smoother purchase advice

Re: Fit and finish

TMStock

>I doubt initial machining of the wood plane bed or user fitting after receipt has much to do with maintaining a decent fit over time. Even the most stable planes wiggle around a bit compared to metal tools.

More likely wear, deformation of the bed/blade under load, and a relatively large mating surface provides enough contact area to transfer vibs to the plane's body.

If rigid conformance of the bed with blade geometry is really necessary, then something akin to glass bedding should show the best results. Anyone try it?

Re: Veritas MkII power sharpener update

steve knight

>I have noticed the higher bedding angles benifit from higher mass. the difference between a 3 pound coffin smoother at 60 degrees and a 5 pound one is noticable. the plane actualy cuts cleaner and with less effort.

Re: Fit and finish

joel

>you might be right - but I have used dozens of infil planes by many makers. I have never ever used a craftsman build plane that can perform as well as a professionally built plane of the essentially same design. So I would guess that practice does make perfect.

Re: Concrete

Jonathan Peck - N.Y.

>I think this would be called passive damping or a tuned mass damper. Could you call this a Flinstone?

Re: Veritas MkII power sharpener update

Greg Sloop

>Thinking about that...

I wonder what Lyn has to say?

Thanks,

Greg

OK, I'm contrite.

Pam Niedermayer - Austin, TX

>

Re: Fit and finish

Cameron

>joel said:

"you might be right - but I have used dozens of infil planes by many makers. I have never ever used a craftsman build plane that can perform as well as a professionally built plane of the essentially same design. So I would guess that practice does make perfect."

They are out there though. In fact some are even better, ergonomically speaking. You just haven't come across the right one yet.

Re: Fit and finish

joel

>Sure I suppose it's possible - but the point is that top line planemaking isn't a matter of assembling parts.

As a matter of fact that's the brilliance of the Bailey design - Assembling a million bailey planes IS mostly a case of assembling decently made parts and you are done. But with infills and top of the shelve woodies it seems you need practice and skill to do a top line job. And the problem with craftsman made planes of course is the lack of practice by the maker. Even experienced professional planemakers will tell you that their work has gotten much better with practice.

Subtle differences in design do effect the performance of a plane. but I would say fit and finish have a major effect on performance more than any other single thing.

Re: Mass

Lyn J. Mangiameli

>Haven't been following this thread, but the mislabled headings caught my eye.

While I subjectively prefer high mass planes, there remains very little correlation between mass and surface finish based on all planes tested considered as a group (i.e., other than a special Shepherd, I don't have multiple samples of the same plane in different weights, but am reporting on all the planes in the study irrespective of design). The specific Pearson 2 tailed correlation is a .329 with a significance of .076 based on a sample of 31 plane configurations.

Put less mathmatically, the best plane is high mass, but the next three best performing planes are relatively low mass (somewhat like last time). This is not to say that their aren't other advantages to high mass (like plowing through areas of differing density) but mass itself is not require to achieve an excellent surface finish.

I'm afraid I keep dribbling out information from the study and the final report will seem rather old hat.

Re: smoother purchase advice

Mike in Mystic

>Wow.

this is what I love about this group - great information and varying points of view.

After digesting all the information I'm close to a decision to go with the LN 4.5. Now, should I get BOTH frogs, or just one? If just one, the standard or the york? (I know, I should just go ahead and get both, right?)

Thanks for everyone's participation and suggestions - I have a lot to learn, and getting thoughtful answers to these types of questions helps immeasurably.

Mike

Re: What?? NO Low Angle Smoother?

RichD

>Re the ECE Primus smoother, I'm pretty much a novice, with a very limited collection of planes (some Stanleys and some other ECEs without the adjusters) but I've been very happy with its performance. I got mine used for about $100.

Unbelievable!

Alan Hamilton

>WOW!

It's amazing (at least to me) how an unanswerable question generates so many answers.

Alan

You can tell

Dan Donaldson

>That we are all totally non-opinionated ;-))

Try Classicplanes.com

Art Geiger

>I got an A13 smoother from classicplanes.com. The build qualty is superb. At 6 1/2 lbs it gives plenty of heft and has all the attributes you've identified - it's also a contemporary made infill at a sensible price. I was so impressed I bought a miter plane also soon after.

Re: smoother purchase advice

TMStock

>I have two common and one York frog for a #4 - never use the common. There is a significant performance difference between the two pitches in nasty stuff.

Re: smoother purchase advice

Greg Sloop

>Bag the 4.5 and two frogs...no, I think you ought to get the LN 164 or the LN 62/LV 62.5 and a couple of extra irons. Cheaper than frogs and do a better job, IMHO.

Also the 62 & 164 are cheaper than the 4.5 - mass is probably a bit lower though.

I've very much enjoyed my 62 with effective cutting angle irons of 37, ~49, ~65 and a toothed blade at 37.

As far as any grain situation, there's not anything I can't do and can switch nearly instantly.

But now you'll hear about how you need to spend lots more money and develop an odd pervert like fetish about having thousands, nay tens of thousands, possibly even millions of planes. (I suspect they make a magazine with naked vintage baily centerfolds - that's the "girl next door section")

You'll hear that I'm a dope for liking to have only a few, and that somehow I can't do anything with it other than make book shelves with dimensioned pine.

*tongue firmly in cheek*

But hey, I think it does a great job and leaves me more cash rich for other items I'd rather have.

Cheers,

Greg

Re: smoother purchase advice

Mike in Mystic

>Hi Greg,

I already have the 62 with two blades (the standard 37 eff. angle and one about 54). I definitely agree with you on the versatility of the LA planes, but as you noted and my origianl question stated, I'm kind of looking for a heavier smoother and think the 4.5 will do nicely. I probably fall somewhere in between you and the guys that want to have every LN plane and tool they sell. I don't think I've reached the fetish point, but I definitely can appreciate a little variety :)

Mike