Est. 1998 — 27 years of woodworking knowledge
Re: Just buy one plane, Andy
Verne in Northeast NJ
>I have a Record #7 and the C&W Jointer. For a novice, I'd recommend the #7 first. With the C&W I don't see the need for a #8. Actually, since I've gotten the LN 5 1/2 I now usually go 5 1/2 to the C&W jointer, skipping the #7.
Jointer for novices *LINK*
Pam Niedermayer - Austin, TX
>OK, I can certainly speak to this. The first jointer I bought was a Record 07. It was heavy, difficult to adjust the blade, looked nice, though. In short, it was a disaster for this novice, sold it on ebay. Next I bought one of Knight's wooden jointers in purpleheart, 30+" long, beautiful, pseudo Japanese blade. Hard as the devil to push without a handle, which Steve later sent me. But to be honest, I never installed the handle since meanwhile I'd bought an ECE Primus 701P. My life was changed, it worked a treat, I love it. And I still have it and use it on shorter jobs. I still have Steve's, too, but am beginning to feel like a hoarder, so it should go to ebay soon.
Last year C&W threatened to raise their prices, so I quickly bought one of theirs at the old price, even though I didn't have any immediate need for such a long jointer. I recently began testing it on some long pieces I'm preparing for my workshop build - it works great! I love it and can't wait to begin the actual build so it can get a full workout. BTW, this workshop is Japanese style timber frame, so it's important that the posts and beams are smooth, warm, unfinished, with as much beauty as possible; so I consider this to be more furniture than carpentry. And in the new workshop I'll have plenty of room for a super long bench and/or planing beam, so the C&W will have room to shine. At that point I'll use it for everything over 3' long.
So, that's my trip Derek. I have no doubt the Veritas plane(s) will work just fine, but I have no personal experience with them. And my definition of jointer has changed, I'm just not sure what to call the ECE which is between jointer and try planes.
Re: Go with Derek, Andy
Marc in Luxembourg
>Andy,
I'd go with Derek, because...
1. Planing long stock every day has become kind of rare today, think why there is confusion about try planes and jointers, that's because nowadays try planes are called jointers by some manufacturers.
2. a metal plane is set up easy for a novice as some wrote already,
3. a new high quality metal plane shows you how well a plane can perform and as a novice you have to have a reference, an old one can be good, bit it is likely that you have to put in more than 10 hours, and at the end do you know how well it works?,
...so personally, I'd still recommend a LN #8, it works great, has a wide and good iron, nearly the same price as a C&W and a low point of gravity. And it joints edges and planes faces on longer stock too. Or you go with Derek on a LV BU jointer, then you will save money for other tools. I have no great experience on LVs and I'm not so convinced by BUs. But then listen to Derek.
One can buy an iron and build a jointer out of good stock, one can tune up an old metal plane, but this IMHO takes a lot of knowhow a novice will get by practicing with other planes. As most of us make woodworking alone in a homeshop, learning is relatively slow compared to learning by teachers or a mentor. Good tools will help you in the beginning.
Marc, looking at the suns's rising
Why I can't see getting a....
Scott Burr, Freezing rain in Ben Lomond,CA?
>woodie, By Scott. I can't see getting a wooden jointer because of the mostiure swings where I live. It was in the low 30's in the morning here last week and 70's in the aftrenoon. For the past 3 day's it's been in the 20's in the mornings and in the low 40's all day. Swings like that for a wood plane is asking way too much for me and/or it. Give me a plane that doesn't exist... My jointer, It's 30" long 2.5" wide infill. Low front knob if any and a nice fat inclosed handle I'm thinking a Razee handled one right now. With all this rain and cold weather...
Igor! Release the kites and raise the platform!
Re: Go with Derek, Andy
Pam Niedermayer - Austin, TX
>Even if you go with a short jointer like a 7 or 8, I'll always recommend the ECE Primus over a metal plane. The blade is as easy to adjust (if you've got problems with adjusting wedged wooden planes), it's lighter weight, a sweet performer. What's more, Larry Williams has written an article about how much easier it is to joint precisely with a wooden plane with relatively high center of gravity, something about how the left hand holds the front of the plane. I can't find it on their site right now, but it should be somewhere in the BP archives.
