A recent discussion on one of the hand tool forums got me thinking about this topic. The discusion about the quality of contemporary hand tools is a common one on the net and in the woodworking magazines, however, this time, 18th century tools were being compared to contemporary tools. The immediate assumption was that the contemporary premium tools were head and shoulders above what was available to cabinetmakers in the 18th century in terms of quality. However, I don't believe this to be the case.
To really understand this we need to take a look at the tools of the time and the tool makers of the time and remove 250 years of age and abuse from the equation. Comparing an old wooden plane found on ebay to a brand new Lie-Nielsen is really not a fair comparison for several reasons.
First, the old wooden planes found on ebay or at your local antique or flea market are more likely to be mid to late 19th century models. I can say for sure all of the wooden planes I have are definately 19th century tools based on their features and their condition. The truth of the matter is that your are very, very, very unlikely to ever find a true 18th century tool in useable condition in the wild. Time has simply taken it's toll on any of these tools that may still be lingering out there. So the tools you see are more likely mid to late 19th century to early 20th century models. I compare these more to vintage Stanley planes than the premium contemporary versions.
What's the difference you ask? Plenty. I'll use planes as my example becasue that's what the previously mentioned discussion focussed on. Let's start by taking a look at the manufacturing methods. In the 18th century, toolsmakers were a specialized trade of their own. Plane irons would have been made by a blacksmith and the stock would have been made by a planemaker. Many cabinetmakers may even have made thier own planes as evidenced by the many extra new plane irons in a lot of period inventories.
Fast forward 100 years to the mid 19th century and factories are taking the place of skilled toolmakers. A prime example of this movement was the Auburn Tool Company which employed inmates to make their wooden planes. Hardly skilled craftsmen if you ask me. In addition, to speed up the process of manufacturing, we begin a to see a lot of the refinements on the wooden planes, once common on 18th century planes, disappear on the 19th century models. The rounding of the back of smoothers and the "decorative" chamfering begin to disappear. Features that once made the tools comforatble to use all day long are now left off in the interest of faster, cheaper manufacturing.
Planes that were once hand built at several different pitches, specialized for different applications, are replaced by a single common pitch. Again, this is in the interest of saving time and money during manufacturing. In addition, less cabinetmaking was being done and more house carpentry and joinery so the tool manufacturers focused their efforts on tools for these less precise trades.
So you can see how one might perceive that the tools used by the masters of the 18th century might have been inferior to what can be produced in today's super modern CNC equipped factories. But let's take a step back and look at a "contemporary" planemaker who isn't following suit. Clark & Williams have been making planes for years that seem to throw sand in the face of those who would call 18th century tools inferior. The designs of their tools are strictly based on 18th century examples in their own collection. When compared to the other contemporary toolmakers' products, their planes always compare right at the top of the pack.
Today we would consider the C&W tools at the top of the heap or the creme de la creme of contemporary tool makers right up there with Lie-Nielsen, Lee Valley, Wenzloff & Sons and a host of others. The difference between these other toolmakers (with the exception of Wenzloff, who does make 18th century replica saws)and C&W though is that C&W's tools are representative of what was available 250 years ago. They stick to the designs and the construction methods that were employed by all of the planemakers in the 1700s so there is no reason to believe that the masters of the 18th century use tools that were in any way inferior to what we have available to use today.
I personally use a lot of old (19th century) planes in my work. I have also owned old Stanleys, tools from Lee Valley and Lie-Nielsen. I will say that the finish and detail on the contemporary tools is exceptional and far surpasses the old Stanleys or even my old woodies. However, is that the only measure of quality? If I plane a board with a Lie-Nielsen, a Lee Valley, an old Stanley and one of my old woodies and the finished surface is identical from all four planes, does it matter that the sides of the Stanley aren't exactly square to the sole?
I'm not trying to sway anyone away from their beloved LAS. I am certainly not one to criticize anyones own personal preferences. I just think it's time to dispell the myth that our ancestors used inferior tools. After using all sorts of tools from new tools to 150 year old tools, I can honestly say that sharpening and tuning being equal, none of the wood that I've worked was able to tell me what brand of plane I used to plane it.
