LN Low Angle Jack?

LV Plane is slighltly cheaper...

chad pearson

>and it has the words "Don't Panic" written on the face in large friendly letters.

BTW - Just got the LV bullnose plane,...my first LV plane...I am quite impressed with the quality of the machining as well as the fit and finish.

Re: Leaned something new

Pam Niedermayer - Austin, TX

>This is just the way things happen, Todd. As a hand tool beginner I made a lot of mistakes picking planes, never could get them to work all that well. The LN 62 was the first plane that not only worked out of the box, but was extremely flexible in function. I could do most of the jobs I needed to with that one plane, albeit not quite as well as with dedicated-function planes.

So, for that reason alone, I strongly recommend the LN 62 for beginners. Since then, maybe 3 years now, I've learned a lot more and have gradually brought more dedicated, high quality, planes into my work flows. I seldom use the LN 62 any more; but when I do, it still works like a champ.

Pam

Re: LN Low Angle Jack?

Lyn J. Mangiameli

>My results actually have been different. As those who care to look back in my writings, I was never all that fond of LA planes as high end smoothers, and said so. But not the nomenclature LA (for Low Angle-refering to the effective cutting angle). In the first study, the LVLA when used as a LA plane wasn't really up to the rest of the other smoothers.

In the second study, where two different users in two single blind trials, as well as one trial where both users evaluated performance together, the LV LA smoother was set up with a variety of blades, with effective cutting angles from 32 to 57 degrees. Totally to my surprise, the LVLA smoother with an effective cutting angle of 57 degrees (now I wish I had gone higher) outperformed most of the planes in the study, and had a performance roughly comparable to several highly tuned infills. This kind of data opens my eyes and makes me explore the matter more thoroughtly. I've found the LV LA Jack to perform even better than teh LV LA smoother. So, my advocacy of these plane types is really a quite recent phenomenon, and is based on objective comparative experience.

Now I, like many others in this forum, have the majority of my planes of a bevel down design. I use them and appreciate them. But I don't overlook the comparative information that shows the bevel up plane design to be capable of excellent performance. Such a level of performance is even easier to accept and appreciate when one takes the time to examine the principles behind the BA plane.

There you go and open...

Scott Burr in Ben Lomond CA

>this big ol' can of worms and run away;). This is a fun and informative post. Scott still thinking you should get the no. 8)

Doooohhh

Scott Burr in Ben Lomond CA

>Sorry, The no. 8 comment was ment for Gordy thread down the page. I got the 2 of you mixed up. Seinor moment, or maybe I shouldn't have had the 2nd beer at lunch.

Or how about this pragmatic view...

Eric Hedberg

>The planes manufactured by Stanley etc. were developed by designers/engineers who had to lay out dimensions and construct patterns with compass, pencil, and rule. It's much easier to layout and create designs based on 45/45/90 triangles. They were also likely developed by people that approached manufacture from a "metal machining" perspective and not a "woodworker users" perspective. (This never happens anymore, right?) If you assume that there was no "significant" performance issues in planing the wood, why not?

Eric

(Wishing he still had the romantic wistful beliefs of youth)

Senior?!

Scott in Douglassville, PA

>Oh, man - I thought you were my age! ;)

Did I miss something?

Brent Langdon, Sterling VA

>> In the second study...

Has this article been published? I am looking forward to reading it BUT ONLY if the LV #4 1/2 turns in a decent showing. Lyn's first article played a heavy role in my decision about the LA Smoother versus the 4 1/2 so I don't want to read that I paid more for the lesser plane. ;-)

BTW, Lyn: thanks a bunch for the articles that you have written and for you very informative posts.

- Brent

Seeing how I'm

Scott Burr in Ben Lomond CA

>40 somethin' must have been the beers;').

Re: Yes...

Jonathan Peck -N.Y.

>Scott chugs a couple , or two or three beers and says:

"No need for a high end plane....snip..... It doesn't look like much but it's one of my best performing planes in its roll"

Does it look any better after a few beers????? My favorite jack is a #605 SW that is re-japanned and has a repaired tote. Definitely not going to win any beauty pageants, but I'd put it up against any LA smoother any day of the week. Hmmm...I think I dropped $7 on that one and still had enough green left over to pay my bar tab, take swmbo out for dinner and a movie and pay the babysitter.

Re: Or how about yet another pragmatic view...

joel

>The casting and pattern work that was done in the US in the 19th century was unbeliveable in quality and complexity. If a different angle was wanted it would have been made differently. THe marketplace would have demanded it. that 45 degrees is a good all around angle for planes beds predates Stanley by a lot.

There is a fundimental difference between picking a plane based on what will do the finest possible work on the most difficult wood and a plane that works brilliantly and easily with fabulous results on typical woods.

No one I think disagrees that if you raise the effective angle of a plane you can plane more difficult woods without danger. With a lower angle plane you just need a better overall plane with better fit and finish, better bedding, better clamping to get the same result - but you certianly can get the same result.

We do disagree on the maximum performace a 45 degree plane of any design is capable of but that's a different story.