Also, Andy already said he had a friend to help him.
However, if this is your first plane, I wouldn't even be thinking about jointers at all. In this case, one of the bevel up jacks is probably the best one to get since it can do so many jobs for you (as Andrew said about the 6, even though that is bevel down). Then you can specialize at your leisure. Eventually, the original plane will be less useful because you've added other planes to do many of its jobs, but you'll probably still find uses for it.
Pam
Re: Partially disagree, Pam...
Marc in Luxembourg
>...less weight isn't an advantage. I adore the additional mass of the #8. But maybe this is a personal choice :-) I like the feeling when I push it on and it continues gliding almost alone by its mass. The Ulmia hast to be pushed from beginning to board's end.
I prefer my LN jointer over my Ulmia (same length) when jointing because of the low center of gravity. Indeed as it has more mass at a lower level it lies stable on the edge even a very narrow one. And I can stabilize the front by putting the thumb behind the front knob and spreading the fingers on the board's face. That is impossible with a woodie.
If it were my first plane, than I agree, Pam, I wouldn't buy a jointer, but a #6, which later on, I'd use as fore plane by cambering the iron. I'd add a nice smoother after or with the #6.
Have a nice sunday, Marc
Re: Partially disagree, Pam...
Pam Niedermayer - Austin, TX
>Well, you clearly like heavy metal. I don't, and I've got miserable experience with various Stanleys, Records, and the like to justify my opinions. I assume you do, too. Now a good LA jack from LN or LV is a whole other issue. There you go.
Pam
Re: You're right, Pam...
Marc in Luxembourg
>they are all opinions... as a teacher told me: there are lots of roads guiding us to Rome. If it wasn't true for woodworking, where else would it be?
Good night and go have some sleep :-)
Marc
Andy's slippery slope
Adam Cherubini
>But, if you are a novice, my concern is that you would be intimidated by the finesse required to set up and tune a wooden jointer. There is not a lot to learn, but the LV BU Jointer is light years easier and more reliable! These BU planes are super-easy to get excellent results from, partly because they are super-easy to set up.
My knee jerk is to disagree. But more about that in a minute. There is a nasty thread of consumerism that runs thru our hobby. I was talking to Underhill about it. I think its a common theme in Underhill stuff. Guys like Andy in VT want to know what to BUY. While I have a lot of respect for Derek's sensitivity to Andy's needs, maybe we should tell future Andys to buy the Anant #6 for just that reason. I mean, didn't all of us start with crap planes? I did.
I think Moses mentioned this sometime back. Everybody goes up the learning curve. There's no way to short cut it. Woodworking is a skill, completely unlike the choice of an automobile or HDTV. Andy's looking for the woodworking consumer reports and we're doing our best to fill in the little "better than average" circles for him. If we really want to serve Andy (and I'm sure all of us do) maybe we should just lie to the guy. "Craftsman chisels! They're the best Andy. I've had mine for years." When he writes in complaining they won't hold edge we can act surprised and talk about micro-bevels. Why deny Andy the slippery slope?
Adam
Derek's question-long boring answer
Adam Cherubini, NJ
>These BU planes are super-easy to get excellent results from, partly because they are super-easy to set up.
I've not used the new low angle jointer. I have used the jack.
I guess when you are talking about performance or results, I'm wondering what performance you're talking about. Sorry, Brother, but I'm suspecting you are talking about thin shavings and nice surfaces on difficult woods.
I use a jointer to make edge to edge glue ups. I don't give a darn about a little tear out. I want to get those boards straight fast. The only way to check is to take the boards off the front of the bench and check them. If they are big or heavy, this is a chore. With a long plane you've got a really good chance of only doing this once or twice. With a short plane...well...you will be there longer. So as far as performance goes, the longer jointer is really best for this sort of work. Then there's the width issue. See Dean's post above.
