Contemplating smoother and jack plane purchases

Re: Contemplating smoother and jack plane purchase

Rocky

>Stephen,

I was in your position about a year ago and I went with a LV LA Jack. This was the first bench plane I owned and I had no problem getting great results rather easily. I liked it so much I bought the LV LA jointer and BUS. All three of these planes are easy to adjust and use the same blades. Even though I have all three I still reach for the LA Jack 90% of the time. The Jack is more versitile then the BUS because you can't use the BUS to shoot (chute?) with. The Jack can also be used to edge joint smaller pieces. LN also makes a LA Jack and Smoother and they look very nice. I've never used one but I'm sure they work great.

Rocky

Handplane Decision Making Tree

john jesseph

>I hope someone puts together an algorithm for handplane purchases. Maybe start with intended use. Then vintage vs. new. Next budget categories vs cost is no object. etc. etc.

Sorry, don't have a straight answer, but if you lived nearby you could stop over and try all my planes...

Re: Contemplating smoother and jack plane purchase

John Todd

>While I haven't tried any Lie-Nielsen bevel up planes, I have plenty of their bevel down bailey/bedrock planes. When it came to bevel up/low angle planes, I own all four Lee Valley bevel up/low angle planes, the BU Smoother, the LA Smoother, the LA Jack and the new Jointer, and they've ended up being my most used planes. Might not have bought the traditional array of planes (3,4,4.5,5,6,7 refurbished Stanleys, Cliftons and LVs) had I bought them first. Can't imagine what the LN have that the LVs don't and much less expense. The only turn off with many is the LV style handle, which doesn't bother me in the least, but many don't like. Quality is top notch. Use what you saved on the plane or planes to buy a couple extra blades and sharpen them at various angles. Don't forget the LV BU Smoother, LA Jack, and Jointer all share the identical blade, a very important consideration.

Veritas LA jack

Denis Ch�nard, Orl�ans, Ont.

>My favorite plane. You can plane end grain. You can use it as a smoother for most applications. You can use it as a short jointer for small stock. With a high angle blade you can tame the gnarliest grain as well as any dedicated smoother, or very close to it. You can use it for shooting. You can use it to flatten boards (after the scrub).

You know the saying "jack of all trades, master of none". That definitely doesn't apply here. The Veritas LA jack will accomplish all these tasks very well.

If you have to buy only one plane, this is it.

Check the thread "what plane next" below. People a lot more knowledgeable than me agree with this.

HTH,

DC

Re: Contemplating smoother and jack plane purchase

Greg Sloop, Portland Oregon

>This probably ought to go out on the main thread, but it applies here...

I *have* used the LN versions of the bevel up planes - the 62 and the 164. (The LN 62 compares to the LV LA Jack 62.5, and the LN 164 compares with the LV BUS (heavy smoother) [or perhaps the regular LV BU smoother])

While I really liked the LN 62, it is IMO not nearly as nice to use as the LV 62.5 BU Jack.

I owned the LN 62 for more than year and it was the first bevel up plane I had ever owned or used.

Several issues with the LN I don't care for.

* First - it's more expensive by a fair bit.

* Second - the toe on the LN is pretty short. Planing short pieces with the LV is a lot easier because the toe is longer. Starting the piece is a lot easier to do right with the LV.

* Third - the LN mouth adjust is cranky. It's hard to adjust a tiny amount. It's difficult to open the mouth and remove shavings and go back to the same spot quickly. The eccentric ring used for adjust was sticky on mine, often causing me to bash the mouth into the iron. The LV on the other had has a mouth stop, so you don't bash your iron. That same stop allows very fine adjustment of the mouth. No eccentric ring to stick, etc.

*Fourth - No significant and precise lateral adjust exists for the LN. Not a big issue, but the LV version is very smooth and precise. (The LN is just a push the iron back and forth with your thumb kind of thing...which works but isn't very confidence inspiring.)

*Fifth - The iron hold down screw system on the LN 62 was fussy. Finding the sweet spot between enough hold and not too much was hard to find. Also it would loosen itself if not done fairly tight - but if too tight, then you couldn't adjust projection.

*Sixth - I like the total weight and balance of the LV better.

*Seven - using the same irons for the whole set (jointer, jack, smoother) is a *very* big deal for me. I intend to have at least two irons for each plane, and being able to mix them all about is very nice. This is possible with LV and not for LN. All the planes from LN (62, 164, BU Jointer) use different irons.

*Eight - The adjuster on the LN is nice, but still more back-lash and such than that on the LV.

For all these reasons, I sold my LN62 at a loss on the bay to buy the LV 62.5

As others have said, it's my go to plane for most smoothing and everything else. I use the others (jointer and smoother) probably less than 20% of the total time.

Some notes on the LN 164 and BU Jointer.

