planes performance. The thing it didn't show was how the mouth affected performance as well. It showed that a 80 degree angle on the chip breaker works better than a 50 degree. I checked and most of the planes I have were pretty close to an 80 degree bevel anyhow. At some point I'd like to see if the angle really makes a difference.
> 
> ...


I did adjust depth of cut each time.


----------



## Kickback (Mar 9, 2011)

donwilwol said:


> *How to set a bench plane chip breaker.*
> 
> A while ago on the "Hand Planes of your Dreams" thread there was a video pointed out that showed how the angle of the chip breaker affected the planes performance. The thing it didn't show was how the mouth affected performance as well. It showed that a 80 degree angle on the chip breaker works better than a 50 degree. I checked and most of the planes I have were pretty close to an 80 degree bevel anyhow. At some point I'd like to see if the angle really makes a difference.
> 
> ...


I have several planes. A couple 5's and a 4. I have never been able to use them effectively and I know it is because they are not setup properly. Can you tell me how do you set the cutting depth? Then how do you tune the chip breaker to 80 deg.? Then when you mention setting the mouth and chip breaker distance does that mean the distance the blade edge is to the front opening of the plane bed and the distance of the bottom edge of the breaker to the top edge of the blade? I can get the blades razor sharp using my Tormek but setting up the rest of the plane properly has always eluded me. You seem to be the best person I have found at describing exactly how to do he things I am clueless about. Thank you so much Don for sharing your wealth of plane knowledge with us who are not worthy.


----------



## b2rtch (Jan 20, 2010)

donwilwol said:


> *How to set a bench plane chip breaker.*
> 
> A while ago on the "Hand Planes of your Dreams" thread there was a video pointed out that showed how the angle of the chip breaker affected the planes performance. The thing it didn't show was how the mouth affected performance as well. It showed that a 80 degree angle on the chip breaker works better than a 50 degree. I checked and most of the planes I have were pretty close to an 80 degree bevel anyhow. At some point I'd like to see if the angle really makes a difference.
> 
> ...


Kickback:
Watch this video:


----------



## donwilwol (May 16, 2011)

donwilwol said:


> *How to set a bench plane chip breaker.*
> 
> A while ago on the "Hand Planes of your Dreams" thread there was a video pointed out that showed how the angle of the chip breaker affected the planes performance. The thing it didn't show was how the mouth affected performance as well. It showed that a 80 degree angle on the chip breaker works better than a 50 degree. I checked and most of the planes I have were pretty close to an 80 degree bevel anyhow. At some point I'd like to see if the angle really makes a difference.
> 
> ...


http://timetestedtools.wordpress.com/2013/02/10/a-few-tips-on-how-to-set-a-handplane/


----------



## donwilwol (May 16, 2011)

*A few tips on How to set a handplane.*

Writing a blog about *How to set up a Hand Plane* will take a series, because it really depends on what you are trying to do. In other words, a smoother will be different than a jack and so forth, but it even goes further than that. At what stage your planing with your smoother will make a difference also.

So here is a few tips to get you started, and I'm assuming this is for a smoother, so adjust as needed.

- Set the frog far enough ahead so when the blade just starts to cut, it would be difficult to slide a business card through the mouth, but you could probably force it if you had to.

- Set the chip breaker as close to the edge of the iron as your eyes allow, maybe a 1/16" or a smidgen tighter. Make sure it never goes beyond the blade if the blade is a little uneven or cambered. Here is a blog on setting the chip breaker.

- The cap should be as tight as you can make it and still easily move the iron up and down. Start loose and tighten it down until you feel the adjustment start to become harder.

- You always want to start planing with the blade retracted just above the mouth.

- Slowly lower it until its through. Use the lateral adjuster to make it even across the mouth.

-You can slide a thin piece of wood across one side of the iron then the other to make sure its even, or use your eye. As you practice, you will use your eyes more and more. Using your finger tends to cause bloodshed so its not recommended 

- As you're planing, if you see the iron is taking shavings on one side and the other, move the lateral adjuster toward the shavings, or the heavier side.

- Your first swipe should get nothing, but slowing lower the iron until it starts to take a shaving.

- Then just adjust accordingly.

