Follow up on LV BUS and tear-outs (long)

Re: Blade skew *LINK*

Derek Cohen (in Perth Australia)

>Hi Felix

This topic came up a little while ago on the UK forum (in specific regard to a LA Jack). There are some really helpful tips along the way. Nearer the end you will see my contribution which, to save many scrolling through, I will copy here:

"I have used several bevel up LV planes and have only experienced this on one plane.

In my sample, the mouth was out of square by about 0.5mm. I checked the blade for squareness - nope, that was not the problem. Finally I decided that the bed was ever-so-slightly out of square, and decided to fettle this myself. It took about one hour of careful, slow filing, but the end result was a perfectly square bevel-mouth relationship.

It is really quite a simple matter - determine which side of the bed needs to be lowered, then paint the whole bed in Engineers Blue (or scribble with a pencil) to keep track of what you are doing. Then just file carefully, making sure that once you take the one side down, that you file across the bed to level it off. Keep reapplying the Blue. File a little. Test the fit. File a little more."

Regards from Perth

Derek


UK Forum thread

Re: Typo correction

Paul Erickson

>Would you mind elaborating on what you prefer about the LV adjustment vs the LN. In my experience I find the LV adjuster harder to sneek up on a shaving than with a LN or Stanley Bailey. I keep finding I wish that LV had used a finer thread in the adjustment.

Re: Typo correction

Greg Sloop, Portland Oregon

>Several issues.

First, it's simple. Granted, on the LN 62 it's pretty simple too, but not so on the 164. To sharpen, you've got to remove the retainer from the iron in most cases. Further, to swap blades, you have to switch the little doohicky or have one on every iron.

Next, it's very positive. Virtually no lash/back-lash.

Next, the lateral adjust is vastly better than LN where you must simply push the back end of the iron back and forth across the body till it's parallel. Again, that wasn't a huge issue for me, but it would become more so with a skewed bed.

Finally, it's how it all works together. The very refined and positive adjuster works well with the set screws in the mouth and also the "cap iron" - though it's really just a hold down.

In the LN 62, I found it difficult to get the right amount of hold down pressure. Too tight and you couldn't adjust the projection of the iron. Too loose and it would continue to loosen itself and then eventually chatter. (A dab of locktite would have fixed the loosening thing, but the narrow range of pressure that would allow adjustment as well as not being too loose seemed hinky to me.)

The LV setup has a wide range of pressures that will allow projection changes, and I've never once had any of them loosen themselves at all, much less to the point of iron chatter.

Cheers,

Greg

I have to agree with you on ...

Christopher Fitch @ Memphis

>the adjuster for the LN 164. I like that plane alot and the adjuster works just fine for adjusting blade projection. However, it is a royal pain to sharpen since you have to take the plate off the blade and then place it back in the right spot.

Though the plane is quite nice and mine works very well, I think LN made a mistake by following Stanley's adjuster design for this plane. Patrick Leach even discusses the adjuster issue in the B&G.

Re: Typo correction

Paul Erickson

>Thanks for the clarification. Your reactions are specific to the LN62, and I misunderstood them to be about LN vs LV planes in general. Granting your point about the LN62 in particular, I still find the adjusters on the other LV planes to be problematic. Really wish they had made finer adjustments easier.

Re: Typo correction

Greg Sloop, Portland Oregon

>My, and this thread in whole, are in regard to the bevel-up planes.

I'm really not at all familliar with their standard bench planes, but I was under the impression they use the same adjuster throughout. And I'm very happy with the LV adjuster.

It's every bit as precise as the LN's I've compared it to, though this is _mostly_ the bevel up variety.

Cheers,

Greg

Re: Follow up on LV BUS and tear-outs (long)

ThomD

>Well said!