Search query: «#102»

I'm experimenting with a back-end AI on the site that seems to be getting smarter the more I use it. I'm not a woodworker so I can't verify how helpful the following is, but maybe there is a link to a site that has more information and/or a more useful identification chart. Meanwhile, feel free to post photos. There are readers here who enjoy collecting and using vintage tools who may be able to help by seeing photos.

AI response:

Here are the most reliable and detailed online sources for identifying vintage or old Stanley block planes. These focus on model numbers (e.g., #9½, #60½, #18, #102), type studies (changes in design/features over time), dating by manufacturing periods, and visual comparisons of features like body shape, lever caps, adjustment mechanisms, markings ("Stanley," patent dates, "Made in USA"), japanning, and sole/mouth details.

Comprehensive Reference Sites

• Patrick’s Blood & Gore (Supertool.com): One of the most detailed references for Stanley planes. It breaks down individual models with production dates, dimensions, variations, and close-up descriptions of features. See sections for block planes (#60–#70 series, #9–#11½, etc.). Excellent for low-angle planes like the #60½.

• Virginia Toolworks: Includes "Stanley Block Planes Demystified" (organizes models by functional groups like basic handyman, adjustable mouth, knuckle joint, etc.) plus a dedicated Block Plane Chart and Block Plane Dating/Type Study page with timelines for series like #9½, #18/19, #60/60½, and #65/65½. Features tables on body styles (e.g., Excelsior vs. Handi-Grip), markings, and changes by year.

• Time Tested Tools: Gallery of Stanley block plane examples with photos, specs, production dates, and restoration notes for many models (e.g., #60½, #18 knuckle, #19, #102, #9½). Useful for visual matching.

Identification Tools and Charts

• Wood and Shop Stanley Plane Identification Tool: Interactive type study with photos of features (primarily for Bailey-style bench planes, but helpful context for related block planes). Includes a free downloadable PDF flowchart.

• Hyperkitten.com Stanley Bench Plane Pages: Flowchart-based dating tool and type study timeline. While focused on bench planes, it covers shared features and helps with overall Stanley dating logic.

Model-Specific or Additional Helpful Resources

• Virginia Toolworks Block Plane Dating Page: Quick-reference table for dating key series by features like "Stanley" on the toe, "Made in USA" markings, model number stamping, and body profiles.

• Patented-Antiques.com: Photos and descriptions of various Stanley block planes (often for sale, but good for visual ID).

• YouTube Videos: Search for "Stanley block plane identification" or "Stanley 60 1/2 low angle" — channels often show close-ups of features, comparisons (e.g., #60½ vs. #65 vs. modern versions), and restoration. One example covers handplane ID broadly with flowcharts.

Tips for Identification

1. Note the model number (often cast on the side or toe in later planes, or absent in very early ones).

2. Measure length, blade width, and check the bedding angle (standard ~20° vs. low-angle ~12° for end grain).

3. Look for features like adjustable mouth, knuckle joint cap, lever adjuster, thumb rest, or "squirrel tail" handle.

4. Check markings and japanning color/condition.

5. Cross-reference with production dates (e.g., #60½: 1902–1982; early ones lack certain stamps).

If you provide photos or details about your plane (model number if visible, length, low/standard angle, specific features like lever cap style, markings, or mouth adjustment), I can help narrow it down further using these sources. Many collectors also recommend John Walter’s book Antique & Collectible Stanley Tools for deeper reference.

These resources should cover most common vintage Stanley block planes effectively. Start with Virginia Toolworks and Patrick’s Blood & Gore for the quickest results.

Re: A great little block plane.....

My #102 is a great 'little sister' to the MF-57, a Stanley 60-1/2 comparable. It has spared my arthritic bad shoulder innumerable times. Lie-Nielsen was very helpful in clearing up a minor problem I had with the #102 when I first got it. 

Similar to Tom's experience, they are tools that need more personal attention in factory tuning than a customer accustomed to modern CNC accuracy might expect. They reflect traditional casting methods of the early 20th century. I learned, and since forgot, some standard tuning methods while getting it to perform perfectly for me. 

Recommendations

Derek Cohen (in Perth, Australia)

Bruce, you cannot go wrong with either the LN #60 1/2 or the Veritas DX60. Both are comfortable to hold.

Both are the same width, and will suit the same hand. They are also the same length. If anything, I slightly prefer the LN as the grip is a little more rounded.

Of the two, the ergonomics of the Veritas are much better: better blade adjustment, not just with the Norris-type adjuster and depth stop, but the lever cap wheel is easier to get to on the Veritas. This is only an issue after you have used both.