As far as easy to use, I grant you wooden planes are finicky. Adjusting one seems preposterous. But no lateral adjustment is required on either a try plane with a curved iron, or a jointer used for match planing. Lateral adjustment is important for people who refuse to radius their smooth plane irons. In my view, that a solution to a problem that doesn't exist (and probably another conversation).
Derek, you may be right. The LA planes may be easier to use. But in terms of performance? Here's another typical example from my shop: I've purchased some 1x12" pine boards from my local home center. I need a 10" wide board, 6 feet long. One factory edge is straight so I panel gauge a line over and cut to the line with my rip saw. Off the horses onto the bench, now I need to straighten and true up that edge. The pine is easy to plane, tho there may be a knot. There may be some spots where I left way too much material, either because I didn't saw square or i just blew it. How many passes are required to bring that board into trim? My 28" long try plane will bring that board in fast. That's the performance I'm after. I don't want to strain my eyes looking for the scribe line. I trust the length of that plane to sort things out for me. In demonstrations, I sometimes do this job with my eyes closed since I can hear straight from this plane- that's easy to use.
Sorry for the long post,
Adam
Re: Andy's slippery slope
Derek Cohen (in Perth Australia)
>Adam, with respect � don�t you hate when someone says this. You know that you are in for it � with respect, since I do consider that you are considerably more knowledgeable and experienced than I in most areas. Nevertheless I have opinions and this time they really differ from yours.
You say that �there�s no way to short cut� the learning curve. This is an extremist�s viewpoint, and one that is likely to scare potential handtoolers away since they may find the demands too great. I was part of a discussion with a similar argument pattern on the Oldtool Forum several months ago. The discussion had turned to that perennial favourite, freehand sharpening verses the use of honing guides. Some members were of the opinion that all should persevere with developing freehand and that guides were the Devil�s work. OK, we will not belabour the obvious point here, suffice to say that we all need to start somewhere. Slopes tend to have gradients, and it is unnecessary to make it uncomfortably steep.
I think it is a bit of an over-reaction to class a Anant #6 or Craftsman chisels with a Veritas bevel up jointer. Are you saying that the only jointer to use is a wooden jointer like yours? That all else are second-rate?
Perhaps you are saying that we should circumvent the whole discovery process and only offer one class, or one manufacturer of tools?
I�d like to get more people into handtools. I recognise that some have the ability to jump right in, while others need to take it slow. Some want results Now! while others are prepared to develop them slowly. For years I raced on the state windsurfing circuit here in Australia, and I was pretty involved with the equipment since we competitors all had similar skills and were looking for an edge. On weekends I would sail with my mates and socialise with novices, and often was asked for advice. I would not have dreamed of suggesting that these guys should use equipment like mine since they would not have enjoyed it at all � too much on the edge. You really needed to have good skills to make it work for you.
What type of work do you think a novice could do with your jointer? What type of work do you think that they could do with a LV BUJ (nah, I too would balk at recommending an Anant)? Which experience would spur them on to do more Handplaning?
Respectfully from Perth
Derek
Great points Derek
Adam Cherubini, NJ
>Sorry my response was all italic, BTW. That made my annoying point of view even more grating!
You say that �there�s no way to short cut� the learning curve. This is an extremist�s viewpoint, and one that is likely to scare potential handtoolers away since they may find the demands too great.
Do you think so? I didn't look at it this way. The honing guide is an excellent example. I hope you aren't disappointed by this, but I think I agree with you. Just so you're not completely dissappointed with my debating skills, no I'm not equivocating the LV plane with the Anant (I think Chris Schwarz says the Anant's aren't that bad, BTW). Are you suggesting the LV plane is a crutch like a honing guide?
The planes aside, we need a hand tool Karl Rove; Someone who can eviscerate the power tool manufacturing lobby.
Seriously, I'm not sure what is best for Andy. I'd like him to concentrate on basic skills that will serve him regardless of the tools he ends up using. On the other hand, I don't want him to be frustrated or discouraged by what seems like an unclimbable mountain of BS like mine. I suspect that's where the Lee family comes in. They've probably done as much or more to grease the slippery slope than Underhill has.