A thin shaving should look like this









-
- But remember that different wood react differently and you can get thinner or thicker depending on have much smoothing needs to be done.

- If they shaving comes out like sawdust, or you are pushing to hard to get shavings your iron is not sharp.

- If your iron is straight, even and the wood is straight grained, you get a even shavings across the cut, the full width, or almost the full width of the cut.

- The more your iron is sharpened with a camber, the less this will happen. That is often by design so not always a bad thing.

- Always start your stroke with the plane skewed to one side. It makes the cut more of a slicing action and allows a easier cut.

- Practice makes perfect.










Hope it helps


----------



## ksSlim (Jun 27, 2010)

donwilwol said:


> *A few tips on How to set a handplane.*
> 
> Writing a blog about *How to set up a Hand Plane* will take a series, because it really depends on what you are trying to do. In other words, a smoother will be different than a jack and so forth, but it even goes further than that. At what stage your planing with your smoother will make a difference also.
> 
> ...


Good stuff, keep it coming.
I see a book or a DVD here.


----------



## CharlieM1958 (Nov 7, 2006)

donwilwol said:


> *A few tips on How to set a handplane.*
> 
> Writing a blog about *How to set up a Hand Plane* will take a series, because it really depends on what you are trying to do. In other words, a smoother will be different than a jack and so forth, but it even goes further than that. At what stage your planing with your smoother will make a difference also.
> 
> ...


Thanks, Don. I've been cleaning them up for a while now, but I really need to start working more on my using skills.


----------



## getlostinwood (Apr 11, 2011)

donwilwol said:


> *A few tips on How to set a handplane.*
> 
> Writing a blog about *How to set up a Hand Plane* will take a series, because it really depends on what you are trying to do. In other words, a smoother will be different than a jack and so forth, but it even goes further than that. At what stage your planing with your smoother will make a difference also.
> 
> ...


As one who has wanted to use my planes, and when I try they are cumbersome, hard to use and deliver bad results. This is a huge help. Thank you for making some of my mistakes clearer for me.


----------



## AnthonyReed (Sep 20, 2011)

donwilwol said:


> *A few tips on How to set a handplane.*
> 
> Writing a blog about *How to set up a Hand Plane* will take a series, because it really depends on what you are trying to do. In other words, a smoother will be different than a jack and so forth, but it even goes further than that. At what stage your planing with your smoother will make a difference also.
> 
> ...


Thank you Don.


----------



## OnlyJustME (Nov 22, 2011)

donwilwol said:


> *A few tips on How to set a handplane.*
> 
> Writing a blog about *How to set up a Hand Plane* will take a series, because it really depends on what you are trying to do. In other words, a smoother will be different than a jack and so forth, but it even goes further than that. At what stage your planing with your smoother will make a difference also.
> 
> ...


Great info.


----------



## MikeyLikesIt (Nov 22, 2012)

donwilwol said:


> *A few tips on How to set a handplane.*
> 
> Writing a blog about *How to set up a Hand Plane* will take a series, because it really depends on what you are trying to do. In other words, a smoother will be different than a jack and so forth, but it even goes further than that. At what stage your planing with your smoother will make a difference also.
> 
> ...


Very helpful info, thank you.


----------



## Brit (Aug 14, 2010)

donwilwol said:


> *A few tips on How to set a handplane.*
> 
> Writing a blog about *How to set up a Hand Plane* will take a series, because it really depends on what you are trying to do. In other words, a smoother will be different than a jack and so forth, but it even goes further than that. At what stage your planing with your smoother will make a difference also.
> 
> ...


Great blog Don. One for the favourites.


----------



## Handtooler (Jul 24, 2012)

donwilwol said:


> *A few tips on How to set a handplane.*
> 
> Writing a blog about *How to set up a Hand Plane* will take a series, because it really depends on what you are trying to do. In other words, a smoother will be different than a jack and so forth, but it even goes further than that. At what stage your planing with your smoother will make a difference also.
> 
> ...


Super information and I'm sure Christopher Schwarz will agree in all of its entry.


