LN 4 1/2 problem

Re: LN 4 1/2 problem *LINK*

MikeW

>Uh, the price of the improved CB to fit that #4 1/2 is $25...

But if you are feeling adventurous, you can hammer some of the curve out of the old one and then refile the contact edge so it fits against the iron properly when snugged down.

Take care, Mike


LN chip breakers

Re: LN 4 1/2 problem

Wiley Horne--So. Calif.

>Bill,

How tight is the mouth set? Close chipbreaker + tight mouth sometimes equal jammed shavings. Suggest opening up the mouth wide to get the shavings feeding correctly; then close it down by degrees to a normal setting. If there is something in the escapement clogging things, you'll discover it that way.

The old chipbreaker should work OK, it's just thinner than the new ones.

Wiley

Re: LN 4 1/2 problem

MikeW

>Hi Wiley--there is an "issue" with a finely set chip breaker and the higher angle frogs.

Because of the large curve of the former chip breakers, setting the iron too close will result in the shavings rolling back on themselves too much--or simply jamming if a heavier cut is taken.

I had the same issue with my LN #4 1/2 when I had it if I were taking anything but the lightest of shavings when the iron was set close to the front of the mouth.

I smacked mine using a largish piece of Bubinga against a thick piece of steel plate a few times to relax the curve. Then filed the contact area for what becomes a new angle.

The improved chip breaker obviates it by being a lower profiled, thick chip breaker. Very much like those found on good old double irons from woodies.

Take care, Mike

back to grinding steel...

Re: LN 4 1/2 problem

Wiley Horne--So. Calif.

>Mike,

I stand corrected. I was relating to the 45 degree frog sitchyation, not the 50 degree frog that Bill has. So it's metal-bashing vs. $25.

Wiley

Re: LN 4 1/2 solution

Andrew F in Australia

>Hi Bill,

I'd be checking the fit of your backing iron (chipbreaker - US) first.

Assuming that this is fine, then get a bit of 2000# or 1500# wet and dry and polish the top of the backing iron so that the chips slide better off it. Finish up with Brasso (metal polish)

Give this a go and see if it works - first off, however, check that the backing iron hasn't bent and there's a gap between the leading edge of the backing iron and the blade. THis won't be visible as a fine line of light as the trailing edge of the backing iron will be in contact with the blade still.

My guess is that you'll need some file work on the backing iron. If you don't, try to polish the upper face of the backing iron for the first 1/2" or so.

Cheers,

Andrew

My thoughts as well

Derek Cohen (in Perth, Australia)

>Agreed Andrew.

I usually resist using the term Chip Breaker instead of Cap Iron, but here it seems to be appropriate.

I suspect that the chip breaker may be too bulbous and, if then, may be flattened a tad - initially with a judicious wacking, and then by vigorous rubbing with rough surfaces ... is anyone else getting hot here? :)

But first I would examine the contact surfaces - are they flush, or permitting shavings to jamb in there?

Regards from Perth

Derek

Re: LN 4 1/2 problem

Pam Niedermayer - Austin, TX

>Have you tried it without any chipbreaker? With maybe just a wedge if the blade is too loose without the cb?

Pam

Re: LN 4 1/2 problem

Warren in Lancaster, PA

>I was wondering if you did not have another plane that you could use. For this work I would not use a plane that was wide or heavy or high angle or tight mouthed. I looked at Pam's list of recommended bedding angles but poplar (Liriodendron tulipifera) was not on. I dont't think many would suggest a high angle for this wood.

Here are some suggestions. You could file the front wall of the mouth so it angles forward slightly instead of going straight up, giving better escape. This would not affect the actual opening. You could adjust the frog for slightly larger opening. You could try other irons and cap irons that you have on hand. For troubleshooting purposes, the iron or the cap iron need not be the full width.

why the 4 1/2

Bill Tindal, E.TN

>1st thanks for the suggestions.

As to why I am using this plane to fit drawers, getting to an answer involves both a historical and a philosophical journey. I am of the mind that the best tool for any task is the tool that is in hand. If that doesn't work , well then, try something more appropriate. The drawer fronts are walnut, and not the most cooperative grained walnut at that. The sides are resawed, quartered poplar and there was a portion of these boards with a grain reversal that was problematic. After buying the 4 1/2 I found that I like a massive short plane for any task where it can be used. The 4 1/2 stays on the bench so it is the first thing I grab when shavings need to be removed. If I wasn't cheap I would buy a normal frog for it and probably never install the high angle again.

