# 5 1/2, or L-A Jack???

Re: # 5 1/2, or L-A Jack???

Dan Clermont in Burnaby

>Hi Bob,

I own the LN 5 1/2 york pitch and the low angle jack and have two blaes for the jack.

I absolutley love my 5 1/2 and wouldn't give it up for the world as I really like bevel down planes. The weight behind the 5 1/2 makes it go through all of the hard figured woods without hesitation.

I have two blades for the low angle jack. One bevelled at 37 1/2 degrees and the other is at around 70 degrees approaching the angle of a scraper plane.

That said, the low angle jack is more versatile but in my shop I would prefer to have individaul LN #9 miter plane, Scraper plane and a 5 1/2

Dan clermont

Re: # 5 1/2, or L-A Jack???

Derek Cohen (in Perth Australia)

>Bob

What I suggest may sound a little heretical at first.

I would use the LA Smoother for your shooting board. Frankly, the length of a plane does not make any difference in this situation since the plane is guided by the shooting board. It is not the same situation as when you are flattening a long board. To illustrate this, I often use my low angle LN 60 1/2 block plane to trim thin sections on the shooting board.

In my opinion it is not necessary to have a heavy plane for a shooting board. Yes, a heavy plane will carry momentum better through harder timbers, but a sharp blade will help in such situations as well. I do have and use a LV LA Jack on my shooting board, but I also use a Stanley #62 LA Jack and often prefer the latter for its more delicate feel. (Yes, and I could use a LA Smoother, and I would happily do so, as I have many times in the past, but as you can see this is really unnecessary).

Instead of buying the LA Jack (the LV version is the one I know and it is a terrific plane, no doubt about that), since you specify flattening boards, I would be looking at the forthcoming LV BU Jointer. This is a sensational plane with its adjustable mouth, and it has a versatility in keeping withthe BU design. You can open the mouth and take thick shavings. You can close it right down and smooth long sections of difficult grain (I am not sure if the LV BU Jointer is really just a long smoother in disguise!). It will do a better job of keeping long sections flat than a LA Jack will do.

What about a dedicated Jack? Sure, if you want a jack get a jack (although you already do have a MF #5). But if you want to meet the requirements that you specified, get the Jointer instead.

Regards from Perth

Derek

Re: # 5 1/2, or L-A Jack???

mikew

>Hi Bob,

I don't know what you'll shoot or how you will ultimately use for shooting. I usually opt for my LN #9 to shoot with. Most of my shooting boards actually have a chute for the plane to ride in, though that can limit the amount of "feed" one can advance the material being shot.

Because of that, I do have the chute adjustable to enable dropping it if the material allows for a heavier cut.

Shown in the picture is some veneer being shot on a shooting board I made for that. I like the fact the #9 has the upper straight side as when it is used in a board with a chute, it registers on that long upper side.

I have also recently made a fence for it that uses the side handle knob to attach it to the plane. I then use the #9 to square an edge that, after jointing, is still a little off. A pass or two max.

Mike

Re: # 5 1/2, or L-A Jack???

Bob Fawcett

>Bob,

I have a LV Bevel UP Smooth and a Low Angle Jack. The blades are interchangeable. This gives you a 37degree cut and a 50degree cut. I shoot with the Jack. Haven't tried the smooth for shooting.

Re: # 5 1/2, or L-A Jack???

Bob Dodge

>Thank you very much for your input everyone. I've been slowly building up my handtools over the last while, and will eventually have a pretty well-balanced collection. I'm eventually looking at having all dedicated purpose hand-tools, but looking for as much versatility as possible, until I reach that goal.

At ther moment, I have a #3, L-N #4 1/2, L-N BU smoother,the M-F #5, and a Stanley-Bailey #7. L-V shoulder planes (medium and large), L-N skew block, and L-N adj. mouth L-A block and the large L-N scraping plane. Also a few L-N handsaws(dove-tail, and cross-cut carcass saw).

I started with joint-making planes, then smoothers, and now progressing to the bench-planes. Eventually, I hope to get the L-N # 8, as well as the L-N # 5 1/2. I suppose in the end, I'll eventually get both the 5 1/2 and the L-A jack, but I'm wondering if the L-A jack has a place there. Will the 5 1/2 make the L-A jack redundant for face-grain use? And if so, is there a better choice for shooting end grain, than the L-A jack? Certainly seems like a very popular choice these days. I guess my biggest concern, is the quality of cut on face-grain, and that's why I was curious about the sensitivity of the blade-depth adjustment, compared to a #5 1/2 for example. I have no doubt that as a "shooter", this plane will do a fine job, especially with the 12 degree bedding.

The #9 is bedded at 20 degrees, and I was curious about the difference between the ease of use/ cut quality, compared to the 12 degree bedding of the L-A jack.

The L-N BU smoother that I presently own, is no doubt a great plane for shooting, but there is not much room to place my hand in front of the rear tote, to grasp the plane body. The adjustment knob is very close to the tote. That's why I was thinking about the L-A jack. I'd have a much better grip.