Veritas has PM-V11 steel, which is excellent and better, however I have not experienced any issues with the A2 steel in the LN. Both get sharp and hold an edge well.

The other block planes to consider are the LN #102 and, a personal favourite, the Veritas Pocket Plane. Both these are excellent, especially if you are looking for something small and light with authority.

Regards from Perth

Derek

Re: LN #4 1/2 in bronze

Derek Cohen (in Perth, Australia)

David, as I recall, the Anniversary #4 1/2 was $600.

There was an Anniversary #5 Junior (or something very similar) at one time. In white bronze. There is also a white bronze #102 available at this time.

When I purchased the #4 1/2, it was at a time when we looked at the Stanley #4 1/2 as a highly desired smoother. As Patrick Leach hypothesized, it was Stanley's competitor to the English infill planes. I do have a Type 11 #4 1/2, used with a PM-V11 blade, and it is really a wonderful plane. At the time the LN bronze version came out, it was seen to be the ultimate Bailey.

Regards from Perth

Derek

function begats form

Derek Cohen (in Perth, Australia)

OK I've been here since 1998 or so. Posted many pics over the years and learned So Much ...here's the deal: my hand plane collection has never been too extensive and the kids are asking what I want for Christmas. I'm thinking of starting from the beginning-If you had to pick One Hand plane to *Start* your arsenal-what would you chose? Manufacturer/Size/Style- anything that causes you reach for that plane more often than the others- what would it be

Hi Alan

Since you prepare your boards (getting them to size and flat) with machines, you are really looking at a couple of planes that will aid in tuning your work and/or finishing your work.

The type of tuning that planes do best is ...

1. chamfer edges (block plane)

2. square edges of boards and fine tune for length, such as drawer faces (shooting plane)

3. tweak the cheek of a tenon (I would not use a plane - I'd rather use a chisel or rasp. However, if I were using a plane, it would be a router plane)

4. chisel out hinge mortices (router plane)

5. smooth faces of boards (smoothing plane)

6. tune groove or dado width (side rabbet plane)

That should do for a start. I am ignoring dimensioning boards, such as with jack and jointer planes, since you use machines and just looking for a place to start.

Block Plane: my three of choice - LN #102, LN #60 1/2, Veritas DX60

Shooting plane: Veritas LA Jack. A wonderful BU plane that may be used for many tasks, such as a short jointer, but also as a plane on a shooting board. You will never look back.

router plane: Veritas Large Router Plane. Again, a very versatile plane, used for inlay, grooves, dados, mortice hinges, and tenon cheeks.

smoother: Veritas BU Smoother. There are many smoothers to choose from. However, I do not think that you are ready for the 911. Stick with the Golf. This is about easy-of-use and not about performance. The BUS performs as well as the best, and ideal for already-flat surfaces. The blade is the same as the Veritas LAJ, so can be swapped back-and-forth (BU planes use different bevel angles to create different cutting angles. Low angle for shooting and high angle for planing interlocked grain).

Side Rabbet Plane: LN #98/99

Re-posted from the Power Tool side.

Regards from Perth

Derek

Re: Choosing a Hand Plane

Hank Knight

Alan,

Your question is like asking what is the best flacor of ice cream. Everybody has a favorite and people seldom agree. If there is any consensus in the replies you have received, it's either a #5 jack or a block plane. Those two narrow the choices down to several dozen options. Again, everybody has their favorites. Mine are the Lie-Nielsen low angle Jack and the Lie-Nielsen #102 low angle block plane. Both of these planes are "general duty" planes rather than specialty planes that are limited to only one or two narrow applications. I use both of them for all kinds of things in my shop. I have a nice Bedrock standard #5 and several other block planes. I seldom use them, preferring instead the low angle Jack or the low angle little 102 block plane. Both planes are mechanically simple, easy to use and perform well in many situations. You wouldn't go wrong with either of these planes.

My $.02.

Hank

New bench construction - some electrons expended..

John Aniano in central NJ...

>Hello All,

About 3 weeks ago I decided to make a new workbench dedicated to making bows. It is for my new shop space on the 2nd floor of a pole barn we had built about 2 years ago. The 32' x 12' shop space is finally taking shape - the white oak floor is done and the window moldings are almost finished and installed, so workbenches were the next logical step.

Last year, as part of the Central Jersey Woodworkers Association "Big Wood Buy", I had the chance to get several large planks of what I thought was red oak with the idea that they would one day become benches. That time had come.

I cannot take credit for the basic design of this bench. That credit goes to Morgan Andersen, a bow making friend in Rosalia, Washington. I adapted Morgan's design (below) to the stock thicknesses I had. I also made the new bench larger. And although I describe the construction of the trestle base below, I cheated and bought a 24"x60" maple top for my new bench.