LN Jointer I've not used, but no adjustable mouth. Not a huge issue, but nice to be able to choose. Also it's a lot less cost for the LV. (I do have the LV BU jointer.) Same issues apply to adjuster, no laterial adjust etc.

LN 164: The adjuster on this plane requires a "thingy" attached to the iron. To sharpen the iron will require removal of the "thingy." Further, switching irons will require multiple "thingy's" or moving it from iron to iron. Again, nice plane, but IMHO, not as desireable as LV's BUS.

I was in the market to buy both the jointer and smoother from either LN or LV. After reviewing the options from all, the "set" from LV made a lot more sense, both in terms of cost and in IMO superior functionality. (Some claim, though I don't exactly agree, that the LN stuff looks better. If so and it matters a lot to you, then a Holtey should be in your future. :) ) http://www.holteyplanes.com/no98_1.jpg

On bevel up vs. bevel down designs more generally...

As for bevel up designs. Bevel up is more versitile. Changing cut angles is a cinch compared to any bevel down bench plane. (And softer wood end grain isn't something any bevel down bench planes going to do well at all.)

Adjusting mouth size is vastly easier and quicker than any standard bevel down plane.

Overall, I think BU style planes give you the easiest plane to use as a novice as well as experienced user.

They're quick and easy to adjust to match the conditions of the wood.

They're cheaper by a little to a very substantial amount.

Generally, given equal construction methods, and thus generally cost, they produce results that are at least as good if not better than a bevel down bench plane setup in an equal setup.

And since it's easier and quicker to adjust them to fit the wood conditions, it's likely you'll adjust them optimally more often and thus be likely to produce superior results to the bevel down plane.

Hope that's helpful.

Cheers,

Greg

Re: Contemplating smoother and jack plane purchase

John Hoffman

>I have played with a friends LV planes, like the LA jack. I have four LN planes and can say that I would advise not to get hung up on the money difference between LN and LV as it is not that much when you look at what you get and the amount of time these tools will last. I have the bevel down LN Jack and love it. I visited LN and used all thier planes. They are top quality in all respects and inspire one to work better. The LN BU Jack is probably the finest tool of this sort made. As far as using one plane to do a lot of different tasks by buying different blades, I don't like it. It depends on the way you work. I grab one plane to do one task then another to do a different task. I wouldn't want to continually switch blades and set up. The LN tools are first rate, the people and company are first rate also.

Regards

JH

Re: Contemplating smoother and jack plane purchase

Steve Kubien

>Greg, that's among the most thorough comparisons between the LN and LV I've seen. Nuts and bolts comparison. It kinda makes me want to get into the 'bevel-up' parade...but I just love my Knight's too much.

Cheers,

Steve Kubien

Re: Contemplating smoother and jack plane purchase

Stephen Kirk in Quakertown PA

>These are a lot of great responses. I think I'm seeing that if I go with the cheaper LV, I won't have any problems - which was my main concern (was I sacrificing quality for cost). I had used one LN smoother before, and I saw just how good the quality was. So, I'm happy to see that the LV planes compare favorable (or better in some people's minds).

I'm of the mind that I want to make furniture, not collect planes, so I just need tools that work well and don't cost me an arm and a leg.

Thanks so far, and feel free to say more if any other opinions come up.

Re: Contemplating smoother and jack plane purchase

Dean J in MN

>

I'm of the mind that I want to make furniture, not collect planes, so I just need tools that work well and don't cost me an arm and a leg.

Thanks so far, and feel free to say more if any other opinions come up.

I'll toss in my thoughts. You say you don't want to collect planes, rather make furniture. Do you use hand tools only, or are you a machine guy that turns to planes for stock cleanup?

If you are a hand tool guy, do you have the basic fore, try, joynter and smooth bench planes? You needn't speed an arm and a leg on your basic foundation of bench planes, for the most part they are doing pretty rough and tumble work. If your basic stock prep planes are in order I'd turn to planes that make building furniture faster, like dados, rabbets, plows, filletsters, molders, etc.

Or, a nice selection of handsaws, suited for their several tasks...

If you are a hybrid machine/hand tool shop, you'll have to ask the others for advice.

-Dean

Re: Contemplating smoother and jack plane purchase

Rocky

>I have a LA smoother, jack, and jointer. The only time I switch blades is when one of them needs to be sharpened. I feel I use my bevel-up planes just like I would if they were bevel down. My smoother is always set to take a fine shaving and it stays that way. I do adjust my Jack often depending on what I am doing and my jointer is rarely adjusted. What I like about the bevel-up planes is that they are simple to use and get great results (not to mention cheaper). Some people who own them like the idea of changing angles for different types of wood (highly figured) So far in my woodworking I only use hardwoods like cherry and walnut so just about all of my blades have a 45-50 degree "total" cutting angle. These were the first bench planes I bought and I'm glad I went with the bevel-up design. If you already own a fleet of bevel-downs then there is probably no need to make the switch but for a beginner I think the low angle planes are the way to go.

