Hand Planes

[coolford]

This plane is a new one for me, as the frog is a permanent part of the body.  It was cast at the same time the body was cast.  Certainly is a different idea.  This plane is part of my 900 pounds, it is the size of a No. 5, but has no markings on the body except a very faint casting T behind the adjuster.  It was a complete plane, the iron is marked "Worth", but that may mean nothing, as it could easily have replaced the original.  I have other Worth planes and they are similar design wise to Stanley, not like this one.  Anyone know who might have made this plane?  If it is a Worth okay, if not ????  I just finished bead blasting it, as it had very little paint on it and was rusty.

[Jim C.]

Hi coolford,

I think it is a Worth plane.  I'm not too familiar with Worth planes, however based on having done just a little research, it appears that they were made Peck, Stow and Wilcox Co.  I hope you'll post a photo or two once you have it all back together..

Jim C.

[Bill Houghton]

Hey, cool, the Defiance line from Stanley used a cast-in frog, too, but theirs was more rudimentary, with two fins coming up from the base and the adjusting yoke between them.

[Lewill2]

Just to mix things up a little I'll post this at first unassuming Philadelphia made Israel White Screw Arm Fillister Plane. Just a beech wooden plane with screw arms from the 1830's, you might think but a little closer examination reveals that there are brass plates added to the side of the plane where the nuts contact the plane. Wear plates you might guess so the brass rings on the nuts don't mar the wood body? No the brass rings on the nuts and the brass plates screwed to the side of the plane are an assembly so when the nuts are turned they move the body as you adjust them. The nuts are held onto the body of the plane. I'm not sure how this is done because I have never taken the plane apart and I have never seen a patent for this feature on a plane. This is the only one I have seen with this feature but I'm pretty sure there are more out there someplace. The question comes to mind if this was an attempt to counter E. W. Carpenter's 1838 Improved Arms Patent that didn't allow the body of the plane to float freely on the screw arms like most of the screw arm planes were made.

[coolford]

Jim-C----Thanks, will consider it a Worth plane and will post picture of it when finished.----Coolford

[Jim C.]

Hey Les,

What a great looking plane! I'll admit that prior to reading your write up, I did think the brass plates were ornamental in nature and may have added some protection to the wood body.  After reading your description, I'm looking at the plane a lot closer to try and figure out exactly how it works!  Just wondering..... is it a hard plane to disassemble?  Thanks for adding some fantastic content!  If you decide to take that plane apart, I hope you'll share your findings with us.

Jim C.

[Northwoods]

I came home with a nice carpenter's level today H.(Herman) Chapin Union Factory.  In looking into it, I came across this plane by same.
It is somewhat similar to yours.
http://www.supertool.com/etcetera/isanctum/is11.htm 

[coolford]

Great information, thanks for posting it today.

[Lewill2]

Jim, if you mean is it hard to unscrew the body from the fence, no you just have to keep the fence close to parallel to the main body so you don't bind the screw arms. Like I stated I never made an attempt to remove one of the nut assemblies from the main body. 

[Jim C.]

Les,

Your additional explanation makes sense.  It's a great looking plane.  You mentioned that you had never taken the nut assemblies apart.  I was wondering if that's a difficult process and if the disassembly protocol is different with regard to vintage wood planes.  Typically when I get a cast iron plane, even one in NOS collector condition, I disassemble it, clean it as necessary, and lubricate anything with screw threads.  I like "Super Lube." It's surprising how often I'll come across a nice plane with little or no damage and there's at least one or two screws that are frozen.  It happens a lot on the barrel nuts that connect to the threaded rods that run through knobs and totes.  The last thing I want to do is bugger up a slotted screw head on a vintage tool, so I do lubricate that stuff just in case I want to disassemble the plane somewhere down the road.  So, in the matter of wood planes, does it make more sense to just leave screws intact, particularly if the screw is threaded directly into the wood body of the plane?  It certainly would not need lubrication.  Would removing a metal screw eventually deteriorate the threads in the wood?  Basically, if it's tight, just leave it alone?

Jim C.

[Lewill2]

I hardly ever disassemble any of my screw arm plow planes. The few that I have the screws are usually bound in the wood and they are difficult to remove without screwing up the slot in the heads.

[Jim C.]

I hardly ever disassemble any of my screw arm plow planes. The few that I have the screws are usually bound in the wood and they are difficult to remove without screwing up the slot in the heads.

Thanks Les. I got my answer.  If I ever come across a winner, I'll keep your advice in mind and just leave it alone.

Jim C.

[coolford]

Here is the Worth #5 cleaned up, 5 coats of black Rust-oleum, wire wheel and W-D 40.  Sharpened the iron and used it along with a Stanley #5 I have---second picture and it worked as well.  Way to make a user out of a piece of junk.  One question, the clamp was also painted black, don't know if that was correct, but I painted it black anyway.

[lptools]

Hello, Coolford. Nicely done!!!!!! Regards, Lou

[Jim C.]

Hey coolford,

I'm with Lou on this one!  GREAT job restoring that plane!  I always like giving an old tool a second chance.  As for painting the lever cap, well, if you think paint remnants were there prior to the restoration, then for purposes of completing a faithful and accurate job, I'd say paint it.  If you painted it for the sake of satisfying your personal preference, then that's good too.  What really matters is that you took the time to bring an old tool back to life.  I like that.  Well done.

Jim C.