I got out my trusty Husquvarna chain saw (yes, I said there were power tools used in this project! But hey, the end result is for hand tool usage so I guess it is OK). The chain saw made fast work of crosscutting the planks of "oak" to rough length. In fact, the chain saw cut too easily and at that point I realized this was not red oak. At first, I thought it was ash, but later realized chestnut was a better candidate. The planks were very old, and so encrusted with barn dirt that they were literally brown/black. Even a few scraper passes made me think "oak". Anyway, the wood was easier to work with than I expected. I bucked out lengths for the trestle tops, bottoms and vertical members. The stock was a true 3" thick at this point but needed to be cleaned up. Once ripped on my bandsaw, the narrower pieces were surfaced on a 6" jointer, and trued up and final surfaced with hand planes.

I marked out the curved feet on the bottoms with a can of paint as a pattern and cut them using the bandsaw. I cleaned up the surfaces using, of all tools, my little Stanley #92 rabbet plane. It did a great job in the corners as well as the curved sections.

I marked out the mortise and tenon joints and drilled out the waste with a 1.5" Forstner bit. Squaring up and cleanup was with a 1" chisel.

The 2" long tenons were cut by hand using a modified tenon saw (teeth shaped as rip teeth a la Mario Rodriguez) and a conventional crosscut tenon saw. Clean up of the tenons was with a Mattheson 1-1/2" wide rebate plane. I drilled out the 5/16" dowel holes in the tops and bottoms and marked the tenons using the same brad-point drill bit. I offset the holes ~1/16" in the tenons to drawbore the joints.

White oak pins were made by pounding them though a steel plate with a 5/16" diameter tapered hole. After final surfacing all the members one final time, I beveled the edges with a #102 plane. Glue up was with my favorite Kremer liquid fish glue. With the joints assembled, the pins were driven in and pulled everything together. I let the pieces dry overnight and trimmed off the excess pins with a Japanese Zeta flush cut saw and planed the ends flush to the sides.

The stretcher was really of oak, white oak in fact, and quite hard and heavy. Surfacing this was a challenge since the piece was ~8" wide so I enlisted a neighbor who has an old Craftsman surface planer. I cleaned up the planer marks with hand planes. There was, however, a knot that had badly chipped out on one edge, so I needed to address that. A bevel would have hidden it, but thinking out loud, I felt that a small OG moulding would look nicer. I have a nice Sims moulding plane and this worked well on the corners of the white oak. The knot chip-out was hidden. Don't let folks tell you that old molding planes can only be used on soft woods - when properly tuned up, they can work on hard woods like white oak. They don't like it, but they can perform well.

Some of the tools used include the Mattheson plane, a Spear and Jackson tenon saw and a Richardson Bros. tenon saw with rip teeth.

Using a corded 1/2" drill, the holes for the Veritas bench bolts were bored out. I used the drill press and a forstner bit for the 1" holes for the round Veritas nuts in the stretcher.

Here is the assembled trestle base in it's new home in my new shop space. Another installment will show the finishing of this bench. Stay tuned.

John

Re: Low angle for endgrain?

Derek Cohen (in Perth, Australia)

>One day around 1976, I was planing the endgrain of a thick piece of maple with a block plane and my hand got a little crampy. I thought "something is wrong here, this is too much work". I switched to my smoothing plane and have not used a block plane at all since.

Hi Warren

Your story reminds me of the one that is intwined with my original post here.

Anout 8 or 9 years ago I decided to splash out on a decent block plane, an upgrade on my LA Stanley #60 1/2. I remembered all the praise heaped on the bronze LN #102, a low angle block plane, and so I went off to buy one on a rainy Friday afternoon after work. Dashed into the store, grabbed the last one on the shelf, paid and beat the rain home. I spend a very happy weekend using my new LA block plane, and was in wonder at its ability to slice endgrain so cleanly and easily. Over the years I would show off this little wonder to my friends.

A couple of years ago I came across an auction on eBay (in Oz) for a brand new adjustable mouth LA LN #60 1/2. I had always fancied this plane. It felt right in my hand (I prefer a smaller plane, so the Stanley #65 and the LV are just that bit too large for comfort). And Lyn Mangiameli had referred to it as the "worlds best". It went for about a third of the new price so was a very happy camper. Shortly after it came to live in the woodshop I was comparing a couple of block planes side-by-side (isn't this what we do? :) ). It struck me that the bed angle of the #102 was not the same as the #60 1/2. So I took a closer look. And lo' and behold - !!! - the #102 was not really a #102 at all, but a #103! Teach me not to wear my reading glasses for the small print. A standard angle plane had been cutting end grain so well all those years! And that popped the myth for me.