Rocky

Re: Contemplating smoother and jack plane purchase

gordon thomas

>Stephen: I own the LN LA JAck, #4 , #5 1/2 and 8. I also owned the LV BU smoother and BU Jointer. I returned the two LV planes. I used the planes from both companies extensively on maple, cherry and oak. I noticed no difference in performance. After about half an hour of use with the LV BU smoother my wrist tendons were screaming with pain. I switched to my LN # 4 and the pain vanished. My view is that the rear tote is the key difference between the two brands.

I have no wish to instigate another heated debate between the two brands. If you wish feel free to email me offline and I would be happy to share the rest of my experience with you.

regards,

Gordon Thomas

Re: Contemplating smoother and jack plane purchase

Dan Clermont in Burnaby

>Similar feelings about the LV totes. I have had a friend Veritas planes for evaluation and just could never get comfy with the rear tote

Felt my Bailey. Bedrock and LN totes feel better in the hand.

Does anybody know if LN has a "tote" patent? and aor why LV chooses not to go with a more traditional style tote? I have heard the LV brass comment on if they made 28 different style of totes people would not like them and want the 29th. I tend to disagree as I and others I know like the feel of the curvy Rosewood (or cherry) tote on the older planes along with the current LN's.

Cheers

Dan Clermont

Re: Contemplating smoother and jack plane purchase

john jesseph

>"I read over about the past years worth of messages, and basically saw a lot of confusing comparisons between the two."

Hey, now you have even more confusing messages!

John, who is planning on building all his own planes...

Re: Totes

Lyn J. Mangiameli

>No patent on the L-N tote, it is basically a copy of the ubiquitous Bailey bench plane tote.

As most know, I find the present L-V tote to be the weak point of these planes. I've written a lot about totes and one can do a search here to find more comments than I can remember now.

Basically, there are three things you need to keep in mind about a tote: angle; height; and diameter. There are other things like how well the tote aligns your hand with the center of gravity of the plane, but I'll skip the subtle stuff here.

In general, the L-N totes have more angle, less height, and smaller diameter relative to the Lee Valley totes. The lower the height at which you plane (which generally, but does not always mean a lower bench height), the more you will appreciate a tote with a greater forward angle. It better positions your shoulder over and behind the plane, which allows better alignment of force in a low bench position. The higher the planing height (which usually means a higher bench height), the better a more vertical tote will align your shoulder behind the plane, and effectively channel the propelling forces.

In the old days, most hand tool benches were fairly low; today, most work benches are higher, which make them visually and ergonomically more suitable for mixed use of power and hand tools. Thus for these higher working heights, the Lee Valley will often feel a bit better. If you go with the more traditional height, you'll likely prefer the greater angle of the L-N.

Height wise, the Lee Valley totes tend to offer greater height, and tend to fit larger hands better, and allow smaller hands more choice of postion, at least the old style did, they now have a centered forward belly that makes this more difficult in the current versions.

If you have smaller hands, you may prefer the smaller diameter of the L-N, if you have larger hands, you may prefer the Lee Valley. But then I have medium hands and do fairly well with either.

Now this scares some people, but I recommend that folks not be afraid to trim a tote a bit to fit their individual hand, if you screw it up, a new tote isn't that expensive. If you want to experiment, get some clay, roll it into a shape a little larger in diameter than your tote, an then squeeze it while in a planing position. The result will give you a good ideal of what your hand really wants.

Because the Lee Valley tote is a little taller, a little thicker and has less angle, you can usually tailor it a bit more than you can with the L-N. The downside is that the dual post attachment of the LV limits this somewhat, but I do appreciate the extra rigidity the LV dual post attachment offers. Even very small changes in tote shape can make for considerable differences in comfort. For the Lee Valley, I recommend getting rid of that forward swell, and narrowing the diameter a bit down at the little finger level. If you narrow the bottom along the front, and the top from the back, you can go a long ways toward increasing the angle, if that should be desired.

Again, I get along adequately with both totes, while finding neither ideal all the time.

Can you define high bench!!

Dan Clermont in Burnaby

>Hi Lyn,

I stand 6'3" and my bench stands at the first knuckle on my pinky which is considered low.

Recognizing everyone varies in height is there a "body part" that may make the Veritas tote more confy (ie hip height)??

Cheers

Dan Clermont

Re: Contemplating smoother and jack plane purchase

Doug Trembath

>Stephen, I'm certainly no expert, but have been using bench planes quite a while. I learned how to fettle planes from articles in FWW and other magazines. I'm afraid it took me a long time to actually get one to take whisper thin shavings, but I persevered. Since then, I have been following the advice here and on other forums, and have discovered some of the tricks to get them really tuned up, and can easily get a very nice finish, and planing has been a much more pleasurable and rewarding experience.

