advice needed on plane purchase

Re: advice needed on plane purchase *LINK*

Jonathan Peck -N.Y.

>Jane,

A good place to start is with Patrick's B&G. You'll like the no nonsense approach to Stanley bench planes by the numbers. A good first plane could be a low angle block plane or a Jack. The jack will do alot of things pretty well and is a good versitile plane. It will serve you well until you start to aquire dedicated use planes such as a scrub, jointer and smoother, but much depends on what type of work, joinery and stock you plan to work with, and if you plan to also use power tools.

Perhaps you can tell us what your first project is

As to LN or LV, you can't go wrong with either. The differences lie in the materials and the sticker price.


Patrick's B&G

Re: advice needed on plane purchase

Jane

>Thanks for the link. Let me study this awhile and then get back in touch...

Re: advice needed on plane purchase *LINK*

Jim in Burlington Ontario

>Jane if you can wait a few days LV's newest comes out. I get alot of use out of my LV low angle and LN 4 1/2 and Bedrock #8 Those are the 3 that are always on the bench.


http://www.leevalley.com/wood/page.asp?page=49708&category=51&abspage=1&ccurrency=2&SID=

Re: advice needed on plane purchase

Bill Houghton, Sebastopol, CA

>A great deal depends on how big you are, including how big your hands are. The old beginners' books all recommended a jack (No. 5), and this is still a very useful plane. If you're starting out as you should - projects in softwoods or the milder North American hardwoods (assuming you're in North America) - a regular bench plane should be fine. On the other hand, if you've got really small hands and need to build up to a larger plane, a No. 4 or even a No. 3 might make sense.

Much as I love the No. 6, I would not buy one as my first plane. Great "hogging" planes or junior jointers for short (two foot or so) stock, but a bit too large to do anything subtle with.

But so much of this is project-specific. For really little projects, the best starter plane would be a block plane. Still, if you want an all-purpose starter plane, a 5, 4, or (if you're petite) 3 would be the place to consider starting.

Re: advice needed on plane purchase

Greg Sloop

>IMHO

From LN a 62

From LV a 62.5

Low angle planes are easier to "start" with, though I don't think you'll find any reason to move on to the bevel down variety. Even if you do, these are two planes which I think you'll find your money was well spent to buy.

If you want a smaller one, how about a LN 164 - it's a more dedicated smoother. I wanted a bit longer myself and decided on the 62. I'm hoping that the blade adjust mechanism on the 164 will change or that LV will produce a similar one without that "bolt-on" adjuster. It will make changing and sharpening irons a bit easier. (Small gripe, but still...)

For either one, get at least one additional blade and sharpen at a higher angle. With higher angles you can do pretty much anything. (I've got three blades and I use them all.)

Best,

Greg

Re: advice needed on plane purchase

Steve Kubien

>I'll second Jim's note. A jack plane is a nice place to start. This low-angle gives you a lot of versatility if you also get the extra blade. Some people like block planes as a good place to start. With the utmost respect, I disagree. I have several block planes and they are among the least used in my shop. When you need them, they're great but I don't seem to need them very often.

Again, all opinions are related to the projects you want to start with and the wood-type you plan to use.

Steve Kubien

remove the _9 to email

weight and length main issues

Bill Tindall, E. TN

>1. Length Unless you get into the specialized task of jointing with a plane, there will rarely be occasions where you need something a flat as even a #5 will make it. I find even a #5 annoying as it skips over some slightly depressed area I want to clean up. I rarely use mine for this reason. So, for most elementary planning tasks, shorter is better because it is quicker. If you feel that you may pride yourself in panels flat to 0.003", then longer is better.

2. Weight I like a heavy plane. Its momentum smooths out the plane stroke as the plane moves across varying grain. I would be delighted to find an affordable #4 that weighed as much as a 4 1/2. I don't like the clunky width of the 4 1/2, but it is the plane I go to because of the weight. Others are annoyed by heavy planes. figure out what camp you are in before spending the big bucks. Maybe you live near someone on the Forum that would let you stop by and try one, or the others.