----------



## superdav721 (Aug 16, 2010)

donwilwol said:


> *A few tips on How to set a handplane.*
> 
> Writing a blog about *How to set up a Hand Plane* will take a series, because it really depends on what you are trying to do. In other words, a smoother will be different than a jack and so forth, but it even goes further than that. At what stage your planing with your smoother will make a difference also.
> 
> ...


Don wonderful tips. As always I pick up a thing or two.


----------



## BTKS (Nov 30, 2008)

donwilwol said:


> *A few tips on How to set a handplane.*
> 
> Writing a blog about *How to set up a Hand Plane* will take a series, because it really depends on what you are trying to do. In other words, a smoother will be different than a jack and so forth, but it even goes further than that. At what stage your planing with your smoother will make a difference also.
> 
> ...


Nice synopsis!


----------



## donwilwol (May 16, 2011)

*My Union Planes and what I know about them*

From my web site http://www.timetestedtools.com/my-union-collection.html


----------



## Deycart (Mar 21, 2012)

donwilwol said:


> *My Union Planes and what I know about them*
> 
> From my web site http://www.timetestedtools.com/my-union-collection.html


I'm on the hunt for an 4 1/4X… That would be sweet.


----------



## donwilwol (May 16, 2011)

donwilwol said:


> *My Union Planes and what I know about them*
> 
> From my web site http://www.timetestedtools.com/my-union-collection.html





> I m on the hunt for an 4 1/4X… That would be sweet.
> 
> - Deycart


Or find the second know X0!


----------



## terryR (Jan 30, 2012)

donwilwol said:


> *My Union Planes and what I know about them*
> 
> From my web site http://www.timetestedtools.com/my-union-collection.html


Very nice trio, Don!


----------



## Kentuk55 (Sep 21, 2010)

donwilwol said:


> *My Union Planes and what I know about them*
> 
> From my web site http://www.timetestedtools.com/my-union-collection.html


They look good Don


----------



## AnthonyReed (Sep 20, 2011)

donwilwol said:


> *My Union Planes and what I know about them*
> 
> From my web site http://www.timetestedtools.com/my-union-collection.html


That depth adjuster is great. Nice collection.


----------



## donwilwol (May 16, 2011)

*WHY WERE HAND PLANES CORRUGATED*

After a question was posted elsewhere and a discussion pursued, I decided to do some research on WHY WERE HAND PLANES CORRUGATED.

http://www.timetestedtools.net/2016/11/25/why-were-hand-planes-corrugated/

Part of my intent was to debunk the theory that Stanley came up with it as a marketing gimmick. I think that was a success.

Let me know what you think.

The debate rages on. Why are hand planes corrugated. Some say it reduces friction. Some say it does not. Here is what I can dig up on the subject. This is historical facts of why early plane makers thought it was a good idea. Marketing? Maybe. You can decide.

Keep in mind, Stanley was far from the first to offer corrugated planes, but it's possible its marketing capabilities helped carry on the tradition, although I can find no evidence it marketed corrugation as an advantage.



Birdsill Holly is said to have the first successful production metallic plane. These planes are Circa 1852. His patents do not mention corrugation however......................................click to read the rest


----------



## Brit (Aug 14, 2010)

donwilwol said:


> *WHY WERE HAND PLANES CORRUGATED*
> 
> After a question was posted elsewhere and a discussion pursued, I decided to do some research on WHY WERE HAND PLANES CORRUGATED.
> 
> ...


Nice research Don. Lovely to see that information all in one place with examples of the planes.


----------



## theart (Nov 18, 2016)

donwilwol said:


> *WHY WERE HAND PLANES CORRUGATED*
> 
> After a question was posted elsewhere and a discussion pursued, I decided to do some research on WHY WERE HAND PLANES CORRUGATED.
> 
> ...


The friction story makes sense if you're planing under water, in air not so much. My guess would be that the corrugations were added to allow more even cooling of the casting, which reduces internal stresses and minimizes warping. They also greatly reduce the amount of material that needs to be removed during the final grinding of the sole.


----------



## HokieKen (Apr 14, 2015)

donwilwol said:


> *WHY WERE HAND PLANES CORRUGATED*
> 
> After a question was posted elsewhere and a discussion pursued, I decided to do some research on WHY WERE HAND PLANES CORRUGATED.
> 
> ...





