Hand Tools Archive 2005

Re: ... I also believe that LABU *is* superior to

Greg Sloop, Portland Oregon
>For planes of equal quality, fit and finish, the bevel up plane will perform a wider array of tasks, with better performance at a better price.

For example, end grain on soft(er)-wood, straight face grain and wild and woolly nasty stuff. In these situations, the low bedding angle plane with a bevel up design (ala, LV/LN 62/164) will perform much better than the bevel down planes, say from LN or LV.

Further, I expect it's easier to make a bevel up plane as you have fewer machining surfaces to worry about without the frog. (I'm generalizing a bit, I suppose one could make an iron bevel down plane without a frog.)

This is probably going to make the BU plane cheaper, or better made, or just more profit in the vendors pocket.

The blade gets better support, lower down on the iron too. Less chatter in my limited exp.

[I'll digress here to "reply" to Pam too...]
As Pam noted, there's no need to throw away the tools one already has. Indeed, I wasn't willing to get the LV Jack until my LN was gone and that cash went to the LV. But, note that I readily admitted when I got a chance to use the LV that it was, IMHO, vastly superior to the LN. (I ignored the bias toward what I had and liked for a objective review of the two tools, if I can be so boastful...)

My point isn't to say; "your tools are all junk, you must switch..." It's more that I would like to discuss and even debate the merits of one item vs. another, and I'd like to talk about technical issues, rather than practical ones, per'se. (What tool you currently have vs. what would you get if you were doing it again...)

The fact that one likes their current tools, or prefers that old Stanley transitional doesn't eclipse the discussion of what methods are technically superior - at least at the current time.

So, if one wants to discuss those issues, one kind of has to leave the discussions about "what I like" and "what I have" out of it and discuss the details, observations and facts, not just opinions like "well Stanly never sold many 164's so the design must be crap." They might be, or might not. But vaccous discussions about bogus "facts," etc won't help anyone learn anything.

Lastly, I understand that "facts" can be interpreted in different ways, and that others may and will reach different conclusions - but at least we can discuss the merits of things, and leave purely personal preference, personal attack and jihad for the "one right way" out of it and have a spirited, honorable and reasonable debate. (Or at least I hope that's possible...)


Messages In This Thread

Hock or Veritas A2?
Re: Hock or Veritas A2? *LINK*
What's in a name?
Re: What's in a name?
Re: What's in a name?
Same experience here
Re: Same experience here
Correction and answer
Re: Correction and answer
Yes, it's the one from
Honing Leather *LINK*
Re: Honing Leather (kinda long)
Re: Honing Leather (kinda long)
Second opinion + P.S.
Re: Second opinion + P.S.
Sharpness (long and dull)
Re: Sharpness (long and dull)
Paul, I went the other way
Re: Honing Leather (kinda long)
Re: Yes, it's the one from *NM* *LINK*
Thanks Pam! *NM*
Re: Hock or Veritas A2?
I have...
Re: I have...
Are your LNs A2 Cryo? *NM*
Great Idea!
My 2 cents
This issue has been settled
Just like LA planes can do everything HA's can:-) *NM*
Hijack - facts and non-facts...
"Facts are meaningless. ...........
... I also believe that LABU *is* superior to BD..
Re: ... I also believe that LABU *is* superior to
Thanks, Greg. *NM*
Re: ... I also believe that LABU *is* superior to
Re: ... I also believe that LABU *is* superior to
Re: ... I also believe that LABU *is* superior to
I BELIEVE...I'll Have a Scotch...
"Religous Nonsense" ?
Re: "Religous Nonsense" ?
Re: "Religous Nonsense" ?
Re: "Religous Nonsense" ?
Re: "Religous Nonsense" ?
Re: "Religous Nonsense" ?
Re: "Religous Nonsense" ?
If'in all you say it true...
Outting myself
Re: "Religous Nonsense" ?
Re: "Religous Nonsense" ?
Like I said...
Is that bad, Bob? *NM*
Re: Is that bad, Bob?
Re: "Religous (sic) Nonsense" ?
Re: "Religous (sic) Nonsense" ?
Re: "Religous (sic) Nonsense" ?
Yes, sorry to have replicated the misspelling. *NM*
Re: "Religous Nonsense" ?
That`s our Pam!
Re: "Religous Nonsense" ?
So, Paul, what is the best plane? *NM*
Best Plane?
I`ll say it again.
Re: "Religous Nonsense" ? - long
Re: Hijack - facts and non-facts...
© 1998 - 2017 by Ellis Walentine. All rights reserved.
No parts of this web site may be reproduced in any form or by
any means without the written permission of the publisher.