>The long promised review on the LV Scrub Plane has finally landed - it took a bit more planning and construction than I anticipated. My thanks to Rod Peterson who has prepared it for the Articles section. Since that may still be some time away, I have included below a link to my "website". Please not that there are two broken picture links there, Fortunately very insignificant and, hopefully, soon to be repaired.
It is a little bit more than just a review, and I hope that you bear with this.
Enjoy and all feedback and criticism is welcome as usual.
>I have been using the LV scrub on what is probably better described as a timber framing project. I have not had to sharpen it yet either, and I did a very cursory job originally of sharpening it (I have the carbon blade). The rear handle feels very comfortable and is large enough to provide a hold for my entire hand. My biggest problem has been rust, the same problem I have with new planes more but all planes in general. I enjoyed your review and am anxious to try out my scrub on hardwood boards. At this early stage it seems to me that the better-than-expected quality, utility and reduced introductory price of the LV scrub has made it a very satisfying buy.
>Thanks, Derek. That was a well thought out, well researched and well presented review. It makes me want to retire my #40. In retrospect, I suppose I should have turned my own knob for it instead of buying a replacement the same size as the original. Even more than the short tote, the undersized knob makes the Stanley more uncomfortable than it needs to be. At the very least, I'm going to seek out some L-V planes at the next woodworking show or CJWA meeting (if someone in the association has one), so I can try out the new tote design.
Now, you've got me thinking, which is usually dangerous. So, the question for discussion is, what are the advantages of a three finger grip over a four finger grip? I think there must be some, or backsaws would come with bigger handles. With backsaws, it would be easy to say that it was for increased accuracy of guidance, but a lot of scrub plane users assume the scrub plane is more a brute force tool than a precision tool. Maybe you're right, you need two scrub planes, and the smaller, finer one needs to be used with more finesse, if the next plane is not required to do most of the work that the scrub should have done.
>Maybe you're right, you need two scrub planes, and the smaller, finer one needs to be used with more finesse, if the next plane is not required to do most of the work that the scrub should have done.
It's all a question of nomenclature. I have a wooden jack and a metal jack. The wooden jack has quite a pronounced camber, the metal jack very little.
The wooden jack is quite effective enough to follow my (converted conffin bodied smoother) scrub.
>On a scrub or a low angle plane there's really no place to put your fore finger. I think a three fingered grip is uncomfortable on these. On my new scrub, the four fingered grip has been comfortable and seems to provide great control owing to the need for more "push" on the plane. I find myself using a three fingered grip on my LN LA jack all the time. When I switch to a four fingered grip it works just as well and feels better(?) I guess this is what the ergonomics of the plane seem to suggest.
>I thought Derek wrote a very fine piece also. His photo sequences and especially the level of qualification he provides, is excellent.
A small bit of personal experience....I took Adam's advice a while back and bought a traditional-design jack (C&W). Blade comes with a 3" radius camber on it. I've had a little time now to compare its operation to an LN40-1/2 scrub, which also comes with the 3" radius camber.
Both these planes make the same gullies in the wood (for a given blade extension). They're both high quality tools. And both very comfortable. C&W jack comes with a strike block ahead of the blade. And it is handled, which I find a benefit.
But what I have really come to appreciate about the C&W is what you get with any wedged woodie--advance/retract the blade with hammer taps. It's fast and effective and repeatable even for fine adjustment. Derek made a good point about the desirability of adjustment in his article. IMO, the ability to quickly change the blade depth on a scrub or true olde-tyme jack (as opposed to a No. 5) is a way-underrated benefit. Scrubbing is not always about performing mayhem on wood. In fact, I find that a danger. It's not too difficult to rip the whole 3/16" deep curl out of curly birch or curly maple if the blade is 1/32" too deep. The C&W jack is a plane I reach for a lot.
I don't think that for tropical or Australian wood, the adjustability benefit overcomes the heft of a heavy plane--Derek certainly didn't find it so. But for temperate-zone hardwoods, the traditional woodie jack, toted, and cambered like a scrub with 3" radius, has won out in my shop over a very good non-adjustable metal competitor.
>I also prefer the C&W jack for the rear tote and adjustability; but I come at it from the horned wooden European scrub viewpoint. I think I'd like to have a tote (horned or not) of some sort on the front, too, would certainly speed up my work.
>The horned planes are plentiful and cheap(even on the dreaded `bay).
Speaking as a person who has limited capacity in his right arm,that horn comes in real handy and is far more comfortable than an iron plane`s front knob.
Even before the arm problems I found the horned scrub easier to control and use.Just my .02.
I should have gotten back to you about this a couple of weeks ago,but as you know I've been under the weather for a while.
The camber on the jack iron is about a 5 1/2" radius. The five gallon plastic that I use to mark them out has an 11"+ diameter on the top edge. So now the truth is out about C&W.
>If you're going to get with modern marketing practices, you need to refer to that technique as "FGB 2000 measurement standards." The "2000" is thrown in just for completeness; the critical part is the acronym for "five gallon bucket."
