>Perhaps I should have added this to E bay definitions....Anyways I'm after some history and would be grateful for thoughts and opinions....I wanted a (reasonable) jointer could'nt cough up the cash for LN/Clifton/LV and just spent some money on a sargent 22" VBM apparently marked 422 via ebay, I'm happy I've got what appears to be a usable tool..Anyone tell me anything about this acquisition, it'll help with the justification excercise when the CC bill shows up...all the best Iain
>This, and almost all other planes of its era are of the Bailey type, not Bedrock. Stanley made older style (round side) Bedrock planes for Keen Kutter and Winchester. The only other older non-Stanley bedrock-frog-style planes that know of are those manufactured by Vaughn & Bushnell. Clifton and LN make them today.
I do not know of any Bedrock frog planes that were made by any other manufacturer.
>Scott Wow...thankyou very much...the principal seems the same as a bedrock but the execution different...so when did they stop manufacturing this type of mechanism...kind regards..Iain
>VBM does stand for Very Best Made and was first used as a marketing slogan in 1907 befor that it had been used on Sargent pliers. Was used on the Sargent logo as it appears on tools from 1909-1919 . Was used on ALL of Sargent planes , cheap and expensive and not on only the "Top of the Line" ones , more of a selling gimick then anything else,[think warrented superior].
The 422 plane in the ebay auction was not Sargents top of the line plane but rather just a standard plane, would corrospond to a Stanley "Bailey" no 7 . This plane "books" for between $40-$80 in the Heckel Sargent book. In my experance selling many Sargent tools his prices are a bit optimistic
Sargent did make a Bed Rock style plane.The model number of these planes corrospond to thier lentgh and one of this size would be a 22 [no 4 prefix]. These Sargent planes are in my experance very uncommon and a 22 books at $125-$250. These planes are sort of simular to Stanley square side bedrocks and the Sargent patent is actually older then stanley's. The difference is the frog screws are behind the frog right under the blade adjusting wheel.I think it could be said these as well as maybe the more common Autoset planes were Sargent top of the line planes.....Sargent planes esp. these older ones are very well made planes, I really like them, but I think this one for what it is went pretty high esp. with the wrong tote.....Todd
Thanks for the correction. I was not aware that Sargent made planes with this sort of frog. It does look different from the Bedrock, though, since there is still a step in where the frog seats. I guess this would have an advantage over the Stanley Bedrock sloping bed since the blade depth would not change when the frog was adjusted.
>Ted.......Aww shucks....a tool fool and his money are quickly parted! Ain't it always the same. Thanks for the depth of your response...At the outset, I'd figured it pretty standard fare. I wanted a jointer and then thought that I'd got lucky...I'm not a collector so really based my decision to buy on the fact that it looked reasonable and budgeting for a clifton blade i'd end up with a good usable tool at $140ish and not LN's $400 cheers Iain
>These Sargents "Bedrocks" were only made for 8 years from 1910-18 so you can see how they would be uncommon. I have a no.8 [Stanley 3 size] that I should clean up and redo, idiot that sold it to me spray painted it, but think I only gave $10 for it....Out in the shop somwhere maybe I will dig it out tomorrow and post a photo. I saw a rough 4 size one at an auction a few months back that I should have gotten. Imagine it went cheap but I didn't feel like hanging around all day to get it. They are a pretty neat plane though the frog makes them look kind of strange.....Todd
In the big scheme of things, you got a very nice, clean jointer for an acceptable price. Thing to do now is enjoy it, and practice edge jointing and the like.
But here's something to think about, considering you've only got a dozen or so buys, and may have many more: Analyze the bidding. Go back and reconstruct the bidding as it went down, and ask yourself what you probably would have paid for the plane if you had dropped your number in only once, and at the last moment. There are free services that will do this for you.
>Wiley, thanks for your advice ref bidding, its something I try to do but was out of the country/away from a 'puter and in meetings at the time of closure....I would have gone to �77!...My alternative was buying a new stanley/record, plastic, warp's etc. which would have cost the better part of $170in the UK, then there's the need for a decent blade so I'd be in to a very ordinary tool for well over $200...With the sargent I figure I've bought something just a little different, possibly/likely better than a new equivilent and paid to my mind an acceptable figure...I wanted something to swish over the edges of boards out of my planer....and I figure this'll do it fine.
Here's a laugh though...My first ever e-bay transaction..I did a similar thing (purchase wise)with a Calvert Stevens CS88 (4.5) and every time I've picked it up since I just feel I got a bargin....
>I don't see how the frog clamping screws are accessed with the blade installed. There seem to be 3 or 4 frog screws and an adjusting screw. Looks to me like one (or 2) of the frog screws are obstructed with the blade installed. I may be dense this morning. JR
>Now that is a nice plane. How do you like the Norris style adjuster? It is standard cast iron though and I read on another forum about a broken one due to a drop. Heartbreaking.JR
>Hey Joe, the CS88 was clearly in someones collection being taken apart and polished more than used, to the extent that the protective lacquer totally unmarked was still on the cast iron and the cutting iron had never been honed..It came with a fancy wood case and a signed (Mr Stevens/Mr calvert)manufacturers certificate..To be honest it strikes me as more marketing than function, hence the bailey style and not bedrock frog..Kinda eye candy for tool junkies...That said... Yep its a very nice plane in use, condiderably heavier than a standard 4.5 At first I was a little dissapointed with the Norris adjuster, just seems to lack finess, in all directions...now I just live with it...Any tips would be welcome....cheers Iain
>I've seen one of those sitting in an antique mall I frequent--been there for over a year. #4 size, but marked $25.00. Seemed high, given that the tote was badly cracked and the over-all condition only fair. If I didn't have four or five #4's already I may have had some interest in it then.
Since it is not a common plane, I may have to stop in and make an offer for it.
>I have a CS88 also. When I got it I sharpened the blade and went to have some fun with it. I found the adjuster some what disappointing. It's a nice heavy plane and with some fussing it produces nice shavings. Marketing yup� with the Clifton SS cap iron it has all the bells and whistles. Mine resides in its box for the most part now.
>hello scott, mines pretty much a full time user and I enjoy the oddity value...the case and bits and pieces are stored away...have you ever tried it with an alternative iron? Is the CS88 the only type they produced or did they make other models??Ref the adjuster; I look at current LV bench planes that have adopted the same method of adjustment and see that they've addressed the issue with grub screws at the base of the iron...Pretty clear to me that they had the same problem regarding consistency of adjustment, ..that extra machining has got to eat into the profit of what are very good value planes. I'm sure if they could get away without the extra support provided by the screws they would
>Hi Lain, Nope, never tried a different iron in it. How about you?
The CS88, is the only one like it that Record made.
There are other manufactures that incorporated the Norris style adjuster into metal planes I can�t remember the names right now.
I can�t comment on the LV planes. I�ve never touched one, too ugly for my taste. Looking at them I would agree with you about the screws. I remember LV saying something about how the screws help keep the blade straight (i.e. to help get a full width shaving when planning).
You got me wanting to pull it out again and play with it some more.