On paper, both the L-N and the L-V L-A jacks, seem like great choices, and I'm curious about the cryogenically treated L-N blade, as opposed to the non-treated L-V blade. Does the cryogenically treated blade retain an edge longer? Can both be sharpened to the same degree of finesse?

Thank you so much for your time and responses.

All the best, Bob

PS. Derek, I'll try that L-A adj. mouth block on the shooting board. I see no reason why it wouldn't work like a charm. That was my first high-end plane, and it's an absolute "gem".

Re: # 5 1/2, or L-A Jack???

Lyn J. Mangiameli

>In order:

"I'm eventually looking at having all dedicated purpose hand-tools, but looking for as much versatility as possible, until I reach that goal."

Makes sense to me.

" I have a #3, L-N #4 1/2, L-N BU smoother,the M-F #5, and a Stanley-Bailey #7. L-V shoulder planes (medium and large), L-N skew block, and L-N adj. mouth L-A block and the large L-N scraping plane. Also a few L-N handsaws(dove-tail, and cross-cut carcass saw)."

Good base collection, so it does make sense to begin to concentrate on more specialized planes.

"Eventually, I hope to get the L-N # 8, as well as the L-N # 5 1/2. I suppose in the end, I'll eventually get both the 5 1/2 and the L-A jack, but I'm wondering if the L-A jack has a place there. Will the 5 1/2 make the L-A jack redundant for face-grain use?"

Yes, there is a place for a low bedding angle, bevel up Jack. It will offer more versatility of effective cutting angle, and ease of mouth adjustment. I have had a 5.5 ever since L-N brought it out (50 degree frog), and to be blunt it is one of my least used planes (though I know others really like it). Personally, I tend to skip over it for a #6, or these days, I go with one of the BU Jacks. Part of your choice will depend on the range of woods you use, and the size of projects you build. For a wider range of woods (both with respect to species and presence of figure), I find swaping blades in a BU plane to be more convenient.

"And if so, is there a better choice for shooting end grain, than the L-A jack?"

For quality of cut, probably not. For ease and consistency of registration, the I really prefer the L-N #9. It's really all I use for shooting. Lots of registration surface, and sufficient mass. Also a reasonable handle configuration just for shooting.

"I guess my biggest concern, is the quality of cut on face-grain, and that's why I was curious about the sensitivity of the blade-depth adjustment, compared to a #5 1/2 for example."

I'm kind of demanding when it comes to surface finish, and I tend to plane rather demanding woods. If you want the possibility for a superb quality of cut on the widest range of woods, you will be very very hard pressed to obtain a plane superior to the LV LABU Jack, regardless of price or design. Depending on the woods you use, you may well do fine with a number of other planes, including a 5.5, but you don't need to fear you will be sacrificing face grain performance by going with the BU Jack as long as you add a couple of blades of high bevel angle to it. As for adjuster, I like them both and don't think you need be too concerned about refinement of adjuster on either.

"The #9 is bedded at 20 degrees, and I was curious about the difference between the ease of use/ cut quality, compared to the 12 degree bedding of the L-A jack."

Depending on the density of the wood, and width of cut, it may be discernable. If its a problem, then don't blame the plane, blame your level of conditioning if you are anythign less than 80 years old. Learn to bench press or get a kettlebell.

"The L-N BU smoother that I presently own, is no doubt a great plane for shooting, but there is not much room to place my hand in front of the rear tote, to grasp the plane body. The adjustment knob is very close to the tote. That's why I was thinking about the L-A jack. I'd have a much better grip."

Actually I've used the L-N BU Smoother for shooting and don't mind it at all. I suppose it comes down to the size of one's hands. Frankly, I don't see why you would be able to get a better shooting grip on a Jack than a Smoother.

"On paper, both the L-N and the L-V L-A jacks, seem like great choices, and I'm curious about the cryogenically treated L-N blade, as opposed to the non-treated L-V blade. Does the cryogenically treated blade retain an edge longer? Can both be sharpened to the same degree of finesse?"

Ah, people love to argue about this stuff, but I doubt anyone has sharpened L-N and LV blades more than me. With a good waterstone or diamond paste or powered system, I've never noticed any difference between the two with respect to how sharp you can make them or how much effort it will take. Now either, as A2, will pose more of a challenge than an O2 of comparable width. As for edge life, I personally don't find a difference, but then I try to sharpen before the edge is trashed, so may be sharpening both before a difference would be apt to develop. In practice edge life will be more influenced by the wood you are using than the blade.

" I'll try that L-A adj. mouth block on the shooting board. I see no reason why it wouldn't work like a charm."

It lacks sufficient registration surface for most work, and is too limited in width for many projects.

"That was my first high-end plane, and it's an absolute "gem"."

It is indeed, one of my favorite and most used planes. Definitely a "desert island" plane.

Re: # 5 1/2, or L-A Jack???

Bob Dodge

>Hi Lyn,

Quote:

"Yes, there is a place for a low bedding angle, bevel up Jack. It will offer more versatility of effective cutting angle, and ease of mouth adjustment. I have had a 5.5 ever since L-N brought it out (50 degree frog), and to be blunt it is one of my least used planes (though I know others really like it). Personally, I tend to skip over it for a #6, or these days, I go with one of the BU Jacks."