Re: advice needed on plane purchase

R.J.Whelan

>Jane ... my grandfather gave me my first bench plane when I was nine years old and it was a #5 (one of his old Stanleys). He told me when I had become proficient with it I could have another.

I used that plane for everything: throat open for removing large amounts of material; closed up for jointing; and, really closed up, for smoothing and end grain.

It certainly wasn't the perfect plane for most of the tasks I asked it to perform, but I think I learned some good lessons and skills by virtue of it's limitations.

Good luck with your decision ... rj

Re: advice needed on plane purchase

Tom MacGregor, Vermont

>If I could only own one plane it would be my flat-side 604 Bedrock with a Hock A2 blade & chipbreaker. There are other ways including (dare I say it?) machines to rough stuff out quickly, but nothing matches the surface from a well tuned smoother. I use a 605 for heavier cuts, and use a #7 to shoot edges and flatten lumberyard stock. I have many other types of planes, but 4,5 & 7 sizes are what I seem to use most, in that order. I have a 4-1/2, but on any given piece there's not a huge difference in the number of passes required compared to a #4. Having the benchtop at exactly the right height for maximum effect seems to make much more difference than a slightly heavier plane on a bench unsuited to your particular stature.

Re: advice needed on plane purchase

Charles

>The first plane to buy is either a #7 or #8 and then work downward in length from there, assuming you are interested in processing stock entirely with hand tools.

How do figure...

Scott Burr in Ben Lomond CA

>Charles why do you think a 7 or 8 would be a good starting plane?

This goes against everything I know.

Some things to consider...

Scott Burr in Ben Lomond CA

>Hi Jane, I'm kind of siding with Bill's post. Alot has to do with how big you are. Being a female (please don't take offence here) it could be hard for you to push a larger plane. Depending on your size, what type of projects you plan on doing and the type of wood your going to be using are all determing factors. If you can get to a good ww store and play with a few and see how they feel in your hands.

My recomendataions:

1 low angle block plane.

2 smoother (No. 4)

3 jack (No. 5 or 5-1/4)

This would be a nice starting plane set IMHO.

Let's not forget sharping none thing will happen without a good knowledge of how to get a plane blade good and sharp.

Re: advice needed on plane purchase

dave caudill

>Jane there are a couple of books I might recommend to help you out with your purchase. Peter Korn of the Center for Furniture Craftsmanship wrote a great book on hand tools and has a very good section on planes of all sorts and their uses. Great book.

Also the book planecraft which is sold many places including Woodcraft. It is a book put out by the Record company I believe and is also very useful.

As for me I use my #5 a lot for the roughing out work and then a #4 or 4 1/2 for planing. If I were to choose one I would probably go with a #5 but it is really apples and oranges in my opinion. I use both for different reasons. I also use my #6 quite a bit for larger work. You might want to consider what types of projects you will be doing and the size of the pieces you will be planing.

Bottom line though is that you can take all of our opinions and get a starting point but it will only be that. until you start doing more work you won't know which planes are the ones you will use the most and will do the most work for you until you buy them and start using them. Experience is going to be the best indicator of what works for you. With any luck you will find out sooner rather than after several expensive purchases.

Also you will find the LN planes need but a little work out of the box. But they still need some especially the flattening and honing of the blade. I can't speak for the LV planse but am not enamored with their looks but many like them. sooner or later you will find the skills for fixing up old planes are valuable and quite enjoyable at times. It can be just as satisfying as using them. Just my opinion.

I use mostly old planes and prefer them. Also if you buy decent old Stanley planes they may not be more much more work than a LN or others to get ready. I always replace the irons with Hock irons. That and a little flattening of the soles and they are usually ready to go. Although there is always a few that take a lot of work and you don't know it until you take it home and start flattening and using it.

Good Luck Jane.

Dave

Re: advice needed on plane purchase

Adam Cherubini, NJ

>Dear Jane,

We hear this question often enough. One reason why you don�t see this issue addressed to your satisfaction is because it is so difficult to answer. I tried to answer it in a FWW article (that got dumped) entitled �Why your first plane should be a try plane�. It�s a compelling argument if I do say so myself: you can do a lot of woodworking with S4S lumber, a try plane, a couple chisels, and some sort of saw.