LA block plane do cut end grain better - smoother - but standard angle can do a most acceptable job, and have other advantages as well. Indeed, for years I used an HNT Gordon Trying plane on my shooting board.

Regards from Perth

Derek

So how'd the #102 do?

cooper suter

Re: It's called Rustoleum

Moses Yoder in White Pigeon, MI


>I noticed that the cast iron LN #102 that I picked up this weekend is apparently powder coated. It is a very dull black finish, and I think since it is baked on it should look good for a very long time. It is probably the most durable finish a plane has ever seen. If it were Rustoleum I would not have bothered to haul it home I think. It is fine I guess to paint a 100 year old plane black and make all the old guys that used it turn over in their graves if that is what a person wants to do, but for some reason it just don't seem right. Japanning is easy and educational, and I think probably much more durable than the Rustoleum. I japanned a #606 and cleaned it up quite a bit to use, and it will become one of my favorite planes.

Re: Plane-o-thon?

mikew


>Hi Moses:

"I drove home with the Lie-Nielsen #102 plane spending most of the drive home in my lap, where I could occasionally pick it up and fondle it. It came with a holster and a paper that identifies it as a prize in the Woodcentral/Sawmill Creek plane contest. This plane is an object of great beauty, and will only part ways with me after being pried out of my cold dead hands."

Ain't that the truth. I sold off a lot of planes and other tools last year. Among those which were not even a consideration to sell was my LN bronze 102. It is a jewel and probably one of a couple planes I use most often.

Congrats on winning yours!

Take care, Mike

Re: Plane-o-thon?

Moses Yoder in White Pigeon, MI


>There was way to much happening at the picnic to keep track of everything. The contest was spread out through the day, with the contest board set up and people planing as they had opportunity, which I think worked better than trying to get everyone together to have a set time for the planing and one person going right after the next. However, the shop was crowded and I was working on a few other things throughout the day and did not see a whole lot of the actual planing take place. Being there was a really good time with a great group of people.

There were 16 entries in the planing contest. I imagine Lee Schierer (SP?)will be posting a better report, and I hope to ge the spread sheet from him to look it over. The winner of the contest was once again the L-N low angle jack plane, this time run by Bob Tarr (? I am pretty sure that was the name, forgive me if I am mistaken.) Second place was won by Warren from Lancaster. I am not sure what plane he was using, but think it was a Stanley #4. Bob and Warren are both great guys that I really don't mind losing to. I did not get to talk to Bob Tarr much, but there were several comments from people that he helped them out a lot with their planing, plus he had a very gloatable saw with him, an 1850's Disston purchased for $1, so hats off to Bob. I have not used the LN low angle jack but suspect that it can be adjusted similar to my LN #60-1/2R where the iron is adjusted by advancing it right to the point where it starts to protrude from the mouth and then adjusting the depth of cut by putting a bit more pressure on the lever cap. I was really pleased with the performance of my plane whcih I have elected to name "Ringer". It is an old 604-1/2 with a background of severe abuse. It has a Hock iron in it. I worked with it Wednesday night and was not getting satisfactory shavings, so I took all my sharpening stuff with me. I suspect there was some spray glue buildup on my plate glass that prevented me from getting my stones flat Wednesday evening, so Saturday I borrowed some of Mr. Grumbine's laquer thinner and cleaned the glass off carefully, flattened my stones again carefully, then ground and honed the iron in Ringer and in my 603. I moved up to the contest board with both planes, and the timer was started. I advanced the iron in Ringer until it cut some on one side, then checked the other side and made slight lateral adjustments with a brass hammer. I find I cannot get precise lateral control with the lever, where light taps with a hammer work well. I centered the plane on the edge of the board and with several passes was able to take a decent full length shaving. I retracted the iron, then again adjusted it to where I am pretty sure I was taking about the thinnest shaving I could with that plane, and in several passes was once again able to take a nice full length shaving. I was satisfied that this was probably the best shaving I could get no matter how ong I futzed around with the plane. I had two shavings measured at one spot and submitted the one that I thought was going to be thinnest. I ended up in third place. This once again ended up being ideal because I ended up getting a prize which I originally had bypassed as my first choice prize, but am really glad that I got it. I drove home with the Lie-Nielsen #102 plane spending most of the drive home in my lap, where I could occasionally pick it up and fondle it. It came with a holster and a paper that identifies it as a prize in the Woodcentral/Sawmill Creek plane contest. This plane is an object of great beauty, and will only part ways with me after being pried out of my cold dead hands. One of the first things I will do this afternoon after unloading the Neon that is packed to the brim is to sharpen the iron and relieve the bottom corners of the plane so they are not quite as sharp, and then permanently attaching the holster to my right hip. Many thanks to all the people who made the planing contest and the picnic possible. It was a great weekend.

