Hand Tools

Subject:
what I've found...

David Weaver
I bought three beech norris planes early on. The panel plane was fine, but it was cheaply made. It wasn't better than a stanley plane, but it was expensive compared to one, and more interesting to look at, and someone had resurfaced the one I bought and passed it off as being pristine (casted) and never used. I got it from england and took my lumps on it. That kind of stuff is common among old tool dealers, but I don't like it. Some of the lacquer was worn heavily on the opposite side of the plane, but the seller didn't mention it. Their price was $300 higher than the going rate for a typical used plane and would've been fair if it was actually nearly unused.

At any rate, the two A5s were terrible. either the castings were never flat or they'd moved. I cleaned them up and flattened them and was glad to sell them (in good working condition) to people who wanted them.

the older planes, generally something needs to be done somewhere on them. It's just not likely that a plane made 100 years ago will go through 100 seasonal cycles and not have some kind of fit issue. I've been able to get all of those to be good performing planes, but only a couple would be deemed good out of the box. They often have adjustment personalities slightly different from each other so you have to build familiarity with them (little things all the way down to what part of the bed grips the wood better or the shape of the screw on the bottom of the lever cap will affect things). Some have replacement irons that are too snug laterally (probably due to the original irons being tapered in width), and many have lever caps (i had a norris 2 like this that now another person on here has) that just need to be used as they're a bit tight and slow.

I think that when all of those planes were made, they probably worked well and they were probably flat. I can say with my small sample of a dozen and a half or so that the planes with dovetailed bottoms and rosewood seem to be closer to flat (even when long out of use) than casted planes with beech.

As far as them being a good plane for a beginner to just buy off of ebay and expect to use and get a LN-esque feeling, the chance is probably about 1 in 15.

I have gotten good at fitting planes. What made me good at fitting and cleaning up older planes is making planes. That's not very practical, either. The same is true for old woodies. I can make nearly all of them (that are undamaged with original iron) perform about as well as any new premium wooden plane. But I couldn't do that before I made a bunch of wooden planes with the intent to make planes that work extremely well.

Same thing - not very practical, especially not as advice ("fitting your old plane to work well will be easy, just make 25 planes, and then come back to it")

One last bit that I've noticed with infills, especially panel planes. Those made of mild steel have more friction in use than those made with fairly coarse castings. I'm sure there are textbook coefficients of friction, and some may disagree, but practical use of these planes once they're flat will result in warm plane bottoms and a warm user. Same with the LN bronze. If you plane with it for a fairly long session, you'll be able to pull a paraffin block along the sole and the paraffin will melt slightly and clear up as it's going on the 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