Hand Tools
Subject:
Re: Light vs Heavy planesResponse To:
Light vs Heavy planes () Warren in Lancaster, PA
The heavier planes were considered de rigueur about 15 years ago. Many of these planes were single iron and high mass, thick irons and a tight mouth were believed to be necessary for performance planing.
I think you make a mistake thinking that everyone has been on the same wavelength as you. I have spoken on this forum in favor of light, double iron planes and against high angle planing and thick irons for the 15 years I have been involved on this forum. Maybe you were one who thought I did not know what I was talking about. De rigueur? I don't think so.
Fifteen years ago there was a psychologist from California who thought himself an expert on planes. It was pitiful.
Messages In This Thread
- Light vs Heavy planes
- Re: Light vs Heavy planes
- Re: Light vs Heavy planes
- not the direction I went *PIC*
- Re: reframing the issue
- The experiment and conclusion are both confusing
- At some point..
- Inertia and figured wood
- Re: Light vs Heavy planes
- Re: Light vs Heavy planes
- Not a positive contribution to the discussion
- Re: Light vs Heavy planes
- finding out who to listen to...
- Turnover, newbies and FAQ
- Re: Light vs Heavy planes
- Re: Light vs Heavy planes
- new vs. old planes...
- I like tools from Brooklyn
- Re: I like tools from Brooklyn *NM*
- Infills in the UK
- I'm glad you commented.
- Note on a modern infill
- Re: I'm glad you commented.
- what I've found...
- Weight Comparison
- Re: I'm glad you commented.
- Note on a modern infill
- I'm glad you commented.
- Infills in the UK
- I like tools from Brooklyn
- Re: Light vs Heavy planes
- Re: Light vs Heavy planes