First plane Recommendations (long)

Derek Cohen (in Perth Australia)

>Charles

There is excellent advice above but, as you will note, nothing excites the passions of handtoolers like a discussion on choosing a handplane. There are clearly Schools here - such as adherents to Bevel Up vs Bevel Down, long vs short bench planes, and paying-your-dues vs buy-new - and it is important that these choices not confuse you, or dissuade you from a most satisfying method of woodworking.

One further point on the above - ignore the discussion of the past two weeks (link above) since this was NOT about choosing a first plane but about choosing a single plane.

My recommendation to you, working on the premise that you do not own a handplane, is to get both a decent blockplane and a cheapish #4 benchplane.

In my opinion the most important quality in learning to handplane is feel. Handplanes are not machinery, they are tools that you guide with your hand. It is easier to develop the touch with a light and small plane. You will quickly discover that a block plane is your Best Friend as you use it to trim overhangs, bevel edges, clean up machine marks, and smooth end grain.

There are several choices in a block plane, but I would advise this purchase to be for a new plane - one that will work out of the box so that you can get going straight away. The two companies that come immediately to mind are Lie Nielson and Lee Valley. You cannot go wrong with either. Both make a small block plane (LN have the #102 and #103, while LV have the Apron). I can only speak about the LN #103 from personal experience (I own one). This is a "standard angle" block plane, very heavy in its bronze construction, with a performance that goes way beyond one's immediate expectation from its size. It is superb on both end-and face grain. I had intended buying the #102 and a few years down the track discovered that I should have worn my glasses on the day of purchase (!), but no matter - it does the job just as well. Still, if I were buying afresh, a low angle version is more flexible. Both the #102 and the Apron have excellent reviews.

A larger block plane is the LN 60 1/2 (again I own this one) and the LV LA Block Plane. I love my LN - it is a comfortable size for me, and I love its look (yeah, I know this should come into the equation). The LV is larger (I already had a Stanley #65, which is a similar size) and probably more versatile as a result (it is easier to use as a small bench plane as the blade is wider). The LV also comes with a range of accessories, such as a add-on tote and a chamfer guide. If I were only buying one block plane, I'd probably go for the LV as a result. Both are constructed to a very high level of quality.

Now I also said get a cheapish #4, and try and make this a pre-WW II model Stanley. The aim here is to get take it apart, clean it up, tune it, fine-tune it, fiddle and play. This is another part of the learning path. I do not believe that one must "pay one's dues" if this means doing it the hard way. However, it is important that you understand the dynamics of planing, and this comes from experience. Why a #4 and not something larger? Again, because you are just setting out on a new path and the #4 is easier to manage and get a feel with. It is a more versatile size. Plus you will need a smoother and the basic #4 on undemanding wood does a good job, and it is possible to upgrade it with a new blade. A larger plane, such as a #5 1/2, while an excellent general use plane, is too large for a novice. More experienced users will say that they wished they owned one earlier, but it takes time to get to that stage to be able to say this. Incidentally, my first plane was a #3 (from my father-in-law) and my next was a #5 1/2 (which I continue to use very frequently). It is all in the timing.

Certainly consider a new #4-size plane. And if you do so, I will always recommend a bevel up design here. These are just more versatile and easier to use than a bevel down plane. Getting the above two planes will enable you to explore this aspect for yourself. Both LN and LV make these types of planes, wilth my preference being the LV LA Smoother (the LN version is the #164) since it is cheaper and has a few additional features that puts its nose ahead of the LN in regard to user-friendliness. The end performance of both is much the same.

Lastly, get a decent blade sharpening set up. At the end of the day you will only plane as best as the blade permits.

Enjoy.

Regards from Perth

Derek

Re: Lie-Nielsen No. 6

HC Sakman

>Hi John,

If you like it and add it to your "set" by all means, go for it. How about #3,2 & 1? ;-)

I really like and use 95 quite often. 140 is little disappointing as I found it's not that convenient to use. I just got it, need to fettle with it a little. #60-1/2R is definitely a keeper, so is the #65 & #102.

I absolutely have no use for chisel planes. Probably LV's bullnose w/ chisel feature would be money better spent. As far as shoulder planes go, I also vote for LV over LN.

Chico...

Post-script to "Planing end grain .."