So next time you're at your local tool haunt, don't just throw that old woodie aside to get to the cast iron goodies underneath it. Give it a second look and maybe even a second chance to do some good work. If you still can't bring yourself to try it, pick it up anyway, and send it to me : ).
Well, I've been pretty busy the last couple of weeks so I haven't gotten a lot of shop time, hence there hasn't been much to blog about. I have progressed on the second pair of built-in door frames after mucking up the first set and I have the doors almost done so it's time to start thinking about the next projects. Sure, we need a new entertainment center for the family room and I'll be starting on that soon but I have also been thinking about the other project I alluded to late last year. I'm referring to the video project I mentioned in a December 2008 blog. For full details of my rambling thoughts on it see the original blog about it here. I received quite a bit of positive feedback and interest in the video series through both email and comments to the blog post so I do plan to pursue it.
Suffice it to say that I've still been playing around with this concept and I have a project in mind and a general idea of what I'd like to do but I'm still working out the details. For one, I don't have access to a digital video camera. I have a still camera that actually takes pretty good video, which is what initially gave me the idea, but the problem I'm running into is the sound. The microphone on that thing is pretty weak and unless I talk real loud, it's difficult to hear me. Even when I do talk loud enough to be heard, the quality isn't all that great and I'm just not that happy with it so I'm still playing around with some other ideas with regard to the actual filming.
Hopefully I'll be able to figure something out to work out the videos. My fall back plan if I can't get the video concept to work is to do a detailed written project writeup in article form, however this is not my preference. So many hand tool skills and techniques really are best demonstrated and observed rather than printed. There are just some things that are difficult to put into writing and pictures, and even more difficult to comprehend from writing even though they may be very simple concepts. Hopefully I'll come up with a solution that will allow me to do this in video form.
In the mean time, for anyone who will be interested in building along once I get started, I have put together a basic outline of the project concept and a tool list that I'll share now in case you want to get a jump start. Keep in mind that this project is still in the development phase and may change as I go along so you'll have to bear with me. I'll try to keep you posted on my progress here in the blog.
The general idea of the project is that I will be doing a series of short videos, maybe 10-15 minutes or so each in length. The videos will be short in order to keep the file sizes smaller for easier uploading and viewing. My current estimate is that there should be somewhere around 15 short videos. The videos will be geared toward folks new to the craft and those looking to learn hand tool skills so I'm not going to be building a Chippendale highboy. The project will be simple but I'll be doing it with only hand tools.
I want to start with a brief intorduction and shop tour just to give everyone an idea of how I work. Then I'd like to do a couple of videos on the tools for the project, including which ones will be needed for the project, what to look for when buying these tools and how to tune and sharpen them all up. After that we'll actually get into building a piece of furniture using the tools we tuned up in the previous videos. We'll go from basic design and dimensioning through the entire building process right through the finishing step. In the end I think it will be a good start-to-finish series on a lot of basic skills and techniques which can be built upon with future, more challenging projects (which I may or may not do depending on how the first series goes).
So without further ado, I've put together a tool list for anyone looking to join in the project once it gets started. Some of these tools are optional if money is tight but they will make the project a little easier if you have them or can get them. If you have been woodworking for any length of time you probably already have most of them. If you are a beginner, you may need to get several. So here's the list:
-Long Hand Saw filed rip (optional; needed if you will buy wide stock and rip it)
-Backsaw, 12"-14" filed rip (optional but better for cutting tenon cheeks)
-Backsaw, 12"-14" filed cross cut
-Try/Jointer plane, 22"-24"
-Low Angle Block Plane (optional)
-Try Square
-Marking Knife and pencil
-Straight edge or yard stick
-Marking/Mortising Gauge
-One Bench Chisel (anything from 3/4" up to 2" will work)
-One Mortise Chisel (about 3/8" wide)
-Wooden Mallet
-Brace & Bit (optional but recommended; one bit around 1/4"-3/8" is fine)
-Screwdriver
-Liquid Hide Glue
-Sharpening Equipment
-stones or sandpaper
-tapered saw file(s), mil file, saw set
-auger bit file (optional but needed if you get the brace and bit)
I think this is a bare essential tool list for most projects. This list of tools will allow you to complete the project I'm going to be doing as well as plenty of others. If you don't have any tools at all, this is a good place to start that won't require a big initial investment. If you already have a lot of tools, try to limit yourself to this list and see what you learn.
