Opinions - Please

OK Your...

Scott Burr in Ben Lomond CA

>Ugly and your mother dressed you funny;~).

Just kidding!

I feel that the extra length (this also = weight) is important here especially on long boards. So if it were me and I had the denaro I'd pop for the LN over the 607 (I own a 607). The LN weighs more, has a better blade (and chip breaker as an option), and is made much better than a Stanley.

Scott, feelin a bit goofy today.

Re: Opinions - Please

Frank D. in Montreal

>Hi Tony,

I'll start by warning you that I'm not the most experienced guy around.

I started out with a #7 jointer and I was very happy with, untill I tried a #8. I never use my #7 now. The extra length does make a difference (couldn't see myself jointing a long board with a #6, although skill is a significant factor too) and the extra width of the #8 is great for face jointing. The heft of the #8 is also a bonus. So if you can afford a LN #7, I'd say break open the penny jar and get the #8.

Re: OK Your...

dave caudill

>I love the LN tools that I have and like you say if you have a lot of extra money sitting around collecting dust then you should maybe buy the whole line of LN tools. You would have one fine set of tools!

The LN #7 is a great tool and it has slight modifications to it that make it a little different than the #607 but not anything you can't do by adding a new blade and maybe a Cliton chipbreaker to the #607. The LN planes are copies of the Stanley Bedrock series. The #6 is also a nice plane and some use it for jointing instead of a #7 with good results. The added (4 inches)length is nice though.

If you don't have a lot of spare cash or you are a bit more frugal you could spend it elsewhere and still end up with a great set of tools. I have a $30 Stanley #7 that is not pretty in comparison to the LN but with that extra $370 I can buy an aftermarket blade and a few other tools to boot. The old tools do a great job with a little work and its nice to recycle and old tool. I take great pride in my $30 #7 that works so well. And yes I have hads the opprtunity to try the LN #7 and it too is a dream to use.

All in all its up to you. I mix and match depending on how I feel at the time and if I have soem spare money to burn. I have a few of the LN planes and like them a lot but often go back to an old one that I have a better feel for. Sometimes its an old junker that makes you happy and sometimes its the Ferrari. You're going to have to experiment to find out. Thats the fun part!

Dave

HIJACK: Planing height?

Don Thompson, Cutler Ridge, Florida

>Frank, how can you joint that board down so low?

(or, are you REALLY short?)

P.S. I agree with you on the #608.

Re: Opinions - Please

Steven McKinley from Calgary

>Tony,

if you really want a new one, what about a Clifton? I don't own one myself, but I've heard good things about them.

My jointer plane is a Bedrock 607 that was in very poor shape and I fixed it up to the point of even re-jappaning it. With the new blade and chipbreaker. I have to laterly adjust the blade with a brass hammer, but the performance is good.

Steven

Re: Opinions - Please

Barry Va Beach

>Tony, I have a Clifton 6 and a Stanley #7. If I were you I would check the pricing of Clifton 7 versus the LN 7. I have the LN jack plane and it is great, but so is the Clifton #6. So based on that limited sample, if the CLifton #7 is much cheaper than the LN I would go with Clifton. If they are priced the same, based on the raves on this board for most LN planes, I would go with the LN. BTW I use the Stanley 7 ( non bedrock) with a japanese laminated iron and while it works fine, the Clifton seems like it has more mass ( though I haven't weighed them)

Re: HIJACK: Planing height?

Frank D. in Montreal

>Hi Don,

Don't you know that us French-Canadians are shorter than you Americans?

The long version is that the board in the pic was the widest of a series of boards I had to joint. My workhorses are around 35", plus a 2 x 10 on top, plus the 18" board and the holders, that made the planing height around 55", a tad too high for me. I'm 5'9", and I prefer to work low (my bench is 33" high--low...), so I did that board on the ground. I did the other ones on my workhorses though, they were around 12" wide.

My opinion - #6 and long wooden

Tim of San Leandro

>I'd get the Veritas #6....and if you want a long jointer, get something in the 30" or longer range....which just about means a woodie. I bet Steve Knight would make you a jointer 30+ inches, and it would definitely cost less than a new LN #8.

Re: Opinions - Please

Jim in Burlington Ontario

>Tony If you want to drop by I have a Bedrock 608 you can try out for a few weeks to help you make up your mind. Having tried out LN#8 and the 608 there is a difference I just couldn't see a $300+ US difference.

Re: HIJACK: Planing height?

Don Thompson, Cutler Ridge, Florida

>Well, you are taller than me. I am about 5-foot 8-inches.

My back hurts just looking at that setup.

