Smoother Plane Questions.

nice Canadian accent... eh?

V Parisian

Re: Smoother Plane Questions.

ThomD


>Well, a recent review in some magazine suggested that almost all the alternatives they tried were pretty equal, including one of the newly carelessly assembled planes by Krenov. So sure, if you want to save money on a smoother you can make one on your own, buy a good enough blade and you may make one that is pretty remarable right out of the box. Despite all the breathless prose it's about 90 percent the blade and how you sharpened it, and 10 percent getting the blade supported with good contact and the mouth the right size, difficulty wise.

Re: Smoother Plane Questions.

ThomD


>It can replace both sanding and finishing in ideal circumstances. More comonly it replaces 90 percent of the sanding. And example of the former would be extremely wellplanes wood surfaces in shoji or similar household surfaces in a Japanese house. To work the wood needs to be perfect. A less convincing example would be a hand planed surface that isn't all that great, where the sanding was left out and the surface could be improved, but it looks rustic to the buyer.

A scraper is often used after a plane and then light sanding to blend in the different surface textures one gets planing, if one has to plane from all sorts of wacky angles to follow the grain.

Re: Ditto on sharpening

Dave Mount


>I agree with sharpening being the vast majority of the issue. While higher end smoothers are "better" planes, a more ordinary smoother is capable of handling final smoothing in all but the most demanding woods if the iron is sharp. There are other aspects to getting a standard bench plane into top smoothing form, but in my experience, most vintage Bailey-type planes (assuming they haven't been abused) will produce good results just as they are with nothing more than a well prepared iron. Not to say some don't need significant work on other aspects, but many (most, with my sample size of about 8) do quite well just as they are.

I've no idea where you are on the eternal learning curve that sharpening is. Sharp is not an absolute term, it is a relative term. Every year that goes by, my definition of sharp changes (hopefully toward the sharper end of the spectrum!).

Using handplanes for smoothing is definitely something you can learn on your own, but you'll be way ahead if you can get with someone who knows something about it, so you can experience what a sharp, tuned smoother can do. Once you know what proper performance is like, it's a lot easier to work your way toward that and diagnose problems along the way. I know this because I had to learn on my own, and it delayed my progress significantly. Depending on where you live, it is reasonably likely someone on this board is both near you and willing to show you what they know.

The 4-1/2 you say you have is a very popular smoothing plane. Even if you buy a high end smoother, it won't work well (even out of the box) unless the iron is really sharp. So the first target is the sharpening; with that, the plane you already have will do well. Although not necessary, one upgrade you could consider is a high end iron, such as a Hock, LV, LN, or other (circa $30-$35 USD). . .but even that is not a necessity.

My $0.02,

Dave

Re: Smoother Plane Questions. *LINK*

Derek Cohen (in Perth, Australia)


>Hi Joe

Some responses ...

1 - are smoothing planes intended to be the final plane to use prior to finishing? In essence replacing sanding?

Smoothers can indeed replace sanding. Some smoothers do a better job than others. But there are some situations where sanding may still be preferred to a smoothing plane, such as when the grain is too difficult to plane without tearout occuring. Another alternative to consider at such times is to use a card scraper. While finishing a surface with a smoother is one of the more satisfying areas of woodwork, do not rule out other strategies. They all have a place.

2 - it seems, from reading old posts, the LV BU Smoother gets a lot of recommendations. I do not intend to buy one real soon rather save some pennies first. Is the LV BU Smoother a good one to get? Are there cheaper alternatives?

The LV BU Smoother (BUS) is the Real McCoy. It is indeed a superb smoothing plane. There are other viable alternatives, such as the LN #4 1/2, and each has a loyal band of followers. So do not asak here which is best. You are warned! < grin > Follow the link below for my review of the LV BU Smoother.

A smaller, not necessarily cheaper alternative to the BUS is the Veritas LA Smoother. This has the advantage of also being an excellent plane for a shooting board. Its performance is up there with the BUS.

There are many, many other smoothers than will provide a satisfactory performance. It really depends on the wood with which you work. The "humble" Stanley is the cheapest alternative and, with careful tuning, may be all one woodworker requires. These planes are best suited to straight grained, usually softer woods, where they are quite capable of excelling. Eventually you will own several smoothers, each different from the others, each preferred in a different context, yet all doing the same job.

