Fore/scrub planes

also good! And then there is...

VTAndy4

>... "Grie�."

-Andy

We are not talking sand paper here, he he

Stephen Shepherd in the State of Deseret

>

Funny

Frank D. in Montreal

>It's after reading his article of the same name that I started using my jack as a jack (with a heavily cambered blade). I think the fore and the jack are 2 versions of the same tool, like Henry Mercer ("Ancient Carpenters Tools") who sees them as synonyms. The most important difference between the various plane types is the camber on the blade edge. That's the only criterion Mercer uses to tell the difference between fore and try.

One question Marc: why do you go down to a #7 after a #8 (I believe that's what you said in one of your posts in this thread)? Do you camber the blade on your #8?

Re: Fore/scrub planes

Pam Niedermayer - Austin, TX

>Sounds like a good book, Greg, and a couple of nice planes.

Welcome to Texas,

Pam

Re: Fore vs.scrub vs. jack

Pam Niedermayer - Austin, TX

>This whole fore/jack thing is all mucked up. For example, I have a C&W jack that's narrow and heavily cambered.

As to metal bench planes, I haven't a clue.

Pam

Re: Funny

Marc in Luxembourg

>The camber on the #8 is inbetween the camber of the #6 and the #7. I chose the #8 to follow the #6 because of its heft. It cleans up easier the marks from the fore. The #7 is set up as a smoother and I use it to establish a slight hollow with DC's method.

Marc

Simplifying plane nomenclature

wilbur

>You know, maybe a lot of the confusion/discussion about the "proper" names for a plane could be resolved by just discussing planes in terms of bed length, how wide the blade is, how tight the mouth is, and how cambered the blade is.

So instead of:

"I use a try plane in this step."

"That's not a try plane -- that's a jointer plane!"

"No, this plane was made in the mid 1800's, so it's a try plane!"

We could say something like:

"I use a plane with a 18" bed, a 2 3/8" wide blade with a 4/1000" camber, and a 1/8" wide mouth for this step."

It seems to me that whether a plane is wooden, metal, infill, or transitional, if it fits these parameters, it probably will perform very similarly to another with the same parameters.

Re: Simplifying plane nomenclature

Pam Niedermayer - Austin, TX

>Sure, but it quickly gets too unwieldy to discuss planes, which is why we attempt to give them names, to say nothing of the fact that few of us make cambers to a specified radius.

Pam

Merci!

Frank D. in Montreal

>

How true

jim reed @ tallahassee

>the american black walnut I was working on is common in the southern US. It likes moisture and has large pores for storing water. After drying, it carves beautifully. Hard and tough on the outside, but soft to carve. I'll bet wood down under gets less moisture and is more dense. That may account for its tough attitude toward handplanes in general.