Re: My opinion - #6 and long wooden

Tony Augruso

>A wooden plane. Never tried one. I've always wondered about the odds of a wooden plane warping in my basement with changes in humidity.

Also, can they be adjusted as easily as a metal plane, or is that skill as well?

Tony

Re: Opinions - Please

Tony Augruso

>Thanks for the offer Jim. I am taking some time off next week, so If I can work it out with all the things my wife has planned for me, I'll stop by and take yours for a spin.

Tony

Re: OK Your...

Tony Augruso

>Thanks for the response. I see your point about experimenting. I can also see how experimenting can equal "spend more money". I would prefer to get one plane and kind of stick with that. I have a LN 4 1/2 which I really like.

I want a good tool and I don't want to spend a huge amount of time getting an inadequate tool to work adequately. However, if an older tool will do nicely with little work, I'm willing to go down that road as well.

If I have to, I'll wait a little while longer and get the more expensive plane.

Thanks,

Tony

Re: Opinions - Please

Tony Augruso

>Oh great! :) Now I have another plane to consider. This decision is going to be harder than I thought.

Tony

Re: OK Your...

Tony Augruso

>Scott,

How much did you pay for your 607?

Thanks,

Tony

It's a skill, but

Dan Moening

>its not difficult to learn.

I recently had an opportunity to use some very nice Japanese handplanes. It didn't take long to identify how much of a tap was required to move the iron. I suspect if I were to own one I could set the iron for a very thin shaving more quickly than a metal bodied plane.

And on the plus side tapping a wooden plane in the same place has the same effect on the iron across planes. Whereas, Stanleys as an example, metal planes do not all have the same amount of backlash...or the same thread handiness (left/right).

That's my limited experience.

Dan.

Exactly........

Todd Hughes

>how do you feel a LN plane is "made much better" then an original bed rock plane? Exactly how much more does a LN 7 plane weigh over a 8 lb. 607 and is this extra weight really that important in the use of the plane?. Can you ,[or anybody]tell looking at a planed piece of wood if it was planed with a Stanley 607 or a LN plane?....Just curious.....Todd

Re: My opinion - #6 and long wooden

Steve Kubien

>Adjusting a wooden plane is not that tough. Like some others, I find it easier than adjusting metal body planes. I just received my Knight jointer (24" long. Coulda/shoulda gone longer) and I cannot see where I'll use my #7 again.

My 2cents

Steve Kubien

Ajax, Ontario

remove the _9 to email

Re: HIJACK: Planing height?

Paul M. in San Diego

>Thanks for the description. I had this image of you doing the Chuck Berry duck-walk along that board while jointing. ;-)

adjusting iron in a woodie is easy!

Tim of San Leandro

>adjusting woodies is very easy. I find it easier than any metal plane adjuster I've tried...though my experience there is limited to Stanley Bailey, Sargent, Veritas and Lie Nielsen mechanisms. The Veritas mechanism on their low angle smoother....a Norris style adjuster...is by far the best of the metal bodied plane adjusters but, IMO, pales in comparison to the ease, speed and control in adjusting a wedged iron in a woody. I also don't have many miles on woodies. After about 30 seconds, you'll know what you're doing. I find lateral adjustments with metal bodies planes the most difficult...and the backlash can be a pain. Lateral adjustment with a woodie is tapping the side of the iron and there is no such thing as backlash with a wedged iron.

And I love my Steve Knight planes....and will likely be getting a longer than 24 inch jointer. I concur with Steve Kubien....I shoulda gotten a longer than 24 inch jointer right from the beginning...but my 24 inch long Knight jointer is a very very very fine and accurate tool. Too bad I can't say the same for my woodworking skills... :~o ;-)

As for the plane staying true in a shop with variable humidity....Steve treats his planes with some proprietary finish concoction that is supposed to help stabilize the wood. I also store my planes as I would store a milled stick...I have a small stick that keeps plane off of direct contact with a flat surface...essentially like stickering milled boards.

Tim

Alright alright...

Frank D. in Montreal

>Here's one I salvaged from the trash...flex those knees!:)

For your back Don

Frank D. in Montreal

>Hope you feel better :)

Ahhhhhh...... better.

Don Thompson, Cutler Ridge, Florida

>BTW, nice little urban yard.

LN/Stanley Differences

Don Thompson, Cutler Ridge, Florida

>1.) LN uses ductile iron. Guaranteed not to break. Heavier castings.

2.) Better machining and fit. The soles are flat within .0015" and square to the same degree.

3.) Thicker blade of better metal (A2 Cryo)

4.) Better, machined chipbreaker (see picture below).

5.) Better machined parts for finer blade adjustment.

6.) Bronze frog and lever cap.

7.) Satisfaction Guaranteed.