So wish me luck and hopefully we'll be up and running sometime soon. I also hope you'll build along with me and then share what you learn to help out other folks. I think it will be fun!
If you've been reading my blog for any length of time you know that I like making and using my own tools. However, up until now, most of the tools I've made were mostly made of wood or at least mostly wood. But for some time, I've wanted to replace a couple of my saws with something better. I was just never really happy with them the way they were. As much as I would like one, my tool budget doesn't allow the purchase of a premium saw. I also didn't want to go majorly modifying my current saws. My dovetail saw was shorter than I wanted anyway so modifying it still wouldn't get me what I wanted. So I did what any good Yankee would do, I made them.
The first challenge was the back of the saw. I had never made one before but I did know what I wanted. I didn't want a milled back, I wanted a folded back. While milled backs are very beautiful and function as good if not better than a traditional folded back, they just aren't very traditional and I like the traditional styled tools. The problem was that I had no specialized tools for bending metal. I had read the Norse Woodsmith's article on making saws in which he makes a bending brake for folding brass backs but I didn't want to go through so much expense and trouble to find that I really didn't like making saws. I wanted to do this as inexpensively as possible and with as few specialized tools as possible.
The solution came to me one day when I was in Lowes looking for some supplies for some home improvement projects. In one of their hardware isles they have mild steel stock. It comes in flat, round and angle. When I looked at the 14 gauge angle stock, the idea hit me. See, most angle stock I've seen looks like it was extruded from a die and has a thick sharp outside corner. Indeed this is exactly how the 12 gauge stuff was at Lowes. However the 14 gauge stock was bent into a 90 degree angle from a flat piece of steel. They had made the first bend of a folded saw back for me! I picked up some 3/4" angle and some 1" angle. The 3/4" would be for smaller saws like dovetail and carcass saws and the 1" would be for larger back saws like sash and tenon saws.
The next thing I had to figure out was how to finish bending this stuff into a folded saw back. At first I tried to play blacksmith and cold forge it with a 3 lb. hammer on the anvil of my machinist vise. After all, this is likely how saw backs were originally made in the 18th century. It worked eventually and I did build my first saw that way but the process of folding the back was slow and inacurate. I ended up with a lot of bends and twists in the back that I spent a lot of time and effort removing. In the end, removing the bends and twists resulted in a lot of dents and dings in the steel back that just would have taken too long to remove. I had to find a better way to bend the back for my second saw.
The solution came to me after an email exchange with Adam Cherubini. On his web site, he currently sells brass backed saws. However, he mentions that he wants to offer more traditional steel backed saws in the future after he works out a better process for folding the backs. I let him know of my experiences and he mentioned that the tool smiths in Colonial Williamsburg use some sort of press (hydraulic or otherwise, he wasn't sure) to fold backs. When I read this email, the light went on again.
Pictured is the setup I came up with. I had an old metal woodworking face vise that I removed from my bench when I built my wooden twin screw vise. My plan was to use it as a press to close the fold of the pre-bent steel angle. I just clamped the vise upside down to the bench because I didn't want to re-bolt it to the bench but if your vise is already attached to your bench you can of course use it as is.
So I started by cutting a piece of the steel angle to just slightly longer than the length I would need for the back of the saw. Leaving it a little long would allow for some filing to clean it up later. I placed the steel angle in the vise with the open part of the angle right down against the guide bars of the vise. I slowly applied pressure and began closing the bend. After just a little bending, I opened the vise, shifted the piece down and did the same on the part of the steel that extended outside of the vise jaws. I continued this process of bending and shifting the steel back and fourth to make sure I closed the bend evenly. Trying to close one end too much more than the other results in twisting and bending in ways that you don't want a saw back to twist and bend.
