A question about backlash in Stanley planes

Re: A question about backlash in Stanley planes

Joel

>all planes have backlash - the trick is getting used to advancing the iron from only one direction. with practice it becomes automatic and I know all my planes must have backlash - but I have never noticed it for years.

Re: A question about backlash in Stanley planes

William Duffield, on the Cohansey

>I've gotta' agree completely with Joel. If you tried to decrease backlash to zero, frictional forces would keep the adjustment mechanisms from moving at all. Less backlash makes it quicker to make adjustments, but the same procedures must still be followed for precision. You're better off learning how to make the adjustments, and then make them automatically, on a sloppy mechanism, than to rely on the precision of a tighter mechanism, and then not understand what is going wrong and how to fix it when you have to make a really critical adjustment. You still have to account for backlash, even though the more closely engineered and machined plane might cost you a lot more.

Still, I know it is frustrating, especially when the plane is so sloppy that two, supposedly independent, adjustments seem to be mutually incompatible.

It depends on the individual plane, but sometimes it helps if you back up the depth adjuster until it just starts to retract the blade, before making a lateral adjustment, but then always running it back down before actually applying it to the work. Also, I have found that maximum tightness on the cap iron screw helps, but a much looser grip on the lever cap screw works better.

You can't do much about the gaps between the yoke and the cap iron, or between the lateral adjuster and the slot in the blade, unless you want to replace some components with ones you have machined yourself to much closer tolerences, but you can help the consistency of your adjustments and the feedback the plane gives you by fettling the bedding surface between the frog and the blade. The smoother and flatter the better, of course.

Re: A question about backlash in Stanley planes

Derek Cohen (in Perth, Australia)

>Hi Joel

The problem is I am noticing the backlash more now because of other planes in which I don't have such problems (for example, my LV bevel up planes - which adjust smoothly either way - and my woodies, which just require a judicious tap of a hammer).

While I do understand that I might have to accept that this is the ideosyncracy of Stanley construction quality, I am also finding it harder to adjust the blades as precisely as I would like: a little too much extension ... Ok, wind it back allll the way ... oh, rats .. a little too much adjustment .... wind it back again allllll the way.

Surely someone out there must have a cure for this?

Regards from Perth

Derek

Re: A question about backlash in Stanley planes

Paul in NJ

>Check your lever cap screw and adjustment wheel stud for play where they attach to the frog. You can apply some blue 'Loctite' thread locker on them to tighten them up.

Paul Dzioba

Re: A question about backlash in Stanley planes

Ernie Miller Topeka

>I guess the only answer you will like is replace all tham Stanleys with either LN's or Steve Knight planes you can send the offending one to me. Probably do to the differance in timbers I don't seem to have the same problems as you. I hope you can find a work around.

Re: A question about backlash in Stanley planes

Todd Stock

>Two places for backlash to occur - the adjuster yoke and the chipbreaker/yoke interface. Neither is easy to fix. You'll end up destroying a yoke if it's the cast type (I think the last Records and UK Stanleys had two piece sheet metal yokes, but as a general rule, don't bother).

Technique on Bailey-style planes is to run the blade back then spin the adjuster knob back in (clockwise) until resistance is felt, then adjust the blade forward as desired. If you are not getting resistance prior to blade movement, tighten up the cap screw a bit (not too much) and try it again.

It is an acquired skill to get a 1/16 or 1/32 of a turn.

Shims...

Scott Burr in Ben Lomond CA

>Try to get a measurement of the slop between the yoke and the depth adjuster. Cutout "washers" from Mylar or similar slippery material (I suppose thin nylon washers would work also). Cut through 1 side into the center of the washer (make it look like a lock washer). Remove the depth adjuster nut and place washers on the nut. Reassemble the nut.

Re: A question about backlash in Stanley planes

John Aniano in NJ...

>Derek,

I sort of like the backlash in the various metal planes I have! I especially enjoy having to remember that the Sargent VBM planes advance and retract the blade in a manner OPPOSITE to the Stanley models. It's nice to have the intimate knowledge of each tool and it's pluses and minuses. I've never felt the need to reduce the backlash and it only takes a tiny bit more time to get them adjusted with the backlash.

As an engineer by training myself, we often have the feeling that backlash is something to be eradicated. Yes, it can be irksome at times, but I waste far more time doing other tasks in my shop than dealing with the fact that I have to turn the blade adjust knob 2-3 times to advance and retract a blade. If it really is a time issue for you, by all means try to figure a way to tighten it up; many here already posted good suggestions. I'd suggest just live with the tool and it's idiosyncrasies, especially if it is an older model tool.

Just my own $0.02 worth, and now I get off the soapbox...

John

Thanks,,,, and conclusion

Derek Cohen (in Perth, Australia)

>Many thanks for the replies.

Looking back at my original post, and then follow-up, I recognise that I wrote it at a moment of irritability. The fact is that I do not expect my Stanley planes to have the accuracy of say a LV or be used on timber where only a HNT Gordon will function happily. I use them because they are a reminder of by-gone days, and this brings a warm glow. Tuned well (and mine are), they produce wonderful results within their envelope (which is primarily softwood). For a short while I allowed myself to forget this all and get sidetracked by a small, unnecessary detail.

I think it is possible to get rid of the backlash. Scott's idea of a shim for the brass adjuster wheel is probably all one can do, while tight(er) screw connections are first on the agenda. However, I shall not be attempting any modifications, even if they were possible and perfectly retrofitable, since they would remove the primary reason I use the Stanley planes.

Have a safe weekend.

Regards from Perth

Derek