---------------------------------------------------------------------

Lyn, that's a very interesting point, and that # 6 would probably be a more appropriate choice for me, especially when I consider those planes I already have. I'll eventually get the 5 1/2 anyway, and for now, my Millers Falls #5 can make do. The 18" bed-length on the #6 sounds like a perfect fit between the M-F #5 (14"), and the L-N #8 (24") that I'll be buying this fall. I don't really need another bevel-down heavy smoother for now, since I have the 4 1/2.

So there you have it. I'll get the L-A Jack, and the #6.

May I also add a word of appreciation here, to you, as well as Derek, ALF, and all those of you who contribute so much time and effort here at WoodCentral, to educate would-be Neanderthals, such as myself. I voraciously absorb every word you type, and I feel you've saved me years of trial and error. Thank you so much.

All the best, Bob

Delicate feel, smoothers

Bob Dodge

>Hi Derek,

Quote: "In my opinion it is not necessary to have a heavy plane for a shooting board. Yes, a heavy plane will carry momentum better through harder timbers, but a sharp blade will help in such situations as well. I do have and use a LV LA Jack on my shooting board, but I also use a Stanley #62 LA Jack and often prefer the latter for its more delicate feel."

---------------------------------------------------------------------

Derek. Once I've rounded out my collection of larger bench-planes(5,6,7,8), I'll be refocusing on smoothers. At present, I have the L-N BU smoother, and the L-N #4 1/2, and I'd really like to consider a few "woodies", for the very reason you've mentioned,,, "delicate feel". I'll probably try an HNT Gordon, as well as one of Steve Knight's lil' beauties, and perhaps a Clark and Williams smoother.

I've been thinking of starting out with an ECE Primus Improved, since that is available locally. My only concern with the "woodies", is sole maintainance. Not from a lubrication stand-point, but rather, long-term durability and wear. I'm curious as to just how far you can go before having to flatten a lignum-vitae sole, and possibly opening the mouth in the process. Would you recommend sticking to adjustable-mouth smoothers in that case? Also, will humidity necessitate more frequent re-flattening of the sole?

I've also entertained the possibility of getting the ECE scrub.

As far as technique is concerned, would you tend to use more of a skewed cut with a light-weight woody, compared to a heavier iron or bronze smoother?

Bob

Re: Delicate feel, smoothers

Norman (Metcalfe, Ont.)

>Hello Bob,

"I've been thinking of starting out with an ECE Primus Improved, since that is available locally. My only concern with the "woodies", is sole maintainance. Not from a lubrication stand-point, but rather, long-term durability and wear. I'm curious as to just how far you can go before having to flatten a lignum-vitae sole, and possibly opening the mouth in the process. Would you recommend sticking to adjustable-mouth smoothers in that case? Also, will humidity necessitate more frequent re-flattening of the sole? "

You should not need to re-flatten the sole often or rarely once it is flattened. Any change in the wood should be uniform along it's length.

Long-term durability? I have a few transitional and old wooden planes I have resoled, but these were heavily used and well over 100 years old each.. I normally simply add a mouth insert ahead of the blade if the mouth opens up too much from wear.

Adjustble mouth, although a nice feature, is not absolutely necessary. On non-adjustable mouth woodies, the forward slope of the plane cavity is formed such that the portion just above the sole

slopes inwards somewhat before sloping back outwards. This is to compensate for any flattening which would normally open the mouth a little. In the case of the inward-sloped chip ejection forward slope,

it keeps the mouth a constant opening size. You really need to see what I mean in a photo though..

I made the 2 woodies below in the past 2 weeks. One is a large smoother, the other a large jack plane. There is a little more tuning and fettling involved with woodies, but well worth it. A different feel completely from all-metal planes.

Also, once you get used to tweaking and adjusting the blade with a small plane hammer, it's dead simple to adjust..

Norman

Re: Delicate feel, smoothers

Bob Dodge

>Hiya Norm,

Good to hear from you. Did you go to Denis'(Chenard) place last weekend? I could just kick myself that I didn't make it. Sounds like it was a blast. I got delayed by unexpected visitors, then it was too late to get there on time. I would have really likes to see some of the Ottawa guys again, as well as all the planes. Well, there's always the Ottawa Woodworking Show, in early December.

Norm, great job on those planes. I'd love to try my hand at making a few Krenov-style planes, and maybe an infill or two. I may have a bit more free time over the next few months, and I'll try to source the necessary materials. What did you use for your irons? What plane-hammer are you using, the Lee Valley brass hammer with the wood insert?

Bob

Re: Delicate feel, smoothers

Norman (Ottawa, Ont.)

>Bob

I was definiteyl there, we thought you would show up,

heard later you couldn't make it..

The blades are Hock iron assemblies specifically for wooden handplanes. 3.5 in. long, 3/16 in. thick, with cap iron.

The wood is European beech with goncavo mouth insert.

Other parts are tropical woods I had around.

I do use the LV plane hammer with the wooden insert on one end.

It's a good weight for adjusting these planes.

Norman