After doing this about four or five times, I had the bend about half way closed. I had to move my clamps to keep the vise from shifting under the extreme tourque being applied but after moving the clamps everything seemed to work ok. I removed the piece from the vise often to make sure I was not introducing unwanted bends and twists like I had done with my forging attempt. Everything looked to be going well so I continued onward. I flipped the back over and finished closing the fold with the open end facing the top of the vise (which would actually be the floor in my setup. My vise had a small recess at the bottom that helped to finish closing the fold. Again, I worked slowly to close the fold evenly. Don't want to mess it up now.
Success! The fold closed evenly and the back stayed straight. I ended up with a very nice saw back without all the cussing and fussing of the first one. Another benefit was that the steel was relatively unmarked on the sides. On my first attempt of cold forging a back, I did a lot of damage to the back that I just was not able to remove from the finished back without removing way too much metal. So I left it in. This back came out amazingly smooth and free of blemishes. Bonus!
So I had one nice, straight, practically blemish free saw back. This picture was taken before I did any filing of chamfers or sanding to clean up the back itself. All that was left to do was tap in a piece of spring steel saw plate, fit a handle and some split nuts and file in some teeth. The back was the hard part and now it wasn't so hard anymore! Sweet! I was so thrilled I tried it again with some 1", 14 gauge stock I was planning to use for some larger tenon saws. The process worked equally well for a 16" and a 19" piece of 1" steel angle. Excellent!
So here's the final result. A pair of matching saws. The handles are made from the last of a piece of bubinga that I had. The split nuts are built using the Norse Woodsmith "Poor Boy Split Nuts" method with a minor modification. Since I don't have the ability to silver solder or braze the brass, I used cyanoacrylate glue to attach the bolt head to the threaded brass rod. I also stole an idea from the Grammercy saws kits and used a lock washer under the bolt head to keep it from spinning instead of the traditional square shaft with matching mortise. Much less work and you can't tell the difference until you remove the bolts.
You can see in this picture the difference in the resulting backs from the cold forging and the vise method. The smaller dovetail saw back was cold forged. You can see the dings and dents I couldn't remove. The larger carcass saw back was folded in the vise and is much cleaner.
Both saws have 0.020" thick saw plates. The small dovetail saw has a 9" plate and 17 PPI (16 TPI) filed rip with 5 degrees of rake. I built this saw for dovetailing thin stock like drawers and small boxes. The larger carcass saw has an 11" plate and 15 PPI (14 TPI) filed rip with 5 degrees of rake. I built this one for dovetailing thicker material like 7/8" thick carcass sides and the like. It could also be used for cutting small tenon cheeks, however, I have a pair of rip filed tenon saws in the plans for the future to replace my not so fun to use tenon saw. The best thing about building a saw this way is that I think just about anyone can do it. No special tools required. Mucho fun!
Well I've taken the first step toward learning my new skill for 2009. The lathe is done. After 2 weekends and a few hours a few nights during the week, I have a very servicable spring pole lathe.
The bulk of the lathe was built from a single 2 x 12 x 16' piece of construction lumber. I was able to find a knot free piece in the 16' length so it was fairly easy to work. The remainder of the parts, the upper lever and the treadle boards were made from a piece of 1 x 6 pine. The poles are two 1-1/4" yellow pine poles meant for closet rods. These are usually found in the molding isle of the big box store. The collar around the two poles to adjust the tension is made from a half of a length of 1/2" copper pipe hammered flat, wrapped around the poles and then riveted together. The dead centers and axle for the upper lever were cut from a piece of 1/2" round mild steel bar. The tool rest is adjustable using a 1/2" carraige bolt. Everything required to build this lathe was purchased from the home center for a total of about $50. I think this lathe will be just the ticket for turning furniture parts and chair legs.