Regards from Perth

Derek


Review of LV BU Smoother

Dave you bring up some good points

Joe in a Cleveland suburb


>I think my sharpening skills are reasonable and getting better. My plane tuning technique is pretty good too I think. I spent an evening last winter in Ellis' shop playing around with some of his planes. Jeff Jewitt's shop is a couple miles from me and I've seen him use a plane too. So I know what my target is as far as what sharp is. I understand what you are saying.

You mentioned Hock (or similar) irons. I didn't think of that. But maybe just adding one to my 4-1/2 would be a good upgrade until I save enough pennies to get a nicer smoother (that or I convince the wife that I really do need it now...). Would any certain one (make of iron) be better than the other? If I sharpen the iron specifically for smoothing, should it be sharpened with a certain angle?

Thank you!

Joe

Smoother Theory

woodburnbob


>Joe, you are asking for theories or opinions. Everybody has at least one. Here's mine.

To take a split slab to a panel: Use a scrub plane to get approximate shape. Use a jack to refine shape and remove ridges, gouges and big tearout from the scrub. Use a jointer or panel plane to get it really flat and remove jack marks and tearout. Use a smoother to remove jointer/panel tearout.

A smoother has a small footprint. The blade is to be slightly curved, not just chamfered. The purpose is to clean tearout in local depressions, assuming an otherwise perfectly smooth and flat surface from the jointer/panel/jack. It's not meant to take full width shaving down the panel length.

If you can use a jointer, panel plane or jack to produce a flat and smooth enough surface for you without tearout, you are done. This assumes you put as good an edge on the blades of any of the plane you use as you would for a "smoother".

The problem is that as wood grain rises and falls through a panel, you often will be cutting with and then suddenly against the grain. The $1000+ smoothers with tight mouths, mass, thick blades and so forth are attempting to minimize final tearout planing into the grain.

I agree with the all the others that nearly all the variance is explained by the blade. All the rest you hear and read about planes is basically regurgitated marketing, snobbery and effete elitism (which sadly are sins I commit everyday).

Re: Irons and angles

Dave Mount


>Joe--

In a Bailey-type bench plane, the bevel on the iron faces down; it is the back of the iron that meets the wood. If the back of the iron is flat, then it is the angle of the frog that determines the cutting angle, which is 45 degrees in a standard bench plane. Because of this, the angle of the primary bevel on the iron doesn't come into play much.

Higher cutting angles, e.g., 50 degrees, are often preferred for smoothing more difficult woods (e.g., highly figured). While Lie-Neilsen manufactures special high angle frogs to achieve this higher cutting angle in their planes, this is not an option for a vintage plane. An alternative is to but a backbevel on the iron (e.g., 5 degrees), which will change the effective cutting angle. You should be able to search up info on this, if not, ask again and someone will explain.

My advice would be to just work at the standard 45 degrees the plane is bedded at (and the factory bevel angle on the iron) until that performs well in straighter grained stock, then begin to experiment with back bevels and gnarlier wood.

Best,

Dave

Gnarly, Gnarlier, Gnarliest *LINKS*

woodburnbob


>Dave, I agree with everything you say here and above.

I did have a slight brain spasm on the word "gnarlier". I realized that in all the years I've seen it in a woodworking context, I've never really pondered it.

For those of you with a tasteless sense of humor, like mine, the link you really want to explore is the second one.

Standard Definitions of Gnarly

The Gnarliest Definitions of Gnarly

Re: Dave you bring up some good points

Jerry Nicholson


>4 1/2 IS a nice smoother. Like others, I would suggest a blade upgrade (I use LV blades) and a Hock chip breaker. With a blade upgrade, you will probably find that the slot for the lateral adjuster cam is too narrow by a few thousands. I use a Demel Moto Tool and a 1 inch rigid abrasive disk to widen the slot to fit. It takes me about 20 minutes. Be sure to wear safety glasses.

Among the benefits of the LV Bevel up smoother (and jack plane): Finer blade extension adjustment with minimal backlash, easy to control lateral adjustment, mouth adjustment that is far superior to any Bailey or Bedrock pattern plane, and capability to have any blade angle from 37 degrees up. Stock LV blades provide 37, 50, and 60 degrees. I generally use the LV planes for the final smoothing pass after I have used a #3 or #4 1/2. Others might disagree, of course.

Jerry

Thanks all for the advice - I appreciate it.

Joe in a Cleveland suburb