Stanley 60 1/2 block plane variations?

Re: Stanley 60 1/2 block plane variations?

Moses Yoder in White Pigeon, MI

>The 60-1/2 was made from 1902 to 1982, so I would assume there were a large number of variations. I could not find a type study to the #60 type planes in Walter's book, although I would assume the logo would follow the same type as the #9-1/2 and the #18.

Pics of Stanley 60 1/2 block plane variations

wilbur

>Here are some pics to illustrate the differences I noticed.

In these pictures, my plane is on the left, the one that I am comparing it to is on the right.

This picture is an overview of the planes side by side. As you can see, there are differences in the top part that holds the blade in place, with the one on the left having what looks like a space for a label. Also, the one on the left has a front knob that is made of steel(?), while the one on the right is made of brass. The casting of the lever on the left plane looks not as refined as on the right plane. You might be able to see that the left plane has a throat adjuster lever that is flat, while the right plane throat adjuster is bent up a little.

I wasn't able to get a good picture of this, but the plane on the left does not have anything imprinted on the side, while the plane on the right has "60 1/2" imprinted on its side.

Here's a rear shot. The plane on the left has a plain thumb wheel, while the right plane has "Stanley Made in U.S.A." imprinted on it. I couldn't get a good picture of this, but the left plane has "Made in U.S.A." cast in the bed of the plane in the back, while the right one doesn't have anything there.

Here's the thing that kind of bothers me. Hopefully you can see that the throat adjustment lever is in the same position on both planes, but on the left plane's throat is wide open, while the right plane's throat is closed.

Any thoughts would be greatly appreciated!

I would be interested to know

Bill Houghton, Sebastopol, CA

>how much bedding there is under the iron at the mouth between these two examples. One of the weaknesses of the 60-1/2 planes I've held in my hands is that there's very little metal supporting the iron/blade at the mouth. For instance, in the picture below, the No. 18 on the left has probably 3/4" of bedding, and the lever cap lands right in the middle of the bedding. The 60-1/2 (US made, and thus older) on the right has perhaps 1/4" or 3/8" (the edge of the bedding is visible in the picture as a line - the part behind, which could have been bedding if they'd cast and machined it properly, is lower than the bedding), and I've noticed that 60-1/2 lever caps tend to fall a bit short of the bedding. All this should lead to chatter of the iron - I've never quite understood why Stanley designed them this way.

I don't know if earlier 60-1/2 planes were superior in this regard.

For even better bedding, there's the No. 65

Bill Houghton, Sebastopol, CA

>Here, Stanley did it right - substantial support for the iron.

looks to me like a difference in age...

Scott Burr in Ben Lomond, CA

>The plane on the left look newer model to me. You can tell by the roughtness of the lever cap and label well. Definatly not the same quality as the one on the right.

That's my story, and I,m sticking to it.

Re: I would be interested to know

wilbur

>Bill Houghton: "I would be interested to know how much bedding there is under the iron at the mouth between these two examples."

Ask and ye shall receive:

The 60 1/2 on the left has relatively little support for the plane blade, while the one on the right has a bed that's about 3/4" in length, like in your picture of the #18 and the #65.

Also note that the cutter adjustment mechanisms are different, as well.

The one on the right is most likely older

Bill Houghton, Sebastopol, CA

>and the keeper, if you're deciding to keep just one.

Adjustment mechanisms: Stanley was fond for a while of adjusters with two different diameter threads of differing pitches on the adjuster, causing the actual adjusting pawl to move as you threaded the adjuster forward. Complex, but it must have made some sort of sense.

Re: The one on the right is most likely older

wilbur

>The one on the right does have that dual diameter thread mechanism. It's pretty neat, but there was some moments of panic when I wasn't able to advance the cutter mechanism, when I clearly saw that there was thread left, and thought that I had somehow stripped the heck out of the cutter mechanism screw. It was just the thicker part of that dual diameter thread mechanism bottoming out on the casting.