Skew Block Plane - Useful?

Re: Skew Block Plane - Useful?

Jim in Burlington Ontario

>It's not the plane that I reach for. Personally it's alot easier to use the Record 778. As for useing it as a block plane it doesn't get much use for that either.

Re: Skew Block Plane - Useful?

Derek Cohen (in Perth, Australia)

>Hank

I don't think that the #140 is the tool for the job you describe. I use a Stanley #140 on cross grain work, but this is restricted to trimming tenons and raising panels. Mine does a very nice job here.

For "shallow cross grain rabbets" the tool of choice is probably a Stanley #46, since it has skew blades, which are the recommendation for cross grain work. The #45, #50 and #78 are straight blades. Now you really should not mention the #46 in my earshot since I am still struggling to come to terms with mine. No matter what I do, I simply do not get nice, clean grooves, rabbets, dados - whatever. One edge is always fuzzy. And - yes - I do have a sharp knicker. I will keep practicing. :(

I get better success when I score the wall line deeply (and repeatedly) with a sharp knife, then chisel out the waste with a wide blade. Level out with a #71 router after this.

Regards from Perth

Derek

Re: Skew Block Plane - an opinion against consensu

Andrew F in Australia

>Hi Hank,

I agree with the other two posters here - many other ways to make a cross-grain rebate. The rebate plane is the tool for the job, the router plane would also work

I often read as general consensus that a block plane is useful in cabinetmaking. I usually don't touch one however and wouldn't really miss it if I didn't have one.

I'll admit to touching a block plane maybe once every six months, probably more closer to once per year. I touch a smoother even less - I've carried one around in a toolbox for the last three years and it hasn't seen any action at all.

Generally, planes I use are a No. 6 (for all work,) a card scraper and a shoulder plane if I'm cleaning up tenons/rebate shoulders.

I think I've answered your question with the above statement - the skewed block plane is a better option than a standard (non-adjustable mouth type) block plane.

But I don't really find a pressing need in practice for one, in my experience.

Best regards,

Andrew

A shoulder plane is another option

Ian in Sydney

>I'll admit to being a bit of A block plane Fan. I really like the way you can wrap you hand arround one.

However, for what you want to do I've had great success with a #78 rebate plane.

Alternatively, a shoulder plane will do the job (and they can be assembled into sets!)

Thanks, Guys, for The Input

Hank Knight in SC

>I don't hear a ground swell of praise here for the skew block plane, so I think I'll pass on the purchase. I don't own a 46 either; and, from Derek's comments, it doesn't sound like I'll be investing in one soon. I can go with what I've got. I'll kerf the shoulders of he rabbets, chisel out most of the waste and clean up with a large shoulder plane. Thanks for your input. You guys have saved me $400 I can probably better spend elsewhere.

terminology

Adam Cherubini

>Never used the plane in question.

The joint you describe is called a fillester (aka cross grain rabbet). If you get a chance, read my latest PW article which addresses this very issue (rumplestiltskin).

Long story short, the tool for this job is the fillester plane. If this job is rare for you, I'd advise carefully making it as others have said with a cutting gauge or backsaw and a skew rabbet.

Adam

Re: terminology

Patrick Gibbons, Houston

>Should the skew slant in towards the wood or away from it? I'm left handed and wonder if my sinister condition demands a different skew orientation as well as a guide on a different side.

Re: Thanks, Guys, for The Input

William Duffield, on the Cohansey

>Use the Force, Luke!

You would do well to do a search of the archives for some more positive comments by myself, Lyn, Todd Stock and others on the L-N Skew Rabbet and especially for several other very good usage recommendations of these versatile and well built planes. Comments and experiences with the Stanley #140 are not pertinent. This is not the same plane. It has features and performance far beyond the Stanley.

The main reason most skew rabbets don't get more use than they do is because jigging them for a quick rehoning is difficult. Good hand honing skills are necessary for efficient use of this plane, as for any plane with a skewed blade. (That's why Lyn keeps asking for an enhanced alignment jig for the new LV honing guide.) Also, a low angle adjustable mouth block plane is a better choice for surface finishing of difficult woods, because the skew rabbet doesn't have an adjustable mouth. Therefore, many will pick up one of those first for many other tasks for which the Skew Rabbet is quite suitable, just because the other block plane is laying closer and feels more familiar.

The reason you got more negative comments is that they are easier to dash off and post, especially if they think, from the tone of your question, that that is what you want to hear, than are the complicated explanations of it's good points, and some of us can get a bit tired of doing it over and over again, often to no good effect.

Hear, hear

Pam Niedermayer - Austin, TX

>

Re: Thanks, Guys, for The Input

paul womack

>The main reason most skew rabbets don't get more use than they do is because jigging them for a quick rehoning is difficult. Good hand honing skills are necessary for efficient use of this plane, as for any plane with a skewed blade.

I have little trouble; I use a crowned wheel, top clamping honing guide, and use the guide to accurately control bevel angle. Skew angle is eyeballed when putting the blade in the jig, and fine control of skew angle achieved by differential hand pressure, which is why I use the crowned wheel honing guide.

BugBear

Yes!

Adam Cherubini

>The skewed blade should have its forward most portion against the shoulder. This naturally forces the blade into the shoulder. You may be better off with a square rabbet.

Re: Skew Block Plane - Useful?

Dean in Burlington

>Hi Hank,

I'm going to really confuse you and go against what everyone is saying (except William) and say this is a great plane/planes to have. I have one and love it.