Andy, if you are still reading this hooey, this conversation isn't really about you or your choice of planes. But I hope you are paying attention because I think its something you should be asking yourself and something that will be asked of you when you are trying to help someone on woodcentral. Sorry I don't have better answer. Maybe you will be able o sort this out.
Adam
Re: Derek's question-long boring answer
Derek Cohen (in Perth Australia)
>>"I guess when you are talking about performance or results, I'm wondering what performance you're talking about. Sorry, Brother, but I'm suspecting you are talking about thin shavings and nice surfaces on difficult woods".
Adam, I understand that some may assume that the type of woodworking I do is similar to the type of results I seek in my plane reviews. The ability to take fine shavings in hard timbers with difficult grain is relevant, and the reviews use this as a measure of performance. However it would be a mistake to assume that I consider this to represent the Art of Handplaning, and that my recommendations are based on such goals.
No, when I talk of the LV BUJ being a good performer, I am referring to the ease of setting up the plane (fewer parts to worry about), and of the reliability of the shavings it will make (thick or thin) whether one knows how to radius a blade or not. This is an excellent plane for the advanced, but it is a superb plane for the novice. But it is like comparing apples with oranges when you consider the styles of woodworking of others and yourself.
What did I do today that compares with your example (since you seem to want to know how I go about it)? I did begin the construction of a trestle table out of (treated) pine for the garden. Like yourself, I do not own specialised powered equipment (outside of a tablesaw and bandsaw) to dimension the rough sawn timber I use. LV Scrub plane, Mujingfang jack plane, HNT Gordon Try Plane, and HNT Gordon Smoother came out of the cabinet. I used two vintage oval bolstered mortice chisels and an old C Nurse & Co tenon saw. The Veritas stuff remained in the cabinet. It tends to be hauled out for hardwoods. With softwoods I tend to use my woodies. I don't expect that we work at the same speed. It is not as important to me. I believe I am efficient enough, but assuredly not as much as yourself.
You wrote,
>"My 28" long try plane will bring that board in fast. That's the performance I'm after. I don't want to strain my eyes looking for the scribe line. I trust the length of that plane to sort things out for me. In demonstrations, I sometimes do this job with my eyes closed since I can hear straight from this plane- that's easy to use".
Adam, most of us aspire to get to the level you are at presently. I suspect that you have forgotten how long (in both time and energy) your journey was along this path. Perhaps the question to you should have been, what were the helpful experiences you had that made your learning easier?
Regards from Perth
Derek
Some further replies and questions...
VTAndy
>Good morning to some of you, good evening to others...
I've enjoyed reading all these different points of view over coffee this morning. I am going to respond to several of the threads and pose some more questions. Apologies for the long-windedness. If this were a conversation here in my house yesterday, it would have been a blast, with enough local brews to go 'round for everyone. I appreciate all of your viewpoints, especially since, while I am getting some assistance from friends here, the experience base of forum members is much more broad.
To begin with, a response to Adam's critique of the thread. I did indeed say, which plane should I _buy_. At the moment, I have access to block planes and smoothers at my school's (I am a teacher) woodworking shop. However, they don't have any jack planes, try planes, or jointers. The students work with boards of quite small dimensions, and for anything larger, the teacher sets it up in his "back room" with a power jointer and planer while they are off learning German from me, etc. So, yes, I will have to _buy_ a jointer or try plane: whether it is used or new, cheap or expensive, all that is open to debate. (Stealing is not an option for me -- all the woodworking stores are too far away. Just kidding.) Now, the really debatable point, as far as I'm concerned, is whether it is more "consumerist" to purchase an Anant (and possible an upgraded iron) or a higher end plane to begin with. If using the Anant would be a short-term experience that will have me begging for a better plane, say, in a year or so, then this is the type of thing I like to avoid, personally, for both ecological and economic reasons. However, I would feel differently about the "re-use" aspect of getting a used plane. Adam, I can agree with the uneasiness about the recommendations for "high end" planes. However, a part of me also believes that, in the long run, it might be a less wasteful path to take. These discussion forums are useful, but to a certain degree, taking delivery of a sight-unseen antique plane is a scary prospect, because I don't have an in-person mentor to show me how to get it into shape.