The try plane can easily clean up edges ripped by a handsaw, or jig saw, forgiving the requirement to have some great table saw. Really what does a woodworker really �need�? You need straight, square edges and at least one fair face. The S4S power planer at the mill produces uniform thickness and four good faces. Removing cup, and straightening cast edges or ripped edges is the job of the try plane. You don�t really �need� a smoothing plane, even though they are satisfying to use and produce beautiful surfaces. To be honest, sanding or card scraping are reasonable alternatives.

To a large extent, this is a pointless exercise though. The truth is to work efficiently with hand tools, (or power tools) you need many expensive tools. There is no one best plane, or saw, or chisel, or power tool. But that truth doesn�t stop us from discussing it, or manufacturers from recommending their pointless Low Angle Jack of all trades planes. While I�ve railed against these swiss army planes without a mission in the past, perhaps their best trait is that they are pleasurable enough to use and soon encourage their owners to buy other planes. Maybe that�s where you should start.

Regards and welcome,

Adam

Re: advice needed on plane purchase

Alan Hamilton

>Jane,

I agree with Adam: questions like yours cannot be answered with authority by anyone but you. If you cannot answer your question, you need to study some more.

Books are good sources of the information you need: in addition to Planecraft check out Garret Hack's The Handplane Book, Traditional Woodworking Handtools by Graham Blackburn, and just about any of Saint Roy of Underhill's The Woodwright's Shop series. Others know of more.

Local clubs, community colleges, good wood working stores, as well as any other woodworker group or people who know what they're talking about.

Places like Wood Central are excellent sources too.

But you have to figure out what kind of work you want to do with your planes. You can use planes for everything from rough dimensioning to making molding. No one plane can do everything; each has jobs it does best, and does better than any other plane.

Knowing what you want to accomplish with your planes will tell you, with some definitness, what plane you ought to use, and so what plane you ought to obtain.

You can use this site, and other boards like it, to help you figure all this out, but in order to get good advice you need to ask more explicit questions. Examples: "I want to make some molding. Should I look for a good combination plane, or the various molding planes?" "Is a #6 fore plane suitable for jointing and for flattening on small stock?" "For general fitting do you prefer a low angle block or standard block?" and so on. The simplicity or level of the questions don't matter; no one--well, almost no one--minds answering beginners' questions.

"What should be my first plane?" is just far too general; it leaves out virtually all of the information necessary for one to give you a useful answer. General questions rarely generate specific answers. So my answer would be that your first investment should be time, time for you to learn more about planes and their care and feeding.

Sorry to preach. But you know how I am; you shouldn't have gotten me started,

Alan

Re: advice needed on plane purchase

Greg Sloop

>RE: One tool for everything...

I understand your frustration about recommending a one plane fits all...but it would be nice to have dedicated tools for everything.

I'd like a couple of router tables with mounted routers and lifts so I'd not have to change bits as often. And heck, two cabinet saws would be nice - I could leave the dado in one and a regular blade in the other. Heck how about three...then I could have one dedicated to cross cut and one for rip.

But I don't have that much space or money. As with anything else, one has to reach a compromise in what you're willing to do.

I can edge joint boards with my 62 and get pretty decent results. I can use it as a smoother and get really pretty nice results. I can prepare a single face so I can run the board through the planer with no cup or twist. Would a dedicated jointer, smoother, etc be better? Sure, if money is no object. But in that case, so would the 60X60 shop and the triple saw setup.

The trick is not to buy total junk that you'll throw away when you learn better. I hardly think that the low angle LV and LN planes fit that "trash tool but cheap" compromise. I suspect for many and certainly myself, the real workhorse of their shops in terms of handplanes is going to be a low angle version.

I think it's the best compromise I've ever made in trying to fit a single tool to fit the widest array of tasks.