> The friction story makes sense if you re planing under water, in air not so much. My guess would be that the corrugations were added to allow more even cooling of the casting, which reduces internal stresses and minimizes warping. They also greatly reduce the amount of material that needs to be removed during the final grinding of the sole.
> 
> - theart


My suppositions are along those lines as well. Corrugations may have aided in more stable solidification of the castings. However, I think it was more that most likely planes were scraped flat by hand. Corrugation would leave less material that had to be removed speeding up the process. Even if they were lapped rather than scraped, the interrupted surface would have reduced the time and effort required.


----------



## terryR (Jan 30, 2012)

donwilwol said:


> *WHY WERE HAND PLANES CORRUGATED*
> 
> After a question was posted elsewhere and a discussion pursued, I decided to do some research on WHY WERE HAND PLANES CORRUGATED.
> 
> ...


An intriguing read, Thanks, Don!

Cannot get over the Steers' patent with rosewood inlaid into DT slots. Beautiful. Less friction? Hard to tell by hand, we would need mult-thousand dollar equipment to measure drag.

All I can see is MORE surface area to clean during a restore. 

Makes me wonder why neither LN nor Veritas bother to corrugate their work.


----------



## wormil (Nov 19, 2011)

donwilwol said:


> *WHY WERE HAND PLANES CORRUGATED*
> 
> After a question was posted elsewhere and a discussion pursued, I decided to do some research on WHY WERE HAND PLANES CORRUGATED.
> 
> ...


There was a guy who tried to use math to prove reducing friction wasn't the original intent. His error is assuming the original thought process was logical.


----------



## canadianchips (Mar 12, 2010)

donwilwol said:


> *WHY WERE HAND PLANES CORRUGATED*
> 
> After a question was posted elsewhere and a discussion pursued, I decided to do some research on WHY WERE HAND PLANES CORRUGATED.
> 
> ...


I would BET ALL MONEY on marketing !
Other plane makers were moving into a market that Stanley wanted control of.
Come up with another gimmic to sell a few MORE than competition.
I dont buy int o less friction making it easier to plane. I have BOTH…...I cannot tell difference ! 
I do prefer wooden sole planes like Stanley #22 through 37 over metal ones. I honestly can tell difference when I use those !......Im a wood guy…..they look nicer too…... (Not counting ornate 41's)


----------



## donwilwol (May 16, 2011)

donwilwol said:


> *WHY WERE HAND PLANES CORRUGATED*
> 
> After a question was posted elsewhere and a discussion pursued, I decided to do some research on WHY WERE HAND PLANES CORRUGATED.
> 
> ...


So it's clear Stanley didn't come up with the gimmick.

Its documented that Stanley didn't believe the theory.

And if Stanley advertised that the corragated worked better, where did that advertising go?

The article wasn't meant to be a "what's today's theory".

This might have all taken place 100+ years ago, but these were some pretty smart engineering minds.

There was an obvious aversion to metallic planes at the time, be it real or just a reluctance to change.

I'd buy the marketing theory if I could find more than a few mentions in the small print, but I can't.


----------



## JayT (May 6, 2012)

donwilwol said:


> *WHY WERE HAND PLANES CORRUGATED*
> 
> After a question was posted elsewhere and a discussion pursued, I decided to do some research on WHY WERE HAND PLANES CORRUGATED.
> 
> ...





> This might have all taken place 100+ years ago, but these were some pretty smart engineering minds.
> 
> There was an obvious aversion to metallic planes at the time, be it real or just a reluctance to change.
> 
> ...


My thinking is running along the same lines as those last few thoughts.

I find it very interesting that several of the references talk about vacuum, adhesion and "clinging of the plane to the work", which I've never experienced with a plane. I'm wondering if that is part of the equation. Are there any marketing materials from that time touting wooden bodied planes (i.e. transitionals) being better than iron because of not forming a vacuum? If so, it could be that the corrugated models were marketed as a counterargument in order to get people to switch, not really as a solution to an engineering problem.


