Hock or Veritas A2?

Re: I have...

Tony Zaffuto

>I have to agree (with the exception of the Clifton, though). I have blades from the other after market makers, and unscientifically, found the the Hock blades just feel better, and seem to last a bit longer. By the way, I have several #4's that have different aftermarket blades in them, that are are sharpened basically the same. The Hock, with the Hock chipbreaker is my goto #4. My old 60-1/2 with a Hock is my goto block plane (I also have a LN low agnle version--but I like the lighter old fellow).

T.Z.

Yes, it's the one from

Wiley Horne--Glendora CA

>HandAmerican. Came with a surgical black oilstone. Don't know if they're still around, but hope so.

Wiley

Re: Yes, it's the one from  *LINK*

Pam Niedermayer - Austin, TX

>


HandAmerican

Re: ... I also believe that LABU *is* superior to

Alan Hamilton

>Greg,

I think you need to look again at your post and Jonathan's reply. He didn't set up any straw man nor present an assertion disguised as a question.

Jonathan merely pointed out that in your post you did exactly what you faulted others for doing: you asserted conclusions without any supporting arguments.

In the post Jonathan responded to, you didn't include the mitigating words found in your reply to Jonathan, such as you based your opinions on your understanding of what others have said, and what your experience has been.

Jonathan resorted to no ad hominem arguments--but you did. Rather than respond to the substance of his criticism, you chose to characterize him, his post, and his motives. In so doing, of course, you did exactly what you criticised Jonathan for doing.

Alan

Thanks Pam!

Wiley Horne--Glendora CA

>

I BELIEVE...I'll Have a Scotch...

Todd Stock

>My thanks to Ron White.

The other thing I believe is that there are very few of us that do do half as well as Frank Klausz does with a beater #4 with a stock blade. I also suspect that Frank would find all this religious nonsense concerning LABU, HABD or FWBW ( the new clothing line...For Woodworkers By Woodworkers) pretty darned silly.

"Religous Nonsense" ?

Lyn J. Mangiameli

>Todd,

As one who has HABD planes at a ratio of over 10 to every 1 LABD plane.

As one who regularly uses a wide variety of hand planes and has a documeted history of reviewing quite a number of HABD planes quite favorably.

As one who has gone out of his way to develop methods to objectively compare and evaluate plane performance, and to honestly report the empirical findings to others.

As one who is an atheist in both the traditional and largest sense of the term.

And as one who has reported on the exemplary performance of LABU planes used with high effective cutting angles when assessed in objective, multirater, single blind comparisons; who has commented on the great versatility of the LABU plane; who has commented on the ease of adjustment of the LABU, and who has commented on the considerable value a new LABU plane offers in comparision to comparable HABD planes.

Given the above, I just am trying to clarify for my own understanding, am I one of those who you consider engaged in "all this religious nonsense concerning LABU HABD...." or is it possible to report on comparative performance without be considered spouting either or both religion or nonsense?

I'm sure I've been seeming testy about all of this lately, but frankly I'm both dismayed and a little frustrated that if folks aren't comfortable with a statement, they don't attempt to assess if it can be (or has been) objectively evaluated it, but instead attempt to reduce all assertions to the level of opinion or preference. Some things can be objectively determined (even some of those things on Chris's list of what he considered subjective factors), and some things can't, but I admire most those who seek to move beyond opinion and unsupported pontification. Why? because I too would like for these discussions to rise above nonsense, religious or otherwise.

Re: "Religous Nonsense" ? - long

Joel

>Lyn,

AMong the reasons there is disagreement with your conclusions is that your testing, while exhaustive, only looks at a single aspect of the result: THe quality of the surface of a planed piece of wood created by a freshly sharpened iron. As you have said many times this is the important criteria for you. And certainly it is an important criteria some of the time. It's not for example that important to me. I mill wood by hand and ease of use, longevity between sharpenings, slow failure and other properties of some planes appeal to me a lot more.