Re: why the 4 1/2

les winter

>Hello Bill.

I have a few "stay-sets" laying around. I may have one to fit your plane. If you measure your cutter and let me know its dimension, I'll see if I have a match. If I do, it's yours if you would like it.

regards

Les

Re: why the 4 1/2

Marc in Luxembourg

>Hi Bill,

There are good suggestions to come to a solution in all the threads above. Reading your last thread - you have a philosophical problem ;-) Your toolstorage isn't up to date. You have to reach with just the hand to grab the most appropriate tool for the task. You have to be able to choose from the bunch of your best tools with one slight pick up movement. That doesn't seem to be the case in your shop.

If you had a normal pitched frog on your LN smoother, you had maybe no clogging problem anymore but you would have tearout on difficult grained walnut. That would bother you and would bring you back again to your initial situation. Reinstalling the other frog isn't a solution for a woodworker who thinks the tool in hand is the most appropriate. It would eat up workflow to change frogs for different tasks. So I first would rethink tool storage, then polish the chipbreaker, then widen the angle of mouth escapement and finally think of buying a decent block plane that goes in your apron pocket.

Cheers ;-)

Marc

Angle of C/B edge

David Charlesworth

>Bill,

An enlarged drawing or sketch will show that a traditional chipbreaker with a 45 degree edge could easily produce a shaving trap, if the mouth was set ultra fine and the C/B was set very close, for 50 or worse still 55 degree frogs.

Metal bashing or filing a forward lean on the front edge of the throat will solve this problem.

However, few chipbreaker front edges are truly sharp from the manufacturer (even L-N) and the fit with the back of the iron needs checking as well. I would recommend doing these two checks first, as they are the most likely cause.

See page 28 of my third book "A guide to Hand Tools and Methods", if you have it!

best wishes,

David Charlesworth

Success is at hand,,,thanks to all

Bill Tindal, E.TN

>The wealth of information on WC never ceases to amaze and impress me .

The mating between chip breaker and iron was fine. So I turned the old chip breaker into something more resembling the new chip breaker by mashing it in the vice. (note to others that may try this approach. the amount of force to do this is about 10X less than you would assume. this is not a sturdy piece of metal)

After mashing it too flat, and then rebowing it a bit, I filed the leading edge so that it was no longer at 90 degrees to the iron, and polished it. Then I set it close to the iron edge and was pleased to find that the jamming problem was gone! I think the problem was a combination of the chip breaker leading edge being nearly perpendicular to the iron and the bulge of the conventional chip breaker adding to congestion at the mouth.

I proceeded to edge a number of sticks I was resawing for banding (ooops, was I supposed to use a No6 for this?) with no hint of jamming.And then I surfaced some additional stock and again no jamming. I was SO happy.

I must say that I was not impressed by LN customer service in this matter. It seems that they should know this is a problem.

Re: Success is at hand,,,thanks to all

Craig

>There was a lot of discussion on this topic several years ago on Badger Pond. If I remember correctly, several people suggested that the chip breaker should be called a cap iron, as Derek and Andrew suggested, and that its purpose was not to break the chip but to stiffen the iron. That led to the proposition that it didn't have to be positioned very close to the sharp edge of the iron, as is usually suggested, but rather could be set an eighth of an inch or even more behind the edge without hurting performance (akin to Pam's suggestion). In my hands, this cured the jamming and I haven't noticed any hit in performance. It was an easy fix. Having said all this, I think I'll try your vise-induced flattening trick...sounds like a winner.

be gentle

Bill Tindal, E.TN

>that thing, what ever we call it, bends like aluminum. I thought it might have some spring to it and require a good squish to flatten it some. Nope! I mashed it flat with littl effort. As much as mashing it I think filing the leading edge to make it more sloped was important. As received it presented a wall behind the cutting edge and likely deflected shavings into the throat instead of up the iron and out of the way. One suspects the new cap iron got invented to fix this problem.

Re: be gentle

David Charlesworth

>Bill,

Delighted to hear that your plane is now functioning as it should.

The new improved design has several distinct advantages.

However I repeat that most cap irons/chipbreakers are not sharp enough from the manufacturer.

Any bluntness or residual square edge will adversly affect the ability of the shaving to flow out of the mouth of the plane.

best wishes,

David Charlesworth