Now I just need to learn to turn!
Recently I've read a lot of posts on the forums I frequent asking for recommendations for where to send a hand saw to be sharpened. In fact, there have been so many in the last few weeks that I think it's time for a blog about it. You see, I find it interesting that there is so much talk about the best waterstones and diamond stones and lapping compound, etc. but little talk about sharpening saws yourself. Why?!
Honestly, would you send your plane irons and chisels out every time they needd to be sharpened? I would hope not as that would mean you'd be without your tools a whole lot more that you had them in your shop. You probably wouldn't get too much work done. Or worse, you'd work with dull tools because you put off sending them off to get sharpened. Yet it seems like this is exactly what most folks are doing with their hand saws.
Unfortunately, what this means is that the majority of folks are probably working with saws that aren't really sharp. I really don't understand why there is so much fear of sharpening a saw. It seems like everyone is willing to dive right in and learn to sharpen their plane irons and chisels but very hesitant to consider sharpening their saws. But sharpening saws is so easy! And so much cheaper to get set up than buying yet another set of water stones (which I don't use by the way but everyone else seems to prefer them so that's why I mention them instead of oil stones). For the price of a single water stone you can get everything you need to sharpen your saws.
I'm not going to go into great detail on how to do it here as Pete Taran's saw filing page is a better resource than I could ever put together so no sense reinventing the wheel. Besides being here, the link to his saw sharpening pages is always in the Woodworking Links box at the right. Get yourself a couple of files (a mil file for jointing and a triangular tapered saw file or two depending on the saw[s] you need to sharpen). If your saw needs some set added, also pick up a plier type saw set. That's it for equipment! About $25-$30 worth of sharpening gear. That's about what it would cost to send a saw out for a single sharpening. Pete Taran's instructions will get you the rest of the way.
Make a simple saw vise in your shop with a couple of pieces of wood. I simply used my bench vise with a couple wood scraps to clamp the saw plate for a long time before I got a saw vise. I still do it this way sometimes as I'm not too fond of my current iron saw vise. You could also make a nice vise if you want to and there are plenty of plans for them on the net. Just search for saw vise or saw chops for several very good examples.
So that's my rant for today folks ;). If you read my post from a couple of days ago, maybe you might make saw sharpening your chosen new skill to learn this year. I gaurantee that once you try it and learn it you'll kick yourself for not learning to do it sooner. It really is as easy as I am making it sound. Your saws will thank you too as they will no longer have to suffer being less than optimally sharp. They will perform better for you, and, having sharp saws will improve your woodworking, I gaurantee it :)!
Happy New Year to all! I hope everyone had a safe and enjoyable holiday season. I know I enjoyed my 2 week vacation. But now, looking out my window at the freezing rain currently falling here in the East, I'm reminded that the next 2-3 months are likely to be cold and nasty. Time to turn on the heater in the shoppe.
However, this means that there will be more time to spend in the shoppe as well. The holidays are over so there won't be any place to go. It's cold and miserable outside so I won't get much outdoor activity in. What better way to spend a quiet evening after the kids are in bed or an early Saturday morning than in the shoppe.
This year, as in most others, I have resolved to lean a new hand tool skill. In previous years I've tried to take on at least one project a year that will challenge my skills and give me the opportunity to try something I've not done before. After all, this is how we improve. You don't become Stevie Ray Vaughan by playing "Twinkle-Twinkle Little Star" your whole life. You need to constantly push yourself with new and more challenging projects in order to improve your skills.
Last year I did a few things like carve a ball and claw foot, carve an 18th century inspired shell and most recently, make a tombstone raised panel door prototype (I have not done the real ones yet as I'm waiting for the skew chisel I need to arrive). In 2009, I am challenging myself by stepping outside my rectilinear comfort zone. I am planning on learning to turn.