Derek Cohen (in Perth, Australia)

>I have to tell you all a little story. Well, it does have to do with planing end grain...

The first decent block plane I owned was a low angle bronze LN #102 that I bought several years ago. It has been one of my favourite planes to use. It fits my hand like a glove, cuts end grain as clean as a whistle, feels an extension of my hand when I need to trim something .. did I mention that it cuts end grain like nothing else?

I recall the day I purchased it from Timbercon. I had decided to buy a new Stanley #60 -1/2 (what did I know back then?!). It was late one rainy Friday afternoon and I dashed in from my last appointment of the week, making it just before closing time. The Stanley looked black and shiny but my eye was taken by this bronze gleam nearby. The #102. I had read about these. Excellent reviews. A Lie Nielsen! But too dear... But wait, it is on Special .. even so, it was almost double the price of the Stanley. My skill in rationalising took over and I was soon driving home, one eye on the road and the other on the little bronze #102 on the passenger seat alongside me. ... Did I mention that I really like this plane?

A few days ago I won a LN #60-1/2 (low angle) block plane on eBay. Brand spanking new, in the box, in the wrapping. And it cost less than the #102. Great deal. I always wanted one of these. Really great reviews and considered one of the best low angle block planes around regardless of price. This was a case of lust. No other reason. I already have a Stanley #65 low angle with a Hock blade, and this does a superb job on end grain.

So last night I had these three planes lined up on the coffee table (we all do that we have a new acquisition, don't we?) and I am looking at the blade angles. Mmmm, the #60-1/2 and #65 look the same, but the #102 looks higher.... a closer examination of the number under the blade adjuster ... #103 .... 103!!!

For years I have been marvelling at the end grain cutting of this little plane and assuming it had to do with it being the low angle set up. But now it turns out that it is a standard angle setup! But it cuts like a LA plane ... the number must be wrong ... no, it is definitely 103! This is like finding your pet male rabbit, Jack, has given birth to baby rabbits.

I wonder if the #103 has the same identity confusion as I.

Regards from Perth

Derek

Planing end grain - a little experiment

Derek Cohen (in Perth, Australia)

>I had a little free time today and decided that I would take a few pictures of my efforts at end grain planning to demonstrate that the mouth size of a block plane has no effect on the result. Just for the disbelieving (since a small mouth is stated by many here as a necessity for preventing tearout).

Firstly, in my experience (limited by my amateur status), end grain does not tear out if the blade is sharp enough. I do get tearout on some timber, notably awful stuff such as construction-grade Radiata Pine (no one should attempt end grain planning with this timber – it is heart breaking!), but this does reduce (never completely) with a really sharp blade.

Secondly, a lower cutting angle requires less effort but even a high angle plane will cut end grain. For example, I have successfully used a HNT Gordon Try Plane (60 degree cutting angle) on a shooting board. On the other hand, a low angle jack plane will do the same job with less effort, and produce a smoother cut.

When it comes to small block planes, I’d rather use a low angle (such as my Stanley #65) than a high angle (such as a Stanley #18). But the question is often raised whether one would choose from a block plane such as a LN #102 (which is a low angle plane but has a wide mouth) or a LA block plane with an adjustable mouth. I would say that one should get the adjustable mouth, but because it is useful for planing interlinked face grain rather than as a specialized plane for end grain.

So as a test I chose two pieces of timber, one Scandinavian pine and the other American Cherry. The plane used was my Stanley #65 block plane, which has a low cutting angle and an adjustable mouth. It is well tuned and uses a Hock blade. The blade was sharp but not especially sharpened for the experiment. Photos were taken of the results: both timbers with the mouth closed down and with the mouth as wide open as possible.

The results were clear. I could not tell the difference in performance when the mouth was open or closed.

I tell you what – here are the pictures and YOU say which was which!

About the pictures: those with the cherry came out better than those with the pine. My apologies, but I did not get a chance to examine them until later. Still, they should do the job.

The pics below are of cherry.

Regards from Perth

Derek

Re: Another plane should I question

Derek Cohen (in Perth, Australia)

>Thomas

I, too, have a #65 knucklecap. It is tuned and used with a Hock blade. This is a wonderful block plane and does everything I could wish it to do. I also own a bronze LN #102 (low angle), which is a very sweet plane, with tremendous ability and great heft for such a small plane. In size, these two block planes are very different and in this they compliment each other well. The large #65 is the one I turn to for the serious work, while the small #102 is often the one I turn to first because it is just so nicely balanced and handy. So my advice is to keep the #65, tune it up and replace the blade (I believe LN are now making blades for it now, as well as Hock), and get the little #102 (or the LV equivalent, their Apron Plane), if you are set on another plane. This combination will still cost you far less than a new LN or LV 60-1/2.