Several comments reflected the opinion that, as a novice, it might be better for me to have a plane that is in great shape to begin with, so that a "learn" from it a set of standards, which I could then apply to my own expectations of what a plane fettled by me should be like. I am not looking for a "fast track," (or else I'd be going into machine tools...) but I would say this: I am much more interested in getting started with actually using the planes to make something, and I would rather save the fettling for later. It is quite a lot of learning in the beginning to use the planes properly and to sharpen them as needed, without having to true the sole, replace broken parts, etc. I am not rushing things; the other day, my "lesson" was to free-hand sharpen about a dozen plane and spokeshave blades in the school shop.
There were two recommendations that intrigue me, and I have follow-up questions.
1. One recommendation is to go with a bevel-up plane, such as the LV or LN BU jointers. Are there any _disadvantages_ to these planes?
2. Another recommendation is to start with a shorter plane, such as a #6. The suggestion was that I can use it to plane large surfaces as well as edge joints, and it will still find use should I ever get a #7 or #8 or wooden jointer. Is it really the case that I'll be able to make edge joints with a #6? And if so, a standard #6 or a low-angle bevel-up.
3. I would very much like to try some wooden planes, and my friend is going to take me to a workshop of his friend, about an hour away, where most of the planes used are shop-made wooden planes. So I just wanted the wooden-plane supporters to know that I'm going to follow-up on that option.
4. As for the #7 vs. #8 question, I will have the opportunity to try out a #7 at another friend's shop. I'll just have to imagine: wider and heavier, that would be the #8.
Thanks for all the replies. Lots of food for thought.
-Andy
Re: Derek's question-long boring answer
Dean J in MN
>Don't you love it when a simple question on WC turns into a interesting thread?
No, when I talk of the LV BUJ being a good performer, I am referring to the ease of setting up the plane (fewer parts to worry about), and of the reliability of the shavings it will make (thick or thin) whether one knows how to radius a blade or not.
As for fewer parts -- my try plan has a single blade, a wedge, and a body -- I count that as the same as a BU jointer. Actually fewer parts as my plane has no adjuster. It is as simple as you can get.
But -- I hear the screams - woodies are hard to adjust. I went through the metal plane learning curve. Only after that did I switch to an all woodie team, so I had to start from gound zero on the adjusting front. Turns out to be a red herring. My jointer only gets adjusted after I re-hone the blade. And it really isn't that hard once you learn how to tap tap tap. Yes it is a skill, but one that comes pretty quickly. Same goes for all the other woodies, a plane has a single job, set it up and leave it alone. That is what is missing with the swiss army planes. I want to pick up my try plane and make an edge straight, not remember what angle blade I have, where that other blade is, install it, readjust depth, and finally get to work. Granted, this is a different style of work, and many will reject it. But if we strive to be as efficent as Adam it is a path we will all find in time.
Andy, hope you are still interested in hand tools after all this! You found an amazing group of people here, I learn things from everyone that takes the time to make their point of view known and am thankfull for the passion they display.
-Dean
Maine tool dealers
Bob Hackett(Mainely,Bob)
>Hulls Cove Tool Barn and Liberty Tool would be 2 good places to start.I also bought a restorable #7C from the antique mall in Fairfield for $25 during a sale.
Hulls cove is at the entrance to Acadia National Park so if you bring the wife you could make a weekend of it.It also has an interesting sculpture park on the grounds.
Elmer`s barn on RT 17 is also an option.Pay no attention to the marked prices and be ready to trade insults with Elmer.I have found the ride is always worth my while,even if it`s just to watch Elmer deal with tourists.
Ping me offline if you decide to head east.I could help set up a route that would keep you busy for at least a long weekend.
Mainely,Bob
Want a #6?
Bob Hackett(Mainely,Bob)
>I have a Keen Kutter that needs a tote.Since you have access to a WWing shop at school then a tote shouldn`t be a problem for you.
For the cost of postage I`ll send it and after you move on up you can donate it to the WWing program at your school.
Let me know if you`re interested.
