The most expensive plane ever in my shaking hands!

Re: Opinions, opinions, opinions. *LINK*

Derek Cohen (in Perth Australia)

>Hi Dan

Both Konrad and Karl obviously make superb planes. I really only made my original remark tongue-in-cheek (knowing full well how you feel about BU planes). Just being a little provocative (affectionately so). I thought that was so obvious that I did not add the usual < g >. I will now .. < g >

I think that it is now days more appropriate to talk about "Bevel Up" rather than "Low Angle" when describing the bed orientation of these planes. While the original Stanleys #164 and #62 were "low angle", as were the LN and LV reproductions, the concept has moved beyond end grain planing. (I have descibed this is my recent short review of the LV LA Smoother - some years late, so I just revisited the concept more than just the performance. Link below)

The wear characteristics of the BU planes appear to be different from those of the BD planes. I have been arguing for a higher bed angle, nominally 20 degrees, for those dedicated to high cutting angles. This would decrease the bevel angle (thereby increasing blade penetration), increase the clearance angle and, I suspect, improve wear on the leading edge of the blade. I found it very interesting reading yesterday that Holtey's #98 has a 22.5 degree bed. It seemed like support for the idea (and that I was not so crazy to consider this in the first place). I suspect that this could be the next phase for BU planes, and that the full potential of this design has yet to be realized.

Regards from Perth

Derek


LV LA Smoother review

Re: Opinions, opinions, opinions.

Derek Cohen (in Perth Australia)

>Obviously, you haven't tried applying PSA paper to the bottom of your bevel up smoother.

William, you rascal. < g > No, I haven't tried this, although I did notice that Rob Cosman preferred a low angle sanding block (well, have you ever seen a high angle version of sandpaper?) over his BD LN planes in his recent DVD on drawers. Do you think that he has gone over to the Other Side? :)

Regards from Perth

Derek

Re: Opinions, opinions, opinions.

Frank D. in Montreal

>The #9 block plane as well as infill thumb and chariot planes work well as little smoothers because of the 20� bed. The Shepherd handled miter plane also has the same characteristics (wanted to insert a pic but their site seems to be down).

Here it is 

Jack Guzman from Maine

>

Re: Opinions, opinions, opinions.

Derek Cohen (in Perth Australia)

>Yes, I use my Stanley #18 as a mini-smoother. It has a 40 degree bevel for a 60 degree cutting angle.

I wanted to look more closely at the Shepherd handed mitre plane, but I cannot access their website. I noticed this a few weeks ago as well. I know that they were having some difficulty with meeting deadlines (as reported on the web). Is it still business-as-usual?

Regards from Perth

Derek

Re: Opinions, opinions, opinions.

Frank D. in Montreal

>I think things are picking up, but I know they're still behind on some orders. I got one kit I ordered, but I'm still waiting for a few more, one of which is the handled standard-angle mitre (it's been around 9 months now). I bought it to use especially as a high angle smoothing plane. The low-angle BU smoothers not only have less clearance, but you have to sharpen the blade at a very high sharpening angle to get a high planing angle, both of which contribute to an edge that stops biting sooner. I know I'm not totally satisfied with my low angle planes when I try to use them as smoothers, so I went for the standard angle mitre. Obviously I can only speculate on the results for now....

Funny how Shepherd says you can use the low-angle version as a smoother.

Re: Opinions, opinions, opinions.

John Edwards

>Word on the streets is that Shepard is no longer in business.

Ouch!

Frank D. in Montreal

>Hope that's not true, but the thought has crossed my mind a few times in the last nine months. I got my chariot about a month ago, and they sent me a blade about 3 weeks ago...

That would leave me with either getting a Holtey or making my own from scratch. One more for the rountuit list...

Re: Opinions, opinions, opinions.

Derek Cohen (in Perth Australia)

>John

Mmmm ... that was my impression from a remark make by a reliable planemaker in a discussion on FWW Knots a few days ago. I sincerely hope this is not so and that someone with direct knowledge can say something quickly (since nothing could be worse for business than unsubstantiated rumours). The guys at Shepherd have enthusiasm and much experience, and they would be a loss to the woodworking community. The recent FWW article/review was a mixed bag for them (excellent end result but not as straughtforward to achieve as promised), and I wonder what impact this had. There was also a recent move of premises with the intention of speeding up delivery ... but many prospective customers also complain about slow service and infrequent communication. Hopefully someone will say all is well.

Regards from Perth

Derek

Re: Opinions, opinions, opinions.

Dan Clermont in Burnaby

>Hi Derek,

I would never pass up the oppurtunity to own a Holtey, Anderson, Sauer and Steiner or a Hutchinson if they landed in my lap at a peice I could afford. All of these custom plane makers make beautiful tools.

Regarding BU planes:

Bevel up planes are here to stay!! and will always sell well cause of the versatility. Matter of fact, I have two friends who have bought the LV BUS and I had one of those planes in my shop from Oct 2005 till the beginning of March 2006.

I have also owned the LN version for quite some time after reading Christopher Schwarz's writeup on the LN LA jack. Also own two blades for it so I am not really new to the BU planes. Just not a fan of them.

I have also noticed on one of the BU planes I was using the blade bed was not flat to the sole causing the plane to alway s plane on one side and not the other. I know you have had a similar situation with one of yours which you filed to resolve this issue. Guess what I am saying is BU plane beds are much more difficult to manufacture and hopefully this won't be an issue in the future

Cheers

Dan Clermont

That would be sad!!

Dan Clermont in Burnaby

>I hope they are still afloat and doing alright. I haven't heard much from them on the forums over the past year. Then yet again, I haven't had as much time to watch the forums over the past year as well.

Cheers

Dan Clermont

Ahh!

Paul Kierstead

>Now I see the foolishness of all those people trying to lap their soles on a piece of sandpaper! Put the grit side down, and attach it to the plane, the problems go away!

Re: Opinions, opinions, opinions.

paul womack

>Obviously, you haven't tried applying PSA paper to the bottom of your bevel up smoother. It makes a great sanding block, and backs up FWW's sandpaper vs. hand plane test results, as well, works better than SS�, and results in truly remarkable blade edge retention.

There's many a true word...

sanding block

BugBear

Re: Opinions, opinions, opinions.

paul womack

>The #9 block plane

(I'm assuming you mean #9 1/2)

Long ago a luthier corresponded with me; he was using a #9 1/2 with a high bevel angled blade as a smoother on exotic timbers.

Luthiers use small pieces of wood, so the #9 1/2 is big enough, and it has an adjustable mouth. All the features you need. This was WAY before high angle BU was widely discussed.

BugBear

Yes BugBear, the 9 1/2

Frank D. in montreal

>