----------



## mafe (Dec 10, 2009)

donwilwol said:


> *WHY WERE HAND PLANES CORRUGATED*
> 
> After a question was posted elsewhere and a discussion pursued, I decided to do some research on WHY WERE HAND PLANES CORRUGATED.
> 
> ...


Hi Don,
Yes interesting.
I don't feel any difference when using the one or the other type, so by feel I can't say it is better or worse.
Yes the plane are not a winner used on the edge, so this is a minus.
It will make the plane lighter… yes a fraction, but I actually prefer weight.
Works better on wet wood… I don't plane wet wood.
It has less friction, I have no doubt about that, if you remove half the surface, but you still have same weight on the rest, so if it makes any difference, I doubt it.
The sexy factor… yes having one is sexy - a fun story.
Some how the small round once makes more sense, then hot air could form a air flow under, like this friction would be less, but in reality… naaa I doubt it, wood is not air tight.
Production, yes there would be less surface to flatten after the casting, that means faster and less wear on the expensive grinding wheels, less metal casted, so possible.
I think, at first it was made from the idea of less friction. Then perhaps realizing cheaper production. Finally as a sales trick and on demand.
Best thoughts,
Mads


----------



## hnau (Nov 30, 2016)

donwilwol said:


> *WHY WERE HAND PLANES CORRUGATED*
> 
> After a question was posted elsewhere and a discussion pursued, I decided to do some research on WHY WERE HAND PLANES CORRUGATED.
> 
> ...


----------



## HorizontalMike (Jun 3, 2010)

donwilwol said:


> *WHY WERE HAND PLANES CORRUGATED*
> 
> After a question was posted elsewhere and a discussion pursued, I decided to do some research on WHY WERE HAND PLANES CORRUGATED.
> 
> ...


Don,
I agree about it being a "gimmick", and with little merit. Personally I have found some of my corrugated planes to also have stiction/vacuum issues. IMO, that is because all of the corrugation lines/areas are isolated along the bottom of the plane. It those lines continued through the very ends of the plane (opening a passage for air), or at least had one drilled through hole for each corrugation, then the "less friction/stiction argument might actually be viable. Just my 2-cents…


----------



## donwilwol (May 16, 2011)

donwilwol said:


> *WHY WERE HAND PLANES CORRUGATED*
> 
> After a question was posted elsewhere and a discussion pursued, I decided to do some research on WHY WERE HAND PLANES CORRUGATED.
> 
> ...


Thanks guys

If you haven't seen them, here are some test results.

http://www.timetestedtools.net/2017/02/02/does-corrugation-reduce-friction-on-a-hand-plane/


----------



## wormil (Nov 19, 2011)

donwilwol said:


> *WHY WERE HAND PLANES CORRUGATED*
> 
> After a question was posted elsewhere and a discussion pursued, I decided to do some research on WHY WERE HAND PLANES CORRUGATED.
> 
> ...


Thanks Don for doing the research and testing.


----------



## CharlesA (Jun 24, 2013)

donwilwol said:


> *WHY WERE HAND PLANES CORRUGATED*
> 
> After a question was posted elsewhere and a discussion pursued, I decided to do some research on WHY WERE HAND PLANES CORRUGATED.
> 
> ...





> Makes me wonder why neither LN nor Veritas bother to corrugate their work.
> 
> - terryR


LN has offered corrugated soles in the past. Have they stopped?


----------



## WayneC (Mar 8, 2007)

donwilwol said:


> *WHY WERE HAND PLANES CORRUGATED*
> 
> After a question was posted elsewhere and a discussion pursued, I decided to do some research on WHY WERE HAND PLANES CORRUGATED.
> 
> ...


It used to be an extra charge. When Paul Sellers used to post in the Handplane of your dream thread, he was very anti corrugated sole. I believe his concern was damaging the work piece if you hit it wrong. Not sure if he still is of the same opinion.


----------



## donwilwol (May 16, 2011)

donwilwol said:


> *WHY WERE HAND PLANES CORRUGATED*
> 
> After a question was posted elsewhere and a discussion pursued, I decided to do some research on WHY WERE HAND PLANES CORRUGATED.
> 
> ...


I believe LN has stopped offering corragated soles.

I don't see an advantage but there are still many that believe otherwise.


----------

