Veritas Smoother Planes

THREAD ALERT: Bevel up vs. bevel down issue

Bill Houghton, cold sunny Sebastopol, CA

>Dan,

Just tugging on your leg a little here - this gets discussed so often that some searching will probably yield you more information than you will know what to do with.

Myself, I can't help; all my bench planes are vintage (read: used, came rusty) Bailey-type planes, except for a No. 62 Stanley that I have yet to get around to cleaning up.

Bill

Re: Here, let me help

Glenn Madsen near San Francisco

>Both work. I have and like them both.

And I have vintage Stanleys, too. And Lie Nielsen planes, too. All sweet.

Don't think you can limit yourself to one type, style or manufacturer. The slope is too slick.

The next thing you know, it will be infills, woodies, shoulder planes, rabbets, moulders, and who can imagine what else.

Seriously. Buy either one now, and the other one soon.

Re: Here, let me help

Stuart Hough

>Now that's advice that makes sense!

Another option

Denis Ch�nard, Orl�ans, Ont.

>Both planes are very good (tried them both). I'm partial to the bevel-up approach, in good part because of its lower center of gravity, makes it easier to control the plane IMHO, so if I had to choose I'd go with the BUS.

But you already have a fantastic plane in your arsenal, the Low Angle Jack. I would suggest that you buy another blade (38 degree) and use it as your smoother. If 38 is not sufficient to eliminate tearout (unlikely but possible), increase the micro-bevel to the point where it is eliminated, or get the 50 degree blade.

Now there's a well established school of thought that says that a shorter smoother will be better than a jack at taming isolated spots of tearout, by allowing one to work on a localized spot on a board, which a longer jack will not allow (question of geometry). Well, my (admittedly limited) experience is that I haven't encountered any wood yet that can't be tamed with the higher angle irons on the LAJ. Besides, the longer sole of the jack will give you a flatter surface than a dedicated smoother by virtue of its length. This will prove advantageous when finishing your work, especially if you use glossy finishes...

Now, if you encounter wood that refuses to behave in one spot, I would suggest an even shorter plane than a regular smoother. One turnkey solution would be to get the Veritas Low Angle Block, with a high angle iron and the tote and knob kit. I tried it, it works very well, and has a much shorter sole than dedicated smoothers, so it should work in even tighter spots. Another option would be to get a #2 (LN) or a Mujinfang high angle smoother, or get an iron and make yourself a short high angle smoother.

With the Low Angle Jack at your disposal, it is my opinion that any regular length smoother is somehow a wasted investment. Not because the smoothers are bad (quite the contrary), but because your LAJ will take care of 99% of all your smoothing needs.

Sorry if I killed your "justification" to buy a new plane :-)

DC

Re: Veritas Smoother Planes *LINK*

Derek Cohen (in Perth, Australia)

>At its simplest, the issue is two-fold ..

Firstly, a shorter smoother is preferred by most if working either smaller boards or boards that are not perfectly flat (for "nearly flat" I mean off a power jointer). The longer LA Jack will need to remove more wood to smooth as it does not ride the hills and valleys as a shorter smoother does. Many are quite happy with the LAJ as their smoother (panel plane), but most work is more complex than may be sorted with just one plane.

Secondly, the BU Smoother is far more capable than the #4 1/2 (with a 45 degree frog) of performing on difficult grain. If you are only working straight grained wood, then it really does not matter what smoother you use. The other advantage of the BUS is that it shares a blade with your LAJ, which provides for greater flexibility.

There are a number of reviews out there on these planes. Alf has done some great ones. Below is a link to the ones I have written.

Regards from Perth

Derek


Tools and Reviews

Re: Veritas Smoother Planes

Denis Ch�nard, Orl�ans, Ont.

>OK... I don't think we will resolve this issue here, but let me try...

Firstly, a shorter smoother is preferred by most if working either smaller boards or boards that are not perfectly flat (for "nearly flat" I mean off a power jointer). The longer LA Jack will need to remove more wood to smooth as it does not ride the hills and valleys as a shorter smoother does. Many are quite happy with the LAJ as their smoother (panel plane), but most work is more complex than may be sorted with just one plane.

The wood that comes out of my jointer and planer is quite flat, so the advantage of a shorter plane seems to be lost here. In any case the wood should be flat before final smoothing. Unless the smoother can perform better (which I doubt very much), I don't see the advantage. Besides, isn't the goal to have a flat as well as smooth surface?

For short pieces I can understand the advantage of the shorter smoother, but the pieces need to be quite short to make the LAJ feel unwieldy, at least in my experience.

The other advantage of the BUS is that it shares a blade with your LAJ, which provides for greater flexibility.

Rhetorical question here, but if the LAJ can finish plane as well as the BUS, the issue of being able to swap irons becomes somewhat irrelevant, no?

Not trying to be argumentative here, but it seems to me there are "accepted notions" that are in need of a "shakeup" here...

DC

Re: Veritas Smoother Planes

Derek Cohen (in Perth, Australia)

>The wood that comes out of my jointer and planer is quite flat, so the advantage of a shorter plane seems to be lost here. In any case the wood should be flat before final smoothing. Unless the smoother can perform better (which I doubt very much), I don't see the advantage. Besides, isn't the goal to have a flat as well as smooth surface?

Hi Denis

Oh, I don't know about the boards that come out of a jointer or planer since I do not use one. I do own a planer - "thicknesser" in Australia - but have an aversion to noise and dust, so still do all my thicknessing by handplane and bandsaw. My boards are pretty flat, but I am sure that they are not as perfectly flat as yours. So general smoothing with a panel plane is not helpful since I will unnecessarily lose board thickness. I think that there is a degree of unflatness that is acceptable, that is small and will not be detected unless that finish is a gloss varnish (which I do not use) or a french polish (which I might do on small pieces, which are easy to flatten).

So a short smoother is my prefence. In this regard I am probably more aligned with the old timers. It is worth quoting Joel from his TFWW website when describing the Iles infill smoother: The short 7 1/2" length of the sole (9 1/4" overall) is the traditional length of smooth planes, and enables the plane to reach smaller depressions in the wood than a longer body can.

Having said that I would recommend the BUS over the LAJ for smoothing, I should admit that I have used the LAJ as a panel plane quite a lot since quite a few pieces this year were on the longer side. Still, all my final smoothing is with a small plane since I would hate to have to remove much wood just to remove a small patch of tearout.

Regards from Perth

Derek

Now that you mention it...

Denis Ch�nard, Orl�ans, Ont.

>I seem to remember you posting on the subject before, but I didn't remember that when I posted my reply. In your situation this makes sense.

DC

Not yet 45 still prone to memory lapses