Now you must remember that this is closer to a specialty plane which means you will put it on the shelf sometimes and not use it but when you need it, it comes in handy. Heck I just purchased a set of 98/99's which are rarely used and really specialized but since I've had it i've used them twice and I don't know how I would have done the job without them. They are one of those planes that you only need a couple of times a year but when you need them they come in handy.

Anyways back to the 140. It will do exactly what you want here and do it well. I use mine for this and I think the feel of the block plane in the hand is better than a fillister or rabbat plane (sorry Adam) when cutting these shallow rabbats. But like everything else it's all about personal preference. There is alway 10 ways to do a job.

But if you are looking for other jobs the 140 can do so it doesn't sit on the shelf alot then you can use the 140 to put a small rabbat on the inside of you tail board when doing handcut dovetails. This will lock in the board when you place it on the pin board when tranfering over the tails. It does a great job at that and will improve your dovetails because the transfer is one of the hardest parts about dovetails. You can also use it to clean up your tennon cheeks. So I'm sure you will find a lot of uses for them.

But if you want to save money then get them without the knickers. I find no use for these seeing you just score the rabbet with a marking gage first anyways. Also....just start with 1 plane. I only have one (RH) and haven't seen a use for the Left handed one yet. They are skewed to help with tearout and grain direction but like I said I've been able to use my right handed version with no problems so far everywhere.

Good Luck and never be upset about adding another hand plane to your collection :)

Re: terminology

William Duffield, on the Cohansey

>You can make the original L-N do the job, even if you are left handed. Turn your bench hook around and drop it over the back edge of the bench or over the front edge of the tool tray and pull the #140 towards you. It's not as comfortable as pushing it, but it does work. I'm left handed, and I've done it that way on occasion. I think it's still more comfortable than pushing the ungainly #78.

Re: terminology

Hank Knight in SC

>Adam, thanks for the corretion on terminology. I have indeed read your Rumplestiltskin article and have praised it on this forum and elsewhere. Unfortunately, I have not committed the terminology to memory yet, but I'm working on it. I was afraid I was using an improper term but I didn't have your reference in front of me and I figured everyone would understand "cross grain rabbet." Sorry for the error. I promise to do better.

Re: Thanks, Guys, for The Input

Hank Knight in SC

>William, thanks for the comments. I did, indeed, look up your and other's previous remarks on the skew block plane and those are the chief reasons I'm interested in purchasing one. What they didn't tell me is how frequently the plane gets used in your work and how well it does a broad range of jobs. I understand they are excellent for some tasks, but if they are so specialized that they are relegated to a very narrow range of applications, I may want to reconsider my purchase options. I have a pretty full assortment of planes so I'm not adverse to buying specialty planes. In fact, I'm looking to add more specialty planes to my *amem* collection, but I still would like to consider how really useful any new acquisition might be.

Thanks again for your reply.

Hank

Crowned wheel, top clamping?

Alice Frampton, UK

>Would that be the Marples? I'll have to try that...

Cheers, Alf

Thanks Dean

Hank Knight in SC

>Your reply was exactly what I was looking for. In fact, your suggestion for using the skew angle block plane to cut a shallow filletster (I think that's the right term) for registering dovetails is precisely what I'm planning to do with it. And your recomendation to stick to the right hand version cuts the purchase outlay in half. Thanks again.

Hank

Re: terminology

Pam Niedermayer - Austin, TX

>I think knawing it out with your teeth is better than using the 78.

Pam

sorry

Adam Cherubini

>Hank,

Sorry, buddy. Forgive me if I sounded condescending, which means talking down to...(I love that. It was a Saturday Night Live bit).

Seriously, sorry if my answer was brusk. I didn't mean to chastise you. I really need to work on my manners.

Adam

Re: Thanks, Guys, for The Input

Pam Niedermayer - Austin, TX

>The only block plane I have besides the LN 140 is the LN LA Jack. I got the 140 because it would do all the jobs of a regular block plane plus some things only it could do.

Pam

Re: Thanks Dean

Dean in Burlington

>Glad to help. I recommend the brass version....it's so perty.

Re: Thanks Dean

William Duffield, on the Cohansey

>I'm being picky, but they're cast in bronze, not brass. And there is no ductile iron version of this plane, at least not that I've seen. They might have produced a limited edition nickel bronze version for Clarence Blanchard to sell to collectors, signed and numbered, that is white instead of orange, but I don't follow that market.

Re: sorry

Hank Knight from SC

>Adam, in responding to you, my tongue was planted firmly in my cheek. I didn't consider your remarks condescending. I just didn't want you to think I don't read your stuff when it's published. I do and I enjoy it immensely. By the way, we're still planning to get by Pennsbury later this month, probably the 19th or 20th. The woodworking (cabinetmakers?) shop won't be open, but I plan to look in the windows.

Hank

Re: sorry, too

William Duffield, on the Cohansey

>I didn't think your response (this one, at least) was any more preachy than mine was. In any case, I should be apologizing, too, for chastizing all those who replied truthfully that they didn't find the plane as useful as they had hoped.

In the U.S., according to John Whelan, the accepted spelling is now filletster, not fillister, but probably wasn't in the 18th Century. If anyone wants to have fun with plane design terminology, check out his The Wooden Plane, Its History, Form, and Function. With this weapon, you would totally bamboozle them over on the WC Trivia Forum. Do you know what a Jarvis and a Nelson are, or how about a Listing Router? Those are just a few examples out of many off of just one page, and the book is over 500 pages.