See pics below of #65 and #102 with Jarrah end grain shavings.

Regards from Perth

Derek

Not at all Bill

Derek Cohen (in Perth, Australia)

>Bill

You will not have any argument from me on that score. My best small block plane is a #65 knucklejoint with Hock blade (I do believe that LN have now begun making replacement blades as well). This is simply a stunning plane on end grain, well up to all the hype. For more general trimming I prefer my bronze LN #102. It is just so comfortable to use. As good as it is (and it is), it does not have the performance of the #65. My suggestion of a #60-1/2 was simply because it is cheaper and more easily available than a #65, not because I consider it better.

I turned a #18 Knucklejoint (bed of 20 degrees) into a HA mini smoother by grinding microbevel so that the bevel was effectively 35 degrees. I'm sure that this will work for common #110 and #220 block planes as well (a new use for these unfashionable block planes?). With these you will need to close the mouth down. Since the mouths are not adjustable, read my tuning tip for the #140 skew block plane (the part about using epoxy to close the mouth up). It should be directly applicable to these planes as well.

Try it - I know you will like it!

Regards from Perth

Derek

Chicago Maxwell Street Market

David Miller from Iowa

>Not that I want the competition from you Chicago readers, but the today�s outdoor market was reasonably productive (it is actually on Canal Street at Roosevelt, not Market Street). It was a bit nippy with a stiff breeze, but that kept the crowd down and made the sellers a little more motivated.

Picked up:

A nice 6� carver�s drawknife (Swan mark)

Dead mint Klein 10� bit brace (I really need another brace � I gave 12 to the benefit auction a while back just to get rid of them)

Couple handsaws (Disston and Simonds)- a bit rusty but both had excellent formed and carved fruitwood handles which I�ll keep

30� Disston saw for a miter box (like I need another one of these as well)

Mint Yankee (Stanley era) #130 spiral screwdriver

A decent Stanley #102 block plane ($2)

3 � near mint Stanley bench plane kidney lever caps � 1-#3 and 2-#4/5

Stanley #45/46 patent date slitter I found in the bottom of a tub full of drill bits. Had to pay the $1 minimum transaction fee that is an unwritten rule at this market. Spent way too long looking for the other cutters with no success.

There were about 20 bench planes, but only 2 broke my stride � a pre-war Stanley #6, decent but broken tote � he wanted $25 but I just couldn�t pull the trigger seeing how I have 3 or 4 of these in a box waiting to be tuned. The other was a Sargent/Craftsman #78 equivalent (can�t remember the Sargent #). Good shape with the 1920�s script Craftsman logo - $10, but it was missing the depth stop and I promised myself I wouldn�t buy incomplete planes anymore. A couple deep breaths and an authentic chorizo/egg burrito and I was able to walk away.

Spent $55 (including breakfast) but that also included a fence to a vintage Delta unisaw. I don�t have one, but I figured I can get most of my expenditure back by turning the fence on eBay. I was, however, having second thoughts as I lugged all this 5 blocks to my car. An hour in the wind was about all I could take even though I was dressed appropriately.

Hope to see you Chicago lurkers there next time � I�ll be the big bald guy with glasses, shabby green coat, and a paperboy bag full of heavy metal items that is rooting through the junk bins trying to find a square-tanged countersink bit trying to ignore the vendor that is going on about how rare rusty brace bits are.

PS - I was privately boasting to some of you about my appointment yesterday with a guy to buy a truckload of patternmarkers tools along with several treadle powered wookworking tools. A complete bust except I gave the guy $10 for an aluminum Workmate and a couple Jorgenson clamps. The fellow seemed to think that a trunk full of well used C clamps and plumbing coppers were valuable woodworking tools. He actually did have a couple BIG industrial mortising machines - electric with a foot actuator. He also had a monstrous metal cutting lathe from the dawn of the industrial revolution (belt powered from the ceiling with a 12' bed). Literally thousands of pounds. Told him he should call the Museum of Science and Industry and he said he would.

Re: block plane purchase *LINK*

Derek Cohen (in Perth, Australia)

>Rocky

A low angle (LA, 37 degree cutting angle) block plane is far more versatile than a standard angle (SA, 45 degree cutting angle). The lower the cutting angle, the easier it will cut end grain. I have included a Link below to a recent thread here.

But there is another factor. It is easier to alter a LA block plane to cut like a SA (and even a HA) block plane. All you have to do is grind a steeper bevel on the blade. Keep a few extra blades on hand, and you have a versatile hand plane that can plane between 37 and 60+ degrees).