MB
Consumerism
Adam Cherubini, NJ
>Andy,
That's a cool job and thanks for doing it.
Just in terms of the consumerism, what I was trying to say was that we can tend to look for solutions by purchasing something- essentially throwing money at the problem as opposed to looking into developing a skill. I don't think we should quickly assign some judgement or value to this issue. I just think it deserves our/your consideration.
I know this doesn't exactly address your post, but we have rasied the question here before about whether in the long run, you really are better off buying a nice new plane that's ready to rock and using it, or buying junk and fettling it. I was on the "buy junk" side of the discussion, but I'm not convinced I was right, given the other posts.
Adam
Edge/surface joint, wood vs metal....
Dave Thompson
>For try plane use (squaring up non mating edges, straightening edges etc, flattening faces) there is no practical difference between the #7 and the #8.
I had focused on edge jointing in my response rather than surface jointing, because I primarily edge joint boards with a jointer plane. I wouldn't expect to find disagreement such as for edge jointing a narrow jointer is preferable.
Regarding surface jointing wide surfaces, different characteristics factor in. Regarding the length, one might want to consider when purchasing a jointer how many dining room tables or conference room size tables they're planing to make... the focus being on the width of the table surface. As I believe is typical, I do my planing at an angle to the grain, usually around 45 degrees. If my table surface width is, say 30", my plane path would be 30"*sqrt(2) = 42". If one follows the general rule, i.e. jointer target length should be 1/3 of stock length, even a short jointer plane will be fine for making a flat surface.
For surfacing, I would agree that a wider blade is preferred. The flip side is that there is more resistance. The weight becomes more advantageous for maintaining momentum. By it's nature, a metal plane is going to help here. Another way to overcome this which I suspect you take advantage of is by increasing the mass by way of length. I would guestimate your unusually large 30" x 2 7/8" to be roughly 50% heavier than than a more typical 24" x 2.5" wide wooden try plane assuming same wood. Your massive wood plane additionally has an advantage in that the friction of a woodie is inherently less than anything but a freshly waxed iron plane.
I think increased length of the woodie though creates more issues with warping. I did read you have had no warping issues with your 30" jointer. My two 24" and two 26" wooden try planes were initially quite out of wack. I can't say how regularly they need tuning since I long switched over to just going for my #7, #8.
Regardless, I believe the conversation is splitting hairs, and that the entire set of planes mentioned in the thread would do the job just fine. Personal preferences, style of work, circumstances, opportunities all play an unwritten hand in choice...
Re: Derek's question-long boring answer
Alice Frampton, UK
>I want to pick up my try plane and make an edge straight, not remember what angle blade I have, where that other blade is, install it, readjust depth, and finally get to work.
Ack, I'm so sick of this argument against bevel-up planes. How often d'you feel the need to reach for a different pitch of plane? Well that's as often as you have to play "eeny meany miney mo" with bevel angles. Only an extreme minimalist would use one bevel-up plane for everything if they had any kind of regular requirement for different pitched planes. They'd do the sensible thing and have a dedicated plane for the job. The advantage of being able to easily swap to a different pitch is for those woodworkers who don't have that requirement to justify a dedicated plane at (usually) a higher pitch. Instead of sitting on their hands and saying "ooo, I don't know that I want to buy another plane to just do this little bit of difficult timber" they can do something about at minimal to zero cost in the most efficient way.
Looking at it another way, how does this argument against wooden planes strike you?:
"I want to pick up my jointer plane and make an edge straight, not mess about finding a hammer and "tap, tap, tap" in and "tap, tap, tap" out, only to find the sole has warped in the increased humidity since I last trued the sole and the mouth needs patching because it's rivalling the Grand Canyon, and after rebuilding it I can finally get to work."
Is that fair? No, of course not. You don't have to remouth and true the sole of a wooden plane every time you use it any more than you have to play "hunt the blade angle" every time you use the "SAK" of planes.
Please find a better argument against bevel-up planes; this one's dead in the water.
