Hand Tools

Subject:
Shops using mostly hand tools..
Response To:
Old history ()

David Weaver
Warren, how many shops near you that build furniture generally do the majority of their work with hand tools?

I went to a Weaver furniture shop out your way (I'm not Mennonite, but my spouse - because of where she's from - has been asked more than once if she married a Mennonite) and the owner was probably 10 years older than me. He doesn't use any hand tools.

An amish cabinet maker up from the best man in my wedding and his brother - both making for a living, no hand tools. these guys are all doing making only and not repairing.

The shop owner with my same last name had a son who was beginning to experiment with hand tools, but he was using them to get a "rustic" look by planing against the grain to tear out wood.

I've not made a full case out of rosewood or macassar ebony (gabon planes easily), but jumping over to the australian forum where people are planing woods that are hickory and pecan and on up vs. what we're used to, there is definitely some case for these heavy planes there. The hitch is nobody is dimensioning those woods by hand on a regular basis. Neither would we.

If I wasn't dimensioning by hand, I wouldn't be woodworking, at least not beyond making guitars. I don't think anyone using jarrah or harder would be doing too much hand dimensioning, though, either. I don't mean planing a board here or there either (that often comes up on forums "i've planed ___ with ___ without issue, and mine cost $7), I mean dimensioning several hundred board feet per year with hand tools. Or more.

If those woods are less than perfect (knots, or even just poor mill sawing), they can knock the wedge loose on a typical 19th century double iron wooden plane.

When the dimensioning is done well by a machine, it's easy to see why people would like something like the heavy infill planes - they're not going to be using a plane long enough for the weight to be an issue.

The older infill panel planes were heavy. Why? I don't know. They can be made lightly - some of the earlier cast infill planes weigh about the same or less vs. a similar sized stanley (I've got a 2 1/2" wide cast panel plane that was very early with a wedge and brazilian rosewood that's 6 pounds to the norris A13s 8 1/2). Those were planes sold to professional users. The smoother infill planes were lighter than current infills - I could speculate on that, too. I'm guessing the panel planes were generally made for heavier work, and on the rare really hard wood, they are much easier to tolerate than a double iron wooden try plane.

Messages In This Thread

Light vs Heavy planes
Re: Light vs Heavy planes
Re: Light vs Heavy planes
Re: Light vs Heavy planes
Re: Light vs Heavy planes
not the direction I went *PIC*
5 1/4
Re: reframing the issue
Re: reframing the issue
Friction, and more
The experiment and conclusion are both confusing
Re: Heavy and light
The best case for heavy planes...
another factor
If you're trimming furniture...
At some point..
Inertia and figured wood
Re: Jim, what is Osae-gani? *NM*
Osae-gani
Re: Osae-gani
Note on fitting
Re:wedge fitting
funny...
Re: funny...
Re:wedge fitting
biases for the maker...
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...
Re: Same
Old history
Shops using mostly hand tools..
Re: Shops using mostly hand tools..
Don felder's guitar...
Misprint?
cultural thing...
Re: Misprint?
Re: finding out who to listen to...
I agree...
Re: finding out who to listen to...
Turnover, newbies and FAQ
comment on teaching
If you get my drift...
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
konrad's planes...
Re: I'm glad you commented.
what I've found...
Re: what I've found...
interesting that...
Re: Calling BS
I haven't seen it....
Re: I haven't seen it....
Re: I haven't seen it....
Re: I haven't seen it....
Re: I haven't seen it....
Truing Kanna
expanding on what jim said
Re: expanding on what jim said
Re: expanding on what jim said
Coupla thoughts
different methods of lapping and the bump
Re: Calling BS
Re: Facts, not assertions
Re: Facts, not assertions
I think we're agreeing...
Re: I think we're agreeing...
Re: Me too
Wood isn't indefinitely stable, either
Re: Calling BS
Re: Calling BS
Re: Calling BS
by the early 19th century
Re: by the early 19th century
It's not offered as ball court...
I miss Todd Hughes' contributions too *NM*
Re: It's not offered as ball court...
I'm guessing on parts here...
Re: Can't argue
Weight Comparison
more infill weights
Re: more infill weights
now there is a pearl of wisdom
Re: more infill weights
initial fitting...
one more follow-up comment.
Re: one more follow-up comment.
rosewood
Re: rosewood
© 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.

WOODCENTRAL, P.O. BOX 493, SPRINGTOWN, PA 18081