For my own use I mostly turn to a Stanley #65 with a Hock blades (LA), a Stanley #18 (SA and HA) or a LN bronze #102 (LA). And the LN is the one I generally grab first for tweeking. I do own a #140, but it is reserved for cross grain work, which is where it scores best.

Regards from Perth

Derek


Link to "5 minute experiment"

Re: LN Small Low Angle Block Plane

Derek Cohen (in Perth, Australia)

>RJ

The low angle bronze LN #102 is my reach-for block plane. It is small (perfect for trimming) but as hefty as my larger Stanley #65.

Regards from Perth

Derek

Re: reccomendations for low angle block planes

Derek Cohen (in Perth, Australia)

>David

Your question is actually a bit vague, and as a result is likely to produce quite divergant responses.

Some will answer you directly about a choice of block planes, since you request this. And the fact is that there are many excellent ones from which to choose, all possible candidates at "the best". Personally, I have several, my favourite a Stanley #65 knuckle joint with Hock blade.

Since you are also talking about planing inlay, it may be construed that you want a small plane. Well a block plane is a small plane, but you do have other choices. An excellent small block plane is the LN #102 (the first block plane I bought). Another small plane is the HNT Gordon (and the Mujingfang version, which I have) mini smoother. These are about 3" long and will delicately cut the most gnarly timber. Also, don't rule out the use of a shoulder plane (or preferably a bullnose version) for delicate trimming. These work very well in these circumstances. I often use my Stanley #90/92/93.

I don't think that you are referring to large areas of inlay, but it you mean large areas of veneer, then I might start thinking about a scraper plane as well.

Just "what" did you have in mind?

Regards from Perth

Derek

Agree

Derek Cohen (in Perth, Australia)

>I have used the bronze LN #102 (low angle) block plane for a few years now, and can support everything Hank says. In an article in FWW some years ago, Garrett Hack described this plane as having "great heft" (I say this from memory). It is dimensionally a small plane and, because of its size, it is subjectively quite heavy. Don't let its size and the absence of an adjustable mouth fool you. It is oh so capable of the highest order of performance.

I imagine that it would be the ideal block plane to carry around in a pocket (if this is what you need to do).

LN have now brought out a ductile iron version, which is cheaper.

I have several other block planes, including Stanley #65, #18, #140 (all with either Hock or LN blades), and these all are tuned to the nth degree and work superbly. But I still keep going back to the little LN #102 because it is so nice to use.

Regards from Perth

Derek

Re: 1/16" thick?

Derek Cohen (in Perth, Australia)

>Dan Clermont wrote:

"Old Stanley blades are 1/16" thick? Most of my planes came from a Luthier who had some nice old Bailey's and Bedrocks he sold to me and they all had blades around the 0.085" compared to 0.065 (1/16") and that is why I am skeptical to upgrade my blades to Hock cause they really aren;t that much thicker".

Dan

I am really no expert here, but I recall that there have been several similar threads in the past. In summary, Stanley blades appeared to vary in thickness over the years. Mostly, however, they are around 1/16" thick.

My hesitation to date in buying a Hock blade for my #18 has more to do with the demands I put on the plane than my doubt about the blade. As I mentioned above, I have a Hock blade in a #65. This block plane, along with a LN #102 (low angle), are the ones I have turned to for end grain work. The #18 only gets used for long grain, and this is much less demanding (e.g. I get much less chatter with the Hock blade than the Stanley blade on end grain). The standard Stanley blade has been OK - not great, just OK on long grain. It gets the work done, but even so it needs frequent sharpenings to stay on top of its game. So I'm going to bite the bullet and get a Hock blade for this one as well. At least I will only have to do it once, and it is not a particularly expensive upgrade to improve a classic vintage plane. Incidentally, as far as I know, only Hock make a blade for the #18/65 block plane.

Regards from Perth

Derek

I use mine for ...

Derek Cohen (in Perth, Australia)

>.... cross-grain work mainly.

I have the Stanley version. It is set up with a LN blade.

I have had good success roughing out and smoothing raised panels with it (see pic below - not the best but the only one in my file). It really was so much better at this than my shoulder planes (Stanley #92, #93, and HNT Gordon 3/4") which are usually excellent on end grain shoulders.

It is also good on the cross-grain of tenon shoulders. Keep in mind that it can only be used one-way, unlike a shoulder plane.

I have found it less comfortable on end grain - difficult - I am not sure why. Here I prefer my low angle block planes (LN #102, and Stanley #65 with Hock blade).

Regards from Perth

Derek