Sargent VBM No.8409 plane

Re: Sargent VBM No.8409 plane

Todd Hughes

>Think if you look at it again you will see it says 3409. This is a what is commonly called a Transitional Plane,[in between a wood and metal plane I guess]. Sargent made them from 1891 and 1941. If it is a VBM [stands for Very Best Made] plane it dates from 1909-1918. Sargent transitional planes are pretty common and unless in excellent plus condition not worth much.I passed a larger one up today I am sure i could have gotten for $5 or so. I am sure someone will disagree but i don't think Tansitionals are too popluar with most users.....Todd

Re: Sargent VBM No.8409 plane

Angelo in Cornwall, NY

>Its a 3409. Sargent transitional. I picked one up for $2.00 I think. Makes a nice little smoother, but as Todd said, not to popular as a user. Make sure the wood is tight (no splits)and that the mouth isn't too wide.

Why aren't transitionals popular?

Greg B�tit, Vergennes, VT

>Do you think it was the "firewood" treatment Patrick gave them in B & G? Are they far less desireable as users? You seldom see them in "collectable" condition?

Greg -who is just curious. I have never owned one, or have ever been tempted to buy one, for that matter.

Re: Why aren't transitionals popular?

David Miller from Iowa

>I guess it's personal preference and we'll never get a consensus on that, but I often use my transitionals. I'll put my #33 (with a Hock blade)up against any #608 for edge jointing. Easy now, it's just my preference.

Because

jim_reed@marietta

>they don't look cool. Transitionals are mostly well made and good users, but they look like grandma's bloomers.

Way to go guys!

Bob Hackett

>Now everybody will be out looking for them!We can say so long to all those low prices on yet another classic tool.

Seriously,I can`t think of why they aren`t more popular.The big complaint about woodys is that the learning curve for adjustment is steep for some folks.Transitional planes offer the best of both worlds,easy adjustment and the smooth easy planing that wood to wood offers.I`ve been able to pick up 2-3 transitionals with split or rotted wood for less than $5 on more than afew occasions.A new block,clean up the hardware and you can easily have a quality plane of nearly any length or special configuration for very little work and cash.Look to Bob Smalser`s post in the achives on how to resole to get an idea how easy things can be.

Secret`s out now though.

Mainely,Bob

WHY!

Ernie Miller Topeka

>Did you have to put that image in my mind with a good tool. you have ruined woodworking for most all of us! Never will I be able to pick up a plane with out thinking about them green pokadoted things.

Re: Why aren't transitionals popular?

Todd Hughes

>I think transitionals have several problims,....First a wooden sole that is prone to wear and damage.Dont know how many I have seen that looked like they have only seen minimal use and the sole will have a big gouge in it, much more use then that and it will be worn out of wack , warped or have a huge mouth.Wooden planes didn't get replaced with metal planes for nothing you know. Also lots of transitionals have troubles with the screws that go into the wood to hold the parts on.Plus they weigh less then an equal size metal planes and i think most people today like heavier planes to use.Hard to find a nice transitional to use ,if given the same less then good treatment the transitional will be in much worse shape then a iron plane with the possiable exception of broken castings though I have seen plenty of transitionals with busted castings.

I think about the only reason you see so many transitionals today is that they were much cheaper then iron planes .In the 1920's a Stanley no.8 cost $8.50 while the same size transitional [no. 31] only cost $4.45

By the way Transitionals are not really "Transitionals" between wood planes and iron planes because they did not come out befor iron planes but actually came out around the same time at least in the case of the Stanley ones........Todd

Re: Why aren't transitionals popular?

Charles Self

>Hell, my mother's Mom had 14 kids. Grannie's bloomers couldn't have been a complete turn-off.

My #26 works decently, but needs a new iron--on the some day list.

How'sm 'bout a link...

Scott in Douglassville, PA

>...to that Smalser post? Cain't seems to finds it...

Sorry...

Bob Hackett

>I`m the type with two fingers guy.Links are beyond me at this point.If my son ever returns home I`ll see if he can sort it out for me.

I`d just enter Bob`s name in the archives search and the posts and pics should be easy to pick up from the titles.The post was geared toward resoleing woodies but the basic ideas still apply,there may even have been a trasitional hidden in the batch.

I can also remember looking at a post from someone over on BP where he used exotic woods such as cocobolo to restore transitionals.Real tool porn,that.I`ll see if I saved it under favorites and get back with info if I have it.

Mainely,Bob

Got it... *LINK*

Scott in Douglassville, PA

>It hasn't been officially archived yet - I hadn't searched the active messages yet. Duh. I'll attach the link, in case anyone's curious.

BTW, I started a thread on rehabbing transitionals a long while ago. I have a #30 that I want to rebuild. That the thread you're remembering?


Rehabbing Woodies