Being an amateur cabinetmaker, I don't have frequent need for round stuff. However, every now and then I wish I had the skill and tools necessary to do so when I do need it. This year I'm making it happen. I'm currently in the finishing stages of building a Roy Underhill designed spring pole lathe to add to my shoppe. You didn't expect me to get something with a tail, did you :)! I'll be sure to post it here when it's done and I've had a chance to try it out.
My main goal for the lathe is to allow me to to try my hand at another new skill I've been chomping at the bit to work on, making chairs. Specifically, Windsors. I love the look of Windsor chairs and have for some time now dreamed of making one and I think this year is the year to have a go at it. Though it may not be until later in the year as I do have other, higher priority pojects to complete first, building this lathe is a step in that direction. I'm very excited about my new challenges this year.
So what about you? What new skill or skills have you challenged yourself to learn this year? If you haven't I really urge you to try just one new skill this year. I think you'll be surprised at how much your other skills improve as well by challenging yourself just beyond your comfort zone. Not to mention, it's just a lot of fun.
Happy 2009!
So there I go again. Thinking! It's always dangerous when that happens. But there I was reading "The Woodwright's Guide" and thinking. Thinking about wood; thinking about tools; thinking about furniture. But what really stuck in my mind this time was the format of the book, of all of St. Roy's books for that matter. His style of writing is so very well thought out and continuous (and witty, smart, etc.).
When you read any of the Woodwright's books, you are taken from the basic beginning and up through projects or processes with increasing complexity as the book progresses (e.g. from felling the tree straight through making a piece of furniture). As I contemplated this, it occured to me that this is what is missing from a lot of woodworking instructon media. Sure, there are tons of books on tuning up hand tools, how to use a table saw, how to build shaker furniture (with measured drawings of course). But I've yet to see one source that takes you through these things from start to finish. You are left on your own to put all the pieces together from several different sources. This includes most video instruction and classes as well.
So I had this silly idea that I could put together something using several short videos (maybe 10 minute each). Each video would build on the previous one like a mini apprenticeship but centered around an actual project. I could put the videos right here on the web site so people could check them out whenever they wanted, for free. I wouldn't just show how to set up a plane or sharpen a chisel. Rather I would actually walk through the recommendation I have made numerous times to folks seeking hand tool advice on several of the message boards. Specifically, I'll pick a project, acquire and tune the tools needed for that project and then build it. I'll use the process of building the project to demonstrate the techniques rather than just showing a video of a technique (like hand cut mortise and tenon for example) without applying it to an actual piece of furniture.
Of course this would be geared toward those just starting out in the craft or power tool folks wanting to incorporate more hand tool work. I certainly don't claim to be an expert by any means so experienced folks might not learn much from the videos (but you never know). It might be something that the seasoned wodworkers might like to watch just to get a good chuckle though. If anything, you'll likely get to see me bleed and be able to tell your kids "See kids, here's an example of what not to do". It would probably be more entertaining than prime time television anyway.
So what do you think? How silly am I being? Would anyone actually be interested in something like this or am I that out of touch? Leave me a comment if this is something you'd be interested in seeing. If there is enough interest, perhaps I'll persue the idea after I finish my current project. If there isn't a lot of interest, that's ok too. There are plenty of other foolish things I can come up with the next time I get to thinking.
I was reading through my copies of Moxon and Nicholson over the weekend and I got to thinking (always dangerous) about planes. I'm not sure why as I'm not really infatuated with planes like a lot of folks get when it comes to hand tools. I don't have dozens of them and I have no problem passing up a $5 user if I don't have a need for it. I also don't have any multiples. Call me crazy but I pretty much limit my tool kit to tools I actually use. Currently in my arsenal of bench planes I have an 8" smoother, a 17" fore plane, a 22" try plane a 30" jointer and a Stanley #5 jack plane that I use mostly for carpentry tasks.
What I really got to thinking about though was plane setup. The more I thought about it, the more I came to realize that thin shavings are over rated. Now this is not a new concept for me as I have never been a big advocate of thin shavings and I always chuckle quietly to myself when I read or hear mention of measuring plane shaving thickness with a dial caliper. I mean, does it really matter if your jack plane can take a 0.001" thick shaving? Is it actually 0.001" anyway? Wood is a fibrous cellular material and in a shaving that thin likely compresses under the pressure of caliper jaws so are you actually taking an acurate measurement anyway?