Cheers, Alf
P.S. Nothing personal, Dean; you just caught the point of maximum exasperation :~)
Re: Consumerism
VTAndy
>Hi Adam,
Thanks for your response. Points well taken! I've been involved in similar discussions concerning musical instruments -- learn on high-end vs. learn on junk -- and have actually been drawn to both sides of the argument.
I think I might have found a nice solution here: this morning I got in touch with a local woodworker -- a retired teacher so we have much in common! -- who is selling off his collection of old tools. So, this might kill 2 birds with one stone: a source of old planes, where I can try them out and compare, as well as someone who might be willing to show me the ropes in terms of flattening soles, adjusting blades in wooden planes etc.: in other words, all the stuff that I find to be somewhat intimidating.
The piece I can't wait to see: apparently he's got some kind of wooden jointer -- very very long -- that is meant to be mounted stationary on the bench while you pass the board over it. I'm not at all considering getting this but I can't wait to see it!
One type of old plane that no one mentioned yet (unless I didn't understand something) is the WWII-era wooden Stanley, of which this gentleman has several.
Well, I'll report back later about what I see and learn today. It's going to be fun in any case!
-Andy
Re: Some further replies and questions...
Alice Frampton, UK
>Andy,
Well thank goodness you're such a level-headed fellow. Many a newbie would take one look at this thread and run screaming to the hills! I'll have a go at follow-up question 1.
1. You may just find you don't like them. Might be the low centre of gravity, the four-finger grip (took me a while to get used to that and I still prefer a three-finger and forefinger-on-the-frog variety), the adjustments, whatever. Could just be they're not for you.
2. You have to pay a little more attention to the bevel angle, it having bearing on the angle of attack. Derek claims you shouldn't hone them feehand because of that; I haven't got round to telling mine that yet, so I'm not finding it a problem... If you worry about a degree or two here and there, it may drive you nuts mind you. I don't, but then I'm almost as cavalier about that sort of thing as Adam when the mood takes me ;~)
3. I have small reservations about edge durability, but nothing conclusive. Just at the point when I started to decide it was an issue, it ceased to be. So I dunno, maybe just took a while for the blades to bed in? I'm still looking out for it but it could really do with one of the blade edge wizards to look into it I think.
FWIW, apart from a scrub, I've been using nothing but low angle/bevel-up planes for a while now, just to see what it's like, and I haven't spent my time swapping from one bevel angle to another or pining for a "proper" jack. They're not perfect for everything (what plane is?) but they have a good deal in their favour, especially for the tyro who isn't so used to "regular" planes as to find bevel-up too great a difference to be comfortable.
Good luck in your choice. No sure anyone's mentioned that you'll probably end up with one of each anyway, once you're safely on The Slope... ;~)
Cheers, Alf
Re: Derek's question-long boring answer
VTAndy
>Hi Dean,
You said: "Don't you love it when a simple question on WC turns into a interesting thread?"
Yes, this is awesome!
Also:
"Andy, hope you are still interested in hand tools after all this! You found an amazing group of people here, I learn things from everyone that takes the time to make their point of view known and am thankfull for the passion they display."
It's great: I feel like I found 'my people'!
Now, if I could only figure out how to get quotations into italics on this forum format...
Andy
Stationary plane
Adam Cherubini, NJ
>Andy,
That guy's stationary jointer plane may well be a cooper's jointer. If he'll sell it cheap you should buy it for your kids. I've only made pieces of barrels, but its fun. You know, if you could get away with it, you could wind in all kinds of lessons into a project like that.
I know a gentleman at Phillipsburg manor who does a coppering demo where he talks about the barrels and winds his way into commerce and shipping and eventually slavery, relating the barrels of merchandise in the ships' holds to the human cargo. He's a professional interpretter (unlike me) and he really does a great job of it.
You might find something like this- big and unwieldy, a converstaion starter.
Adam
LA BU question
Adam Cherubini, NJ
>How do you camber an iron on a LA BU plane? Is it an issue? The geometry is really quite different. As you advance the blade, what happens?
Camber on my jack plane is probably 1/8"-3/16". I'm not talking about corner dubbing.
Adam
P.S. I'm not throwing stones. I don't know the answer. I have no point here. I'm just curious.