Then of course there is the question of the surface quality. As you know IMHO the single most important criteria of a planes performance (in your test - of quality of surface) is the fit and finish of the plane - some people talk about bedding quality, but fit and finish is a decent catch-phrase for it all. THe plane you consistently say is one of your top performers plane - the loopy infill - is as you have reported superbly made which bears out some of that theory and I for one certainly am loath to attribute your results to plane design when it seems even from your own data (from previous tests) that fit and finish plays such an important role.

Finally you are claiming plane x produces a better finish than plane y and the users of plane y who are already getting superb results and have never seen a better result (just similar fine results from many planes) wonder if the wide range of your results are real or the way they prepare their plane happens to produce better results than you are getting, Or you seeing minor differences that no one else can (like wine connessurs)? And these are all fair questions. THe thing about science is that results must be independantly verifieable but to my knowledge no one has tried to duplicate your results in the same way and when others preform similar but not identitical tests they don't get the same result. And in science a single exception disproves a theory so it is perfectly fair for someone to say my data don't jive with Lyns so I'm not prepared to accept his conclusions even if he has done to such pains to assemble his data.

Re: "Religous Nonsense" ?

Pam Niedermayer - Austin, TX

>All this science stuff is beginning to appear as obsession, Lyn. I don't know about you; but one of the nicest things about woodworking is that it isn't computer science, I don't have to test everything up the kazoo, don't have to write up reports, don't have to spend 2000 words when 20 will do just to thwart potential arguments, etc.

However, if you and other wants to do this, that's fine with me. I even enjoy reading about the results, in spite of my tendency to zone out on the long paragraphs and being much more comfortable with photos than words when trying to follow some process; and the research about how edges wear is extremely valuable.

But why make a simple get together to show off planes into a contest, complete with "experts?" Why castigate yourself about writing a report that you clearly don't want to write? Why worry about having the best plane? Why worry about having one of every good thing? Why not simply relax, enjoy your hobby, be happy?

With only the best intentions,

Pam

Re: "Religous Nonsense" ?

paul womack

>Why worry about having the best plane?

Now there's a (rhetorical) question I never thought I'd see in a handtool forum!

While I'm here...

Steve Knight has written in very clear terms about the difference in planing results depending on the skill of the user. Since Steve has delivered many more or less identical planes to a wide range of customers, his input seems credible.

Secondly, Lyn's testing is indeed focussed on smoothing plane use. That's his right. We're not paying him to perform tests on our behalf. His time, his choice.

The only person I know of who's done testing to anything near the level of objectivity of Lyn smoother test is Brent Beach, researching bl,ade wear.

Neither set of tests would (as Joel points out) pass the gold standard of peer reviewed scientific papers, but these two nonetheless stand head and shoulder above any other testing I've heard of.

The commonest statement, valid in its own limited context, comes from people who have just acquired their first "premium" plane, be it C&W, LN or whatever; the statement is "this is best plane I've ever used". These statements need to be relied on only in the context in which they are made.

BugBear (the best plane I've ever used is a self tuned Record #SS04)

So, Paul, what is the best plane?

Pam Niedermayer - Austin, TX

>

Honing Leather *LINK*

Don Thompson - Cutler Ridge, Florida

>I have one of those, from Hand American. I use it in the kitchen (and it has an embarrassing number of nicks).

Do you use the conditioned, or the natural side?


Hand American Honing Leather Choices

I`ll say it again.

Bob Hackett

>The best plane is the one you have at hand.

I have yet to see someone run thier hand over a suface and say"Nice,must have been finished with a 604C with a Keen Kutter iron and Clifton chip breaker".

It`s only been a relatively short span of time that manufactured planes have been used in the craft.Before that a craftsman bought an iron and made his own plane,many still do just that.

I imagine our great,great grandfathers also had grand debates about which iron was best.Some things never change.

Mainely,Bob

Best Plane?

Todd Stock

>The one that works for what I'm doing.

