Question for bugbear or Sir William

How's about me? I can help...

Scott Burr in Ben Lomond CA

>After all I have 5 of them. All mine are ground to 25 deg then honed at 30.

Re: How's about me? I can help...

John Horobin

>Yes, thats the same as on mine.

John

Re: How's about me? I can help...

Christopher Fitch @ Memphis

>5 of them??? 5 Record 77's?

sheesh..!!!

hehehe...

hmmmm... 25 degrees.

I can guess then that they end up with a 45 deg. effective cutting angle.

ok..

I'll have to give it a try..

Well, I have a feeling that

Scott Burr in Ben Lomond CA

>Mr. Horobin has a few more than me;). BTW included in mine are the 040 series. Scott, just missing 072 and 074 for a complete collec..errr..I'm mean complete workiing set, yea that's the ticket.Although I couldn't see dropping $350.00 on the 074 that completed today on ebay.

Re: Well, I have a feeling that

John Horobin

>And that 074 really went very cheap I thought. People don't realise just how rare they are - I've seen more Stanley #1's!

JOhn

Re: Well, I have a feeling that

Christopher Fitch @ Memphis

>Heh...

I have all the Clifton shoulder planes so I know where you are coming from...

:)

Re: Why me?

William Duffield on the Cohansey

>I don't have a Record 077. I don't in general use a bullnose plane. In fact, the only bullnose plane I have is a Kunz #79. I find it less than worthless. Any task for which you might think you need a bullnose plane can be avoided by planning ahead or can be accomplished with a paring chisel, or at worst a crankback paring chisel.

However, maybe I can help you to solve your own problem: What is it you want to use this plane to accomplish? Will you be cutting cross grain or with the grain? What is the #077's bedding angle? What kind of wood are you working with it? Answers to these questions can help you decide your optimum effective angle. From that, you can calculate a bevel angle. Whether you can stop there, or might be able to improve the performance by increasing or decreasing the angle then depends on the type of steel your iron is made from, the difficulty of the wood and the secondary tasks you may ask the plane to perform.

Oh, Scott, you shouldn't have said that

Bill Houghton, Sebastopol, CA

>Five? FIVE? Don't you know that too high a concentration of one model (anything over four) causes the Earth to slow its rotation and contributes to global warming? The fifth plane must be at LEAST partway across the state from the other four. From Ben Lomond to Sebastopol is about the right distance.

Re: Question for bugbear or Sir William

paul womack

>IIRC planecraft doesn't say. In general, since these are bevel up planes, the same rules apply as for any shoulder or rebate plane. It's a case of easy cutting vs edge crumbling (for lower vs higher angles).

For cutting end grain low angle is desirable (according to L. Lee's book).

BugBear (happy owner of a nickle-less 077 with a Ray Isles blade)

Re: using a bullnose rabbet plane

Moses Yoder in White Pigeon, MI

>I found a real good use for my Preston bullnose rabbet plane. I built over fifty flat panel doors for this kitchen job I am working on. The interior profile of the door frame leaves a sharp edge around the inside edges of the frame. I was easing this edge with a piece of folded sandpaper, but as the sandpaper wore through very quickly because it was being concentrated on the sharp corner, it was a little frustrating. So I grabbed my trusty Preston bullnose rabbet plane, held it at an angle along the inside edges of the frame and eased the rest of the edges with that. The bullnose let me get very close to the inside corners where the stiles and rails meet, and it broke all the edges easily without being resharpened. Much quicker and a better edge than with sandpaper, and it was fun to finally find a good use for a bullnose rabbet plane.

Re: using a bullnose rabbet plane

William Duffield on the Cohansey

>That's a good tip, Moses.

I have found that I will find good uses for just about any competently constructed and tuned tool in my arsenal. OTOH, I have found that if I don't happen to have the optimum tool for a particular operation, I can usually find another way to do it, with the tools I do have. The work-around may not be the most efficient way to get the job done, but often it is more efficient than running out and buying the perfect tool and then doing the job.

BTW, I'm not recommending that someone not buy a good bullnose plane, maybe the Stanley #90, or an antique infill, or a kit, or Rob Lee's recently announced gem. However, I do not have much respect for the Stanley #79 or the Kunz equivalent. These kludges are mostly useful for emergencies. I have made use of mine on a few occasions, and other local pro cabinetmakers have borrowed it.

Re: Question for bugbear or Sir William

Christopher Fitch @ Memphis

>I checked Planecraft too... I was just wondering what angle it shipped with from Record.

On a different note, are you going to add some more info on record planes on your site?

Perhaps you could make the "Blood and Gore" of the Record plane world...

Don't know what you would call it though... maybe Bugbear's leftovers?

:)

Re: bullnose rabbet plane (lots of images!)

Christopher Fitch @ Memphis

>I have to agree on the Stanley/Kunz 79... They just don't look like they are a good design. I prefer the Record 2506

Also, those Kunz planes are UGLY!

I think the new Veritas bullnose looks like a nice modernized version of the Record 077.

For those wondering what all these planes look like, here are images from the web:

Kunz #79

Record 2506

Kunz #75

Record 077

New Veritas bullnose

Re: using a bullnose rabbet plane *LINK*

joel

>A stanley 79 with a fence and a properly set set of blades is a wonderful design - The last generation of stuff from Stanley wasn't. I could not get a Kunz to work (certainly no out of the box)

My personal favorite is the preston with adjuster - but in fact the 79 is a better design. The Stanley 99 and 98 are also good but again I think the 79 wins out. Also since you don't use these planes much in practice, the less expensive 79 is a better value than the 98/99.

Attached is a URL of something I wrote long ago with most of the important side rabbet plane models.


Iron Side Rabbet planes

Confessions of a Shoulder

Scott Burr in Ben Lomond CA

>Plane Junkie, By Scott Burr.

Well Bill, Then I'd have to send a Stanley 90J your way because I'd hate to break up the Stanley No's. 90 thru 94;)

Good thing I only have 2 Cliftons.

Scott, lusting at Shepard infill kits.

Re: Oops - correction!

William Duffield on the Cohansey

>Mea culpa! I got the number wrong. My criticism is of the Stanley and Kunz bullnose rabbet plane #75, not the #79. Both of these are shown in Christopher's photos. I should have looked it up, instead of trusting my memory. The #79 is a fine plane. It is surpassed by the #98 and #99 pair for the task for which it is designed, but that pair is a lot more expensive.

Re: Oops - correction!

Moses Yoder in White Pigeon, MI

>I just couldn't resist the opportunity to give you a hard time, Sir William. I pretty much agree with what you said. I got my #75 because it was put on ebay in good condition with a box from the 40's for $20 by a slowhead; uh, I mean, a very nice lady whom I would like to get to know better. It looks pretty good with my other small boxes, but I'm guessing since it was never sharpened it probably won't be either as long as I own it.

It is pretty easy to minimize your needs if you have a reasonable head on your shoulders, and I could easily do without the bullnose, but have decided to start making all my rabbets a little shallow on purpose just so I can have the pleasure of planing them down a bit with my LN 60-1/2 R.

Re: Question for bugbear or Sir William

paul womack

>On a different note, are you going to add some more info on record planes on your site?

Only as it becomes essential. I was only really intending to publicise the existence of a few Record s that weren't copies of Stanley design, part to conterract the USA/Stanley centric "weighting" of the WWW.

BugBear