Cheers,

Greg

Interesting, Greg

Adam Cherubini, NJ

>That was a really interesting post. I had to read it a couple times and I'm still not sure I got all of it.

I think I got the part about a single tool for each operation:

I'd like a couple of router tables with mounted routers and lifts so I'd not have to change bits as often. And heck, two cabinet saws would be nice - I could leave the dado in one and a regular blade in the other. Heck how about three...then I could have one dedicated to cross cut and one for rip.

I'm not sure if I ever made this clear, but that's exactly how my shop is times 10. I have 4 non-adjustable dado planes, 100 planes for molding, planes for smoothing, planes for joints, special saws for every wood and thickness, special chisels, etc, etc.

I don't know if you were trying to make the point that this is a ridiculous approach or not. (And regardless) this is the reality of the pre-industrial woodshop and one I've found quite practical. I think its strikes us (or me at least) as odd or ridiculous. The biggest challenge I've faced has been getting my mind around the way the hand tool shop works.

If that makes any sense to anybody.

Adam

Disagree slightly, and digressing a bit

Bill Houghton, Sebastopol, CA

>Adam, your statement could be pretty intimidating to a beginner, especially one lacking a thick wallet.

When my son was a pre-driving teenager (this is related; bear with me), I took him to a Tom Petty concert. Early in the show, I noticed a guy at the back of the stage continuously tuning guitars, because, for each song, at least one member of the band picked up a different guitar from what he'd played in the previous song, to get exACTly the right sound for the song.

Your average person who likes to noodle around making music for pleasure needs one instrument.

A lot can be done - maybe not as efficiently, but well - with a limited supply of tools. Jane, if you get hooked, you'll get more tools, and your efficiency will increase (you'll also get some you find not very useful. This is unavoidable, judgment being based on experience); but don't be discouraged into thinking you can't do anything without a set of tools that would sink a frigate. Get a basic set, and start making stuff. Any of the planes you've listed will work (though, again, I don't recommend a No. 6 as your first plane). You'll learn as you go.

Re: Interesting, Greg

Greg Sloop

>And that works fine for you.

I couldn't fit 100 planes in my hobbiest shop.

What I'm saying is that most of us *are* hobbiest's and that a "jack of all planes" if practical is probably a more optimum thing for us.

Few are going to go hand tool exclusive.

For all these reasons, a tool that handles several jobs well is really quite an asset - it's not often one finds a tool that really does handle a number different of jobs well. This is even more true for a newbie who has never ever tried handplanes.

You are welcome to mock using a LA jack as the "swiss army" approach to handplanes. But I can't find a single real reason it doesn't handle all many of these jobs well, and where it doesn't make sense for those who chose to have a smaller "rack."

I've yet to hear anyone come up with some real technical reason the LA sucks. Your point is that you want dozens and dozens of planes. Wouldn't matter if they were LA or not, so why denegreate the LA style by name. What you're complaining about is that you wouldn't be satisfied with one of anything.

I think that is far from the average and would be considered an undesireable "feature" by most.

You're welcome to push the quantity and total dedicated specificity for every single tool, but I don't think that was the question or tenor of the initial question.

In short, you act as though the problem is the LA issue, when really it's that you think we're nuts for trying to solve more than one problem with the same tool.

Having 100+ planes strikes me as a little fruity myself.

Touche!

*in jest and good humor*

Greg

Thanks to all

Jane

>The above posts have been interesting and helpful. Part of the challenge at being fairly new at something is learning the right questions to ask. I tend to do more reading about things (like woodworking) instead of actually working the wood. I've had a lot of time this past winter to think as I sat around with a broken ankle, and realized that woodworking is something I want to take seriously and get good at. I'm going to take the plunge and purchase some of the planes mentioned above. I'll give you a report later this summer...again, thanks!

Re: Disagree slightly, and digressing a bit

Jonathan Peck - N.Y.

>I once saw a guy qualify for the US open using only a seven iron....Umm..OK, that was the movie Tin Cup. Don't think they'd let you out onto even the local muni coarse without a complete set of clubs.