Look - I'm a working engineer and pilot, with not a little time in the Test and Evaluation community. The sad fact is that what is 'best' is seldom defined by convieniently derived metrics. Any testing I've seen on planes is almost entirely subjective once we get just a bit past things like measuring surface flatness, roughness, refractive characteristics, etc.

So - a few questions:

- Who here has 'orange-wired' a plane? Not just strain gauges on the blade - vibs, temps, control surface deformations, and surface friction, to name a few of the data streams that might lead to substantive variance in perceived performance for the user?

- How about blind testing of a few hundred handle/knob shapes, or blade radii by .001 increments, or sole machining patterns?

- Have we held the degrees of freedom in testing down to a few dozen? Just one example here is sole friction (which as a coefficient, changes as the sole wears during testing, or due to contamination, or due to surface temp changes...)

You get my point. Despite any semblance to reasonably rigorous testing methods, hand plane testing is very highly subjective as now practiced. Further, because there are as many methodologies of use as there are users, I view it as unlikely that what Lyn or Paul or Newbee243 will experience with a tool will be closely related to what I might see.

That said, we end up discussing gross physical characteristics, performance under very specific, never-to-be-duplicated conditions, and price.

In essence, we can say something like '...in my ever subjective opinion, this plane worked well for me (with my current methodology of use and skill level), on this task, on this material, on this date, in my shop's local micro-climate, etc."

As with religion, your results WILL vary. Have faith that my results might in some fashion be related to yours.

Re: Honing Leather (kinda long)

Wiley Horne--Glendora CA

>Hi Don,

The conditioned side. Here's some user notes...If you're applying the green stuff and using the strop 'dry', the nicks and just outright cut places will stand up a little while longer than if you're applying diamond paste and some oil. In which case, it'll get soft and spongy. Reminds me I really should get another strop. Sometime. But the nicks'll lay down real flat and you kinda forget about it. Plus they ain't hurtin' nothin'. Plus I'd have to throw out all that accumulated diamond. Probably worth some money. Maybe 15 cents. So i'm letting it ride. It's way down on the priority list below 'buy more slug bait'.

Main thing I've concluded (this is the quasi-religious anecdotal-testing part of the message--everyone else's mileage may vary) is that a leather strop is not a substitute for the next stone in line. It is possible to sharpen a dull edge on one, after a zillion strokes, but this rounds the edge. A lot. So the diamond-on-leather strop is used lightly and at a skew to (a) get the swarf off the blade, (b) get a little light oil on the blade, (c) wipe off whatever flecks of wire might still be on the edge, and (d) pass the newsprint test.

Wiley......thinking Don's kitchen knives must be way sharp.

Re: "Religous Nonsense" ?

Dean Lapinel

>It has been some time since I was regularly on a woodworking forum (pond era). I am appalled by the insensitivity, lack of respect that has been displayed by some posters.

It especially irks me to see condemnations made on one of the greater contributors to woodworkers.

Lyn has helped novices and experts through his diligent, unbiased approach to the study of WW tools, sharpeners etc... Lyn approaches these studies with a common sense that is rare these days.

I think Lyn is one of the true leaders in questioning and challenging tradition and despite the fact that he never boasts, never is swayed by financial incentives and does this for the benefit of others there are people here who have the gall to insult his contributions as obsessions and other nonsense!

Get real folks. Learn some etiquette and respectful methods of disagreement.

Re: "Religous Nonsense" ?

Todd Stock

>See my follow-on post, but let me explain the use of the subject term...

There are certain great debates in the woodworking world that really come down to personal preference - pins first/tails first, left tilt/right tilt, pull saw versus push saw, round versus rectangular dogs, and construction of planes as BU, BD, LA, HA, or whatever.

While many claim that facts support their position on these great issues, careful reading and review of even the most assiduously objective reviewer's work reveals layers of additional dependencies that render the results not much beyond the stage of "I believe X to be true, at this date and time, under these conditions, and subject to these conditions and qualifications."

Given that we cannot even agree on the basic mechanics of how a shaving is produced, most of the postings here should carry a warning...

DISCLAIMER: Works for me and might work for you; however, don't get your hopes up.