But the rediculous practice of measuring plane shaving thickness to thousandths of an inch isn't really what this post is all about. What I really want to discuss is the application of shaving thickness. As I thought about my planes this weekend, I realized that most people spend way too much time futzing with planes trying to get every one they own to take a whisper thin shaving. I don't know why it wasn't so obvious to me before but for some reason, it made sense to me this weekend why planes historically were not made with the super tight mouths that seem to be expected today. Asside from the fact that highly figured fast growing timber wasn't as commonly used as it is today, cabinetmakers of yore simply didn't want planes with tight mouths because they were of limited use.
As a hand tool user, my most used bench planes are my fore plane and try plane, followed by the jointer. My fore and try planes are used on every single surface of every single board of every single thing I build. My jointer is used anywhere I need a long straight edge or a matched and glued joint (as in wide panels). By contrast, my smoother is used only as a final treatment on only the most important money surfaces, and even then, only for a couple of passes to make a show surface shine before applying a translucent finish. On a painted piece, I may not use the smoother at all.
The fore plane and try plane are used for probably 80% of the planing that is done in my shop. These planes are set up to bring rough stock to flat in fairly quick order so I want them to be able to hog off material or at least take a relatively thick shaving. I don't want to spend all day planing these surfaces. For this reason, a thight mouth and a fine shaving is not necessary and actually isn't even desired.
By contrast, in a mixed shop, one which employs power and hand skills, the most used planes are likely the try or jointer and smoother. In this case one may want a thinner shaving as they are only putting the final finish on the surfaces of stock that was prepared using a powered jointer and planer.
So for those of you who have stuck with my rant for this long, I guess my advice is this. Before purchasing and tuning your first (or next) plane, ask yourself a couple of questions. First, what is your intended use of the plane? When you have answered this question, then ask yourself if this task requires a tissue paper thin shaving. Really think about it too, don't just nonchalantly say yes and move on. When you really think about it you may be surprised at the answer. Then move on and get some work done and forget about those cottony thin shavings. They may be impressive to some, but what is more impressive is the actual work you can get done with a tool properly set for the task at hand.
Thin shavings really are over rated ;)!
Being the cheap wood hoarder that I am, I have trouble getting rid of leftover scraps and offcuts from projects long since completed. I use plane shavings as packing material when mailing out boxes. They also make great tinder for starting the grill or fireplace so I can't bring myself to throw them in the trash. I'll go as far as to burn the excess shavings and put the ashes in the garden or flower beds rather than send them to the landfill, even though they are biodegradable. I still have a piece of 12/4 African mahogany from a project I completed some 6 years ago. The piece has a large diagonal split acros it's end, effetively making it useless for anything but the fire, but I keep holding on to it thinking that someday I'll find a use for this small offcut. Until that time is sits at the bottom of my scrap bin.
One very good use I have found for many of my offcuts is to make tools or small toys from them. Making tools for the shop is a great way to use up some of your small offcuts that would otherwise end up in the fire. I made these try squares from offcuts of different species just floating around the shop. The miter square was made from cherry offcuts of trim pieces from our kitchen remodel last year (the pieces supplied with new cabinets for use as filler strips between the end cabinet and wall). It's also very satisfying working with a tool you made yourself. The wood squares also have the benefit of not damaging your work should you drop them and they have thicker blades, giving a striking knife more to register against.
The adjustable bevel was a fun one as well. I knocked it out is about 40 minutes. I do want to make it sliding however so that it can be used as a drilling guide in addition to a marking tool, so this one isn't done yet.
The marking gauge is a good way to use up thicker but smaller offcuts. This one is based on an article by Dean Jansa in the Dec 2006 Popular Woodworking. It is very comfortable to use and can be adjusted one handed, a feature missing from most commercially made gauges. I have plans to make a matching mortise gauge with two pins on each side of the beam permantly set to 4 chisels in my kit. This will reduce time spent setting the adjustable pins on my current mortise gauge.