Hard to belive you could make anything more than a simpple bookcase with only one plane...you could be really limiting yourself in terms of the type of work that you do.

So since you keep promoting...promoting..the LA jack, I'd like to believe that you do more than make the occasional bookcase out of dimensioned pine.

I would like to know what type of projects you are making, so I can relate better to your point of view.

Thanks

Jonathan

Sorry Bill..questions for Greg

Jonathan Peck - N.Y.

>

Re: Disagree slightly, and digressing a bit

Greg Sloop

>Dang... I had a long message all done up and lost it...

Here's a short summary, as I'm not willing to retype it all now.

The latest big project was a table for my daughter. Say 24dx34wx20h out of QS Syc.

I only have a Jet contractors say with an Incra fence and attached router table, using same. A Jet 16" bandsaw, floor standing drill-press and a 12" planer - along with the LN 62, 60.5 and assorted sanders and misc tools.

I thought the table turned out pretty nice.

Stock prep for thicknessing was done with the 62. Flatten one face and run through planer. Since the Syc gets all torn up through the planer, the faces are resurfaced after planing by hand.

Straight line rip on the TS and final edge joint with the 62 where needed.

All the flattening and table top finish prep was done with the 62. So was the edge jointing for the top glue-up and the chamfer on the edge and end-grain clean up - the three blades makes this possible. The 60.5 was used for a few smaller things, like trimming the tennons for fit - a rabbet would have worked better - but oh well - a chisel works for clean-up where the plane can't go.

A 164 would have been great a few places, as I wouldn't have to have flattened as much of an area, but, again - oh well - it wasn't that much of a tribulation.

The tapered legs got burned running them through the TS, esp the first one - not fast enough. Normally this would result in a sand fest, but the 62 cleaned up nicely.

The first top turned into a bit of a problem child as it was to be edged with Walnut. After abandoning it because of lack of time, and the wood was cheap, I resawed it into "1/4 material and I've been cranking out about a dozen boxes with 1/4" box joints for Christmas and other presents/gifts. I've been playing with finishes etc for a while - hand rubbing Poly and the like. I've also been experimenting with lid styles - I'd like to avoid putting hinges on the boxes - because of expense and time/effort constraints mainly.

A weekend or two ago, I did a "replacement" pull out drawer for my wifes baking supplies - flour etc. It was out of poplar and required a fair bit of cup removal. The old one was a piece of trash, and left more than 2" unused in the back of the cupboard. Small trivial project, but nice to get something done in a single Sunday while also wathing my 3YO.

Anyway - I'm looking to do a coffe table with light box next, and then perhaps a dining table with a dozen chairs. But I want the leigh FMT before I do that as I'll be doing more than a hundred M&T joints and I'm lazy. (The wife wants me to do a doll cradle too, but I'm not too motivated yet. *grin*)

Practically, the table/chairs project is a *long* way off. I've got a bunch of half finished projects, like a silver box to complete first and home stuff, like sheet-rock etc. (But I can dream about quitting work and just working on it, can't I?)

So, I'm not a huge professional, but I think I do OK. I don't have a huge arsenal of toys, but I've got more than just the total basics. I'll probably buy say, three more planes, but I can't see having more than that. (Dedicated smoother, jointer, and rabbet.)

Until then, I can certainly make do with what I've got. I have to work-around stuff more than occasionally, but it's not that much of a tribulation.

Cheers,

Greg

Thanks..

Jonathan Peck - N.Y.

>That clears things up. While I to am not a total neanderthal, I also use similar implements of electron distruction in the production of household necessities. My goal is to produce heirloom quality furniture and I am tooling up towards that end. I also enjoy the history, restoration and preservation of old hand tools. All I lack is a local source for inexpensive rough cut lumba' and the time to dedicate to honing my skills

I am also enjoying working under a shady tree in the backyard with the only noise being generated from a local family of blue jays and robins. My affinity for hand tools (not just planes) has gone way past obsession and I have no regrets. But what originally attracted me to hand tools was the quality of the people who use them

Regards

Jonathan