Author Topic: Hand Planes  (Read 215561 times)

0 Members and 4 Guests are viewing this topic.

Offline lptools

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2602
Re: Hand Planes
« Reply #1155 on: December 26, 2020, 04:34:39 PM »
Looking good, Jim!!  And a late Merry Christmas!!
Member of PHARTS-  Perfect Handle Admiration, Restoration and Torturing Society

Offline coolford

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 765
  • Old as dirt
Re: Hand Planes
« Reply #1156 on: January 11, 2021, 01:42:57 PM »
I'm wondering about these two Stanley No. 4 1/2 planes.  They both check out to be type 16's, except for the width of the side walls which makes the one on the right a type 17 (war production).  Everything else about them is type 16.  However, the adjuster knob is wrong for the one on the right to be a 17.  What to you think?

Offline Bill Houghton

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2596
Re: Hand Planes
« Reply #1157 on: January 11, 2021, 03:33:03 PM »
I'm wondering about these two Stanley No. 4 1/2 planes.  They both check out to be type 16's, except for the width of the side walls which makes the one on the right a type 17 (war production).  Everything else about them is type 16.  However, the adjuster knob is wrong for the one on the right to be a 17.  What to you think?
I think no one told Stanley the dates for the type studies, so they rudely kept doing stuff like using up existing inventory even after a type change.

The type studies are akin to management models, which are conceptual frameworks laid atop an organization to try to make sense out of what is, in actual fact, a somewhat chaotic mass of people working together.  That is, the type studies don't represent the reality of years of production of tools.
« Last Edit: January 11, 2021, 05:12:06 PM by Bill Houghton »

Offline Jim C.

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 976
Re: Hand Planes
« Reply #1158 on: January 12, 2021, 07:22:09 AM »
Hey coolford,

Thanks for stopping by the thread.  Bill makes a good point.  When these old planes were being manufactured, type studies were not a consideration.  As I’ve said throughout the thread, and as Bill states, Stanley did not waste inventory, and parts that were made for a plane that was later categorized by collectors as a “type x” would also fit in the same model plane that was manufactured many years later and categorized as a “type y.”  The parts were interchangeable.  That was pretty typical of standard bench planes like your #4 1/2 smoothers.  If you take a look at the bench plane type studies, notice that Type 16 examples ended right around 1941 and Type 19 examples began right around 1948.  Within a seven year period, four “types” were identified, those being, 16, 17, 18 and 19.  It’s foreseeable that left over, but still interchangeable parts from an earlier type could have easily been installed on subsequent later types.  Somewhere back in the thread, I might have mentioned the lack of uniformity in war year production planes.  They were typically assembled from a hodgepodge of parts the were cobbled together from the inventory that was on hand and for some reason the main body castings were thicker and heavier. 

From what I’ve seen, I believe the generally accepted bench plane type studies produced by those collectors with a vast knowledge of the facts are somewhat soft in terms of definitive traits that can be attributed to war era planes and those that were produced immediately after WWII.  There’s just too much variation and combinations of parts that were being used during that brief time period to say, “Type 16 planes had this, this and this..... while Type 17 planes had this, this and this...... “  I wrote a little bit about the #4 1/2 back on page 28, reply 419.  From my perspective, when it comes to the #4 1/2, it seems that Stanley was trying to figure out how to make it competitive with the heavy British made infill smoothers.  The parts they used to make the plane and when those parts were manufactured weren’t as significant as long as they worked and the plane was heavy.  I also wrote a little bit about war era planes specifically as they related to main casting thickness back on page 11, reply 163.  Take a look back if you have a minute.

Jim C.
« Last Edit: January 12, 2021, 05:37:55 PM by Jim C. »
Our Go-To Type Study Member

Offline Jim C.

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 976
Re: Hand Planes
« Reply #1159 on: January 18, 2021, 05:15:09 PM »
Not too long ago, someone asked me (with my wife standing right there) if I really used all those hand planes in my collection.  “Well, of course I do!  Why else would I have them?”  I’ve been floating that story to my better half for years.  I think she’s wise to it, but figures I could be involved in worse things.  So my answer is still the same….. “Well of course I use all the planes!”  Anyway, since I do like using the planes when I’m engaged in some kind of wood working, I thought I might show you how I use them for the simple task of flattening a short board.