I like the easier to push plane (I dress wood by hand so easier is always better). I also prefer a true smoother with a short sole for the same reason. the last thing I need is for the weather to change and my almost flat bloard to move slightly - and have to use a longer smooth plane. Shorter is better as a smoother.

Balance and other factors are important to me also.

I think we can also all agree that a new LA plane is typically less expensive than a new bevel down from the same maker - and for similar performance that is a worthwhile criteria.

The plane you choose should be the plane that feels right for you. how it feels in the hand, how it works for you, how it effects the pocketbook, etc. There isn't really a universal right answer and different criteria are important to different people.

Although, Joel...

Eric Hedberg

>I agree with you on the unresolvable debate of the "best" angle. A 45 degree angle (frog/bedding) predating Stanley (just to chose a name) is again I would argue about the ease of drafting out (and casting/machining) a 45 degree angle design. These high quantity manufactured planes also went to a market that wasn't driven by the need to smooth curly maple. Those woodworkers who did knew and used custom or "European" planes. I would be hard pressed to believe there was a lot of discussion about market satisfaction with 45 degrees at the turn of the century. If so, why not 46, 47, or 42.5?

But maybe more importantly Joel, just how good are those french rasps?

The French rasps

Wiley Horne--Glendora CA

>are sensational. Just about a perfect tool. The cutting action is that of an edge tool, not a grinder. I might add for the left-handers out there that Auriou cuts left-handed teeth also, and it makes a difference in the feel of the tool. Auriou make a very wide range of 'grains' (fineness or coarseness of cut): Joel ordered me a Grain 15 modeller's rasp and that thing is down in the sandpaper range, but with more control and doesn't wear out It's a perfect tool if you carve or shape your own pulls or other small ornaments. They come with a dark wenge handle and ferrule, and are ready to use.

Wiley........happy customer

Re: Although, Joel...

joel

>Wiley has already answered the question on the rasps so just let me make one comment on the planes.

Wooden planes before stanley were routinely at higher angles so layout was certainly not an issue. It's true maybe Leonard Bailey took a short cut but I doubt it. At this point in history plane angles were totally understood and data had been published. THere would be just no incentive to compromise design to save ten seconds reaching into a drawer for a protracter.

Re: The French rasps

joel

>Wiley,

Thanks for the comments - We will be stocking more left hand rasps - seems after we mentioned they existed more and more southpaws are asking for them and as a southpaw myself I feel disingenous selling the rightie ones to a leftie.

Re: Leaned something new

Todd Stock

>You may be right - the LA is easier to set up, with fewer bits and pieces to fiddle with, so it might be a very good first plane.

Re: Personally I'd never

Todd Stock

>You'd have to be crazy to spend another $50 just to get a prettier plane, right?

I keep telling myself that I'll be going 'ugly early' on the next plane...never works out. Call me shallow, but the pretty ones just smell better.

It's progressive

Bill Houghton, Sebastopol, CA

>Senior moments can arrive at any age. They just come more frequ - well, more something - as you get older. At least, I think that's true.

Bill, looking forward to celebrating his, um, 56th? Yeah, that's right, this is an even year.

Speaking of Lee Valley planes..

Christopher Fitch @ Memphis

>I just got my new Veritas Scraper plane in yesterday.

Now I only have two more to go, the bullnose and Low Angle Jack before I have all the Veritas planes I want.

That scraper plane is nice. It's a well made and well thought out plane. The frog adjustment is smooth and the whole plane is nice.

Oh yeah... (drive-by gloat!) I *finally* got my Record 044 in that I won off EBay. This means my Record plough/combination plane collecting days are now complete since I have the Record 043, 044, 050, and 405 planes.

wooo!!!

Ahhh Bill...

Scott Burr in Ben Lomond CA

>It's a leap year! Your only 55;). Think young thoughts, do young things, Scott

Re: Ahhh Bill...

Scott in Douglassville, PA

>Think young thoughts, do young things...

Ah, rationalization for my South Park and BeyBlade facinations. Gracias, hombre...

My Hero!

Alan Hamilton

>Joel,

I agree--but I've never been able to convince anyone else.

I've always thought that planes (and much else) are made in a particular way because there has been ample time, about two millenia or more, for tool makers and users to figure out what works best. The design of planes has evolved; and in any evolution, the things that don't work as well as others die.

In rebuttals I've seen all kinds of reasons why this isn't so: everything from "the old timers didn't have the materials" to "they made them that way for ease of constuction" to "they didn't have the stuff (read "brain power") to figure it out." Nonsense! People who made iron planes in ancient Rome were just as smart and just as clever as we. If anything, it seems to me they would understand such things better than we because our education about hand tools has been truncated through the focus on power tools since the industrial revolution.

Sorry. I'll get off the soap box now,

Alan

HIJACK: Fettling LN Smoother?

Don Thompson, Cutler Ridge, South of Miami FL

>Would you be so kind as to outline what steps you took to fettle your Lie-Nielsen smoother?

I have not been brave enough to work on anything other than the blade.

Don