Sorta sounds like religion to me.

Re: Honing Leather (kinda long)

Paul in NJ

>Hey Wiley,

Have you ever tried a piece of hardwood like Maple for a strop instead of leather? It works for me with some of LV's green compound. I would think the hardwood deforms less than leather and you wouldn't round your bevel angles as much.

Paul Dzioba

That`s our Pam!

Bob Hackett

>In a word sensa-teeeev.

Besides,I know for a fact that Lynn has thicker skin that you and I imagine.I`ve seen him use it to good effect both here and at BP.No excuse for bad manners but...

Mainely,Bob

Re: Honing Leather (kinda long)

Dave Anderson Chester, NH

>Actually Paul I use either maple ply or even birch ply with the green compound on it. Garrett Hack swears by his diamond paste on maple ply scraps and has been trying to convert me for a coupla years. Being thrifty, (not cheap) I still have probably about a 50 year supply of the green compound left so I doubt if I'll change. It seems to work well enough for me. If I threw out the compound at a total cost of about $6, I'd lose Yankee points.

Paul, I went the other way

Wiley Horne--Glendora CA

>and have gone to 1/2-micron diamond on a metal plate. To clarify, I'm not rounding my edges--just threw in a gratuitous caution to others, based on some past experience. So I no longer strop to sharpen, but just to clean up.

That said, I am sure that a plywood or maple strop will polish an edge without rounding it. However, I prefer a 'stoned' edge over a 'stropped' edge, so have opted in favor of finer stones.

Exception: I totally agree with Lief Hanson's discussion above about motorized final stropping of gouges, and have found that, for example, Nora Hall's wheels and honing compound produce a great final hone on gouges. Provided that you're very, very careful to strop UP TO the edge, but not get right on it and round it over.

Wiley

Re: "Religous Nonsense" ?

Todd Stock

>I'm not certain when questioning a reviewer's methodology or applicability of results became a means of personal insult; however, Lyn and others offering reviews or opinions are big boys and girls, and can likely handle some honest debate. The more experienced here will be the first to acknowledge that with reviewed tools, as with hair loss remedies, your results may vary.

To be clear, I absolutely support your privilege to believe anything you wish - just don't expect me to always agree with you. Further, just because I disagree with you does not mean that I think you dress funny, although to be perfectly honest, a quick pass through any woodworking mag provides a pretty good sense of just how sartorially-challenged we as a group appear to be.

Second opinion + P.S.

Wiley Horne--Glendora CA

>Paul,

Just tried your suggestion--diamond paste on maple. And it works really nice. Thanks.

Wiley

Re: "Religous Nonsense" ?

Pam Niedermayer - Austin, TX

>Always a good idea to think twice before getting your dander up, Dean. You're new, or seem to be, and have no idea that Lyn and I've been talking online for probably 4 years now. In spite/because of that, I was very careful to voice my message as solicitiously as possible and still convey said message. Please reread it and parse carefully.

I also suspect that you took great offense when I attempted to debunk your retailer's nonsense about Shepherd infills. I don't know why, but you did. A more rational person would have realized that I was criticizing your retailer, not you. Or do you consider your choice of retailer to be a reflection on you? That would be taking consumerism to a new height.

I don't want some kind of war with you. Can we play nice now?

Pam

Re: Second opinion + P.S.

Greg Sloop, Portland Oregon

>I've been using "green" compound on MDF as a final step.

I use it just like one of the waterstones, except I only pull and not push.

Any opinion on this? I *believe* it helps, but it might just be the frog I sacrifice before I start. (Do the frog after the goat, by the way!) *grin*

Funny thing is, after "stropping" I find the edge to be lots sharper - with "sharper" being that it'll cut hair like a charm. But the tormek will do this too, and I don't think it leaves nearly as good an edge.

So, exactly how does one go about quantifying exactly how sharp the edge really is. (IMHO, the cuts the hair off my arm test is a terrible test, but I know of no other way to quantify things.)

Thoughts?

Cheers,

Greg