I wanted to use this short piece of maple to make a pizza cutter.  It was an easy project and I had this cut off piece of maple that was destined for the fireplace.  Still, I hate to waste wood, so I hung onto it thinking some day I’d use it.  The big problem with it was that it was badly cupped and had a little twist.  Looking at it standing on end, the defects are plainly evident.  So how do you fix it?  This was clearly a job for a few hand planes.  What I had to do was flatten one side by hand so it could be laid flat on the bed of a motor powered thickness planer, which would make quick work of surfacing the opposite face making it flat and co-planer to the face I flattened with planes. 

When I have a cupped board like this, I usually hand plane the convex side, leaving the concave face down.  Clamping the board securely is important.  Since I start this process with a #40 scrub plane, anything less that a tightly held work piece is unacceptable.  Recall that a scrub plane takes a fairly thick shaving, removing a lot of stock quickly.  The work must be secure in order to stand up to the force of the cut.  Starting in one corner of the board, and angling the plane at about forty degrees, I’ll start removing the apex of convex section of the board going from one end to the other.  Once I’ve gotten to the end of the board making several forty degree passes, I’ll turn the plane around and move back down the board again making forty degree passes that run opposite to those made in the first pass down the board.  It might sound complicated, but it’s not.  What I’m trying to do is knock down that high spot so that at least two thirds of the centerline of the board are flat and will run through the powered thickness planer without rocking and then creating a board where the two faces are not co-planer.  As one can see, the scrub plane makes quick work of knocking down that high spot that ran down the centerline of the board.

Now with a much flatter surface, the scalloped face left by the scrub plane can be initially smoothed by the jack plane.  Once again, angling the jack plane at about forty degrees, I’ll plane out the scallops going one way down the board.   When I get to the end of the board, I turned the plane and angled it about forty degrees in the opposite direction, just like I did with the scrub plane.  The formerly convex section is almost gone and the board is almost flat enough for the thickness planer.  I occasionally check my progress by laying the hand planed surface on a table saw top to see if the board still rocks.  If it does, I must identify the high and low spots and make the adjustments to eliminate them.  Once I’m close to having that one side of the board flat, I’ll finish with a #4 ½ smoother.  The board is now ready for the thickness planer.  Laying the hand planed face of the board on the bed of the thickness planer, only a few passes through the machine will level off the concave face of the board making both faces co-planer and project ready. 
« Last Edit: January 18, 2021, 08:27:42 PM by Jim C. »
Our Go-To Type Study Member

Offline john k

  • Contributor
  • Hero Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 2496
Re: Hand Planes
« Reply #1160 on: January 18, 2021, 09:09:19 PM »
Just keep enough planes around to use, unless one comes by me at a giveaway price.   Was unpacking a box that been put away.  The middle one is quite different from the usual Stanley,  plane iron is Union tool.  Is this correct?
« Last Edit: January 18, 2021, 09:13:48 PM by john k »
Member of PHARTS - Perfect Handle Admiration, Restoration and Torturing Society

Offline Jim C.

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 976
Re: Hand Planes
« Reply #1161 on: January 18, 2021, 09:48:56 PM »
John,

Thanks for stopping by the thread.  From what I can see, your Union plane looks like a real deal X Series example. That’s actually a really nice plane.  The Union X series was seen by Stanley as a legitimate competitor to the Bedrock series.  Based on a little research, and looking at the features on your plane, it appears to be Stanley made.  It seems that Stanley bought Union at some point (likely to eliminate the competition) around 1921, and continued selling and manufacturing Union planes for a period of time, actually improving its lateral adjustment lever.  Clean it up and start using it!  If it doesn’t make the list of “users” in your shop, let me know!  Check out the link below. Thanks for the photo and feel free to post a few more!

https://www.unionmfgco.com/x-plane-series-study

Jim C.

« Last Edit: January 19, 2021, 06:18:36 AM by Jim C. »
Our Go-To Type Study Member

Offline john k

  • Contributor
  • Hero Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 2496
Re: Hand Planes
« Reply #1162 on: January 19, 2021, 08:00:37 AM »
The rest of that box.  Sort of getting acquainted with old friends.  The Union plane has gotten some use, and is becoming a favorite.  Laid down some salvaged 120 year old flooring, had to smooth out some high spots.  No. 45 was in there because it needed some major cleaning.  I collect saws, drills, wrenches, just never got the plane bug.  Like I said, got them to use.
Member of PHARTS - Perfect Handle Admiration, Restoration and Torturing Society