I'm still trying to locate a good source of marking gauge pin stock though. I'm not happy with the way modern HSS drill bits work. They can only be shaped on the high speed grinder and cannot be honed on stones or shaped with a file easily. If you know of a source of good pin stock, please let me know.
The plane adjusting hammer was made from scraps of purpleheart and oak. The purpleheart is extremely hard, however, because it is wood, it still doesn't damage my planes or mushroom the irons over like a steel hammer would. The panel gauge has a mahogany head and an oak beam. I took the pin out of this one as I made it from an 1/8" drill bit but wasn't happy with the way the drill bit performed so I need to replace it with something that can be shaped and honed by hand. The drill bits just don't work well.
The taper reamer was fun as well. It was designed by John Alexander. There was a lot of spokeshave work in this one as I do not yet have a lathe. It's obviously not perfectly round, however, it doesn't matter as it only serves as a holder for the scraping blade, which is made from an old handsaw blade from a broken saw. I made this reamer to ream the holes in Windsor chair seats, which I have not attempted to build yet. I did use it to ream the holes for the legs in the bench of my shave horse and it worked very well.
Speaking of spokeshave work, here are a couple I built from offcuts of bubinga. These were fun to build and a lot of fun to use. I have a Stanley #51 high angle shave but my shop made wooden shave is much nicer to use. The hardware is available at most home centers (#10-32 machine screws and matching knurled brass knuts). The blades were made from annealed 1/8" x 3/4" O1 tool steel and heat treated with a simple plumbing propane torch. The travisher still needs heat treating and tuning but I'm not at the point of making my chair seats yet (only due to a lack of time) so I have time.
So next time you have a limited amount of time in the shop, dig through the scrap bin. Who knows what kind of gem you might find in the firewood pile. The possibilities are almost endless.
Recently, one of the first planes I ever bought, a very nice Stanley #65 low angle block plane, had to be retired. The adjustment screw threads in the casting stripped, leaving the adjustment mechanism unable to function. For awhile, I adjusted it like I do wooden bench planes, however, this was a good opportunity for a proper replacement.
When I saw this plane online, I took a chance on it without actually seeing it in person. From the pictures I saw online, it appeared to have a lower bed angle than a typical bench plane. In addition, there is no tote, and no mortise where a tote would go. I was guessing, but I thought it was a strike block. Well, when the plane arrived earlier this week, I was thrilled that my guess was correct. What I had bought was the precursor to the modern block plane.
In the 18th century, this type of plane was referred to as a strike block. Later in the early 19th century it was referred to as a straight block, presumably, because the plane had no tote like other bench planes of the period. Later in the 19th century, these planes became known as miter planes, as their primary function was to trim the end grain of miter joints. Today, metal versions of these planes are much more common than this early 19th century wooden version. Stanley later made a version they numbered #9 and called a coachmaker's block plane.
My strike block is pictured here with my stripped out #65 and a #5 jack plane to give you an idea of it's relative size. My version is about 10" long, though 18th century versions were usually closer to 12". Unlike a modern block plane, this plane is bedded with the iron bevel down like a typical bench plane. This identifies it as likely being an American made plane (which it is). English versions were typically bedded with the iron bevel up but at a lower bed angle like today's low angle block planes.
The effective cutting angle on both types of planes is the same, however. A typical low angle, bevel up block plane is bedded at around 12 degrees. With the addition of a 25 degree bevel on the plane iron, the effective cutting angle is around 37 degrees. My plane, typical of American made planes, is bedded bevel down at an angle of 35 degrees.
Today I cleaned it up, honed the iron and tried it out on some pine end grain. The finish left behind was super smooth and polished. The plane cut just as well as a bevel up low angle block plane. I am extremely happy with this replacement. Anyone want a low angle #65 with a stripped casting?
RSS Feed