I followed the discussions here on the LV BU Jack, and bought one. I was able to take sub .001" shavings with it out of the box, and am so impressed with it I wouldn't hesitate to recommend it. I then bought the LA Smoother, and took it to a meeting with a bunch of woodworking friends. We adjusted it, and it didn't perform nearly as well as the Jack. I took a look at it last night to troubleshoot why. I was flattening a couple of Stanleys, and had some 1200 grit paper on my glass. I skimmed the smoother over this, and on one side the adjustable mouth plate mouth was appreciably higher in relation to the sole, or recessed from the surrounding area, when the mouth was closed. I went up to 500 grit, and it became even more apparent. I took the adjustable mouth plate out, to see if there were any burrs on the milled surfaces, stoned them lightly, and put it back in before I began to flatten it. I finally took it to 220 grit, and polished it up. I haven't completely gotten it flat yet, as I wanted to watch MNF. I'm hoping it was a fluke, as LV has always shown up as very high quality stuff. I would have tried to contact Rob about it, but I need it this weekend for a hand tool class I'm taking with Garrett Hack (stealth gloat). All in all, it shouldn't take more than a few more minutes to polish the sole flat, and sharpen the blade today, so I'll let you all know what comes of it.

Man, I also got the Mark II sharpening jig, and am amazed that no one has done this before. What a wonderful tool!

Doug Trembath

Studio in the Woods

Re: Contemplating smoother and jack plane purchase

Stephen Kirk in Quakertown PA

>So, to me it seems like if I'm comfortable with the tote, either major manufacturer will work just fine, and that going with the low angle as a first plane is a good idea (for either manufacturer).

Lee Valley will be at the show, and I recall that they often have a test bench set up, so I should be able to get my hands on the planes and give them a try. I've probably got medium sized hands, so maybe I'll be good with both. I don't plan to do lots of planing, but I do hybrid woodworking, so I prefer hand tools where they are good, and power tools where useful. I don't have a jointer, so I would like to be able to do some flattening prior to using the power planer. I also hate sanding, so smoothing with a plane will probably be my main usage.

Thanks for all the replies.

Re: Contemplating smoother and jack plane purchase

Dan Clermont in Burnaby

>Doug Wrote;

I then bought the LA Smoother, and took it to a meeting with a bunch of woodworking friends. We adjusted it, and it didn't perform nearly as well as the Jack. I took a look at it last night to troubleshoot why. I was flattening a couple of Stanleys, and had some 1200 grit paper on my glass. I skimmed the smoother over this, and on one side the adjustable mouth plate mouth was appreciably higher in relation to the sole, or recessed from the surrounding area, when the mouth was closed. I went up to 500 grit, and it became even more apparent. I took the adjustable mouth plate out, to see if there were any burrs on the milled surfaces, stoned them lightly, and put it back in before I began to flatten it. I finally took it to 220 grit, and polished it up. I haven't completely gotten it flat yet, as I wanted to watch MNF. I'm hoping it was a fluke, as LV has always shown up as very high quality stuff. I would have tried to contact Rob about it, but I need it this weekend for a hand tool class I'm taking with Garrett Hack (stealth gloat). All in all, it shouldn't take more than a few more minutes to polish the sole flat, and sharpen the blade today, so I'll let you all know what comes of it.

Hi Doug,

The two LV BU planes I have both have toe plates proud of the sole. If I was to guess I would say they were around a thou or so. The planes actually belong to a friend and Rob did offer to take them back but my friend really doesn't want to be bothered.

Cheers

Dan Clermont

A twist

Ron in Kokomo

>I have several Bedrocks found at flea markets that I have tuned and fettled and put Hock irons in, that are all much better tools than I am a craftsman. You really do not have to spend 200 bucks to get a wonderful tool!!

Ron

Re: A twist

Stephen Kirk in Quakertown PA

>That's another thought I considered, but then I'd have to start hunting around flea markets and hope I can find something good. I have taken a hand plane class where we discussed what to look for, so I at least think I have a chance of finding something decent.

I haven't ruled out the possibility of building a wooden plane ...

Re: Can you define high bench!! *LINK*

Lyn J. Mangiameli

>A nice succinct discussion of workbench height can be found at the link below


http://www.woodworkingtips.com/etips/etip02.html

Re: Contemplating smoother and jack plane purchase

Doug Trembath

>Well, Dan, I am sure if I raised a stink, Rob would accommodate me. Mine had the sole proud of the toe plate, and I finished leveling it today, but have been fussing with other tools and my woodburner, which needs CPR, I think. Can't breathe. If the frog area isn't true to the mouth, I'll contact Rob.

Looking forward to the class this weekend.

Doug Trembath

Studio in the Woods

Re: Totes

gordon thomas

>excellent summary Lyn.

Gordon Thomas