Turning from power tools to hand tools

[Derek Cohen]

I find I can take two boards that are almost perfect in dimensions and run them through a few times side by side and end up with identical dimensions. To me the 735 is like a scrub plane.

Bill, that is what handplanes do. And they do it better ... finished surfaces. Without dust and noise ... and dust.

You are planning to use handplanes to finish, so why not kill two birds with one stone. This is why you want to use handplanes, not so? This is where the enjoyment starts. There is no sander than can compete with the finish off a hand plane.

Personally, I would keep the planer and sell the drum sander. The planes will do a better job of removing waste fast and getting to a dimension without any rounded edges (which is what sanders can do).

Regards from Perth

Derek

[Bill Sutherland]

Yesterday I took Allen Breinig's suggestion and broke down one board into two identically sized boards using only hand tool. After a disastrous start with ripping via handsaw I started the dimensioning process with the scrub and my 62. I wanted to get everything done with the handplanes. I do have to say that I did get them "almost" identical but in the end I was off 2mm in width and thickness. In hindsight I suppose I could have butted the two together in a vise and planed until they were identical. Next time I'll do just that. Instead I used the drum sander to get them identical.
I was able to get the silky smooth result with the 62 and can see where sanding from that point would ruin that beautiful finish. My disconnect is that once I got the wood to the silky smooth finish I would then start my process of dovetailing to create the box. Since most boxes seem to get sanded after joining the dovetails wouldn't this negate the silky smooth finish? If I was building furniture or just doing large panel glue up I could see the advantage of finishing with a smoother.

[ken hatch]

Yesterday I took Allen Breinig's suggestion and broke down one board into two identically sized boards using only hand tool. After a disastrous start with ripping via handsaw I started the dimensioning process with the scrub and my 62. I wanted to get everything done with the handplanes. I do have to say that I did get them "almost" identical but in the end I was off 2mm in width and thickness. In hindsight I suppose I could have butted the two together in a vise and planed until they were identical. Next time I'll do just that. Instead I used the drum sander to get them identical.
I was able to get the silky smooth result with the 62 and can see where sanding from that point would ruin that beautiful finish. My disconnect is that once I got the wood to the silky smooth finish I would then start my process of dovetailing to create the box. Since most boxes seem to get sanded after joining the dovetails wouldn't this negate the silky smooth finish? If I was building furniture or just doing large panel glue up I could see the advantage of finishing with a smoother.

Bill,

Why the obsession with identical? Boards used for hand tool joinery do not need to be identical, they only need correctly prepared reference edge and face.

ken

[Jim Koepke]

[edit]
My disconnect is that once I got the wood to the silky smooth finish I would then start my process of dovetailing to create the box. Since most boxes seem to get sanded after joining the dovetails wouldn't this negate the silky smooth finish? If I was building furniture or just doing large panel glue up I could see the advantage of finishing with a smoother.

Actually after the dovetailing the boxes may be given a few swipes to remove any of the "proudness" of the pins and tails. This usually is done with a low angle block plane working towards the center of the box to avoid blowing out the edges of the pins or tails.

jtk

[Marshall Harrison]

<p>
Fascinating thread. I would really like to combine power and hand tools in my shop. The thought of using hand tools is peaceful and soothing to think about. But power tools have their place when up against a time frame that gets less with each pasing day. Or so it would seem. Disclamer: I don&#39;t have a shop yet and no clients. I&#39;m crrently planing and building a shop specific to my needs and wants.</p>
<p>
&nbsp;</p>
<p>
4, 4.5, 5, 62, scrub plane, block plane, bench plane, smoother, jack plan, low angle and high angle. Frogs? So confusing for someone jsut starting out. How to decide what to get and when to use which plane when you can&#39;t even speak the language. Dimensioning, roughing and smoothing are about the only terms I have understood in this thread.</p>

[David Eisenhauer]

Marshall - Web based woodworking "how-to" or tutorials (either full blown instructional treatments or quick You Tube videos) can get you started. Also, there are several decent books written that help new-to-the-hand-tool approach towards woodworking that are very useful and remain as reference material until the information becomes imbedded. Some of the web guys and authors are better woodworkers than teachers or writers and some are better writers/teachers than woodworkers, but all can help when you are just starting out. Some names that come to mind are Paul Sellers, Shannon Rogers, Rob Cosman, Chris Tribe, David Barron, Jim Tolpin and many, many more. Many of the above mentioned have slightly differing methods for the same task, but there are different ways to get to the same place and each of us have individual preferences as to which way we prefer. A guy named Chris Schwarz has something out called "Coarse, Medium and Fine" or something similar that discusses the (to Chris) basic procedure in processing wood for a project. Many folks have started with Paul Sellers' as their initial web-based instructor and have good things to say about his instruction. Research and get started. Have fun.

P.S. - Go the individual web sites of SMC members Brian Holcombe and Derek Cohen for their thoughts and many, many good photos of their tools and work.

[Jim Koepke]

4, 4.5, 5, 62, scrub plane, block plane, bench plane, smoother, jack plan, low angle and high angle. Frogs? So confusing for someone jsut starting out. How to decide what to get and when to use which plane when you can't even speak the language. Dimensioning, roughing and smoothing are about the only terms I have understood in this thread.

There are some great resources here that seem like they are hiding if one doesn't know where to look. One store of knowledge is the Neanderthal wisdom/FAQs:

http://www.sawmillcreek.org/showthre...al-wisdom-FAQs

It is hidden in the "Sticky Threads" at the top of the Neanderthal Haven Forum. It contains some good starter information such as:

http://www.sawmillcreek.org/showthre...th-Hand-Planes

For many folks needs the standard "set of planes" was a smoother, a jack and a jointer. Most often this was a #4, #5 and a #7. Most folks would add a block plane to this group and would be good to go on most projects. Some folks might have smaller hands and would like a #3 for their smoother. Folks with larger hands might like a #4-1/2 for a smoother with a #8 for their jointer. With the jack planes the #5-1/4 is a junior jack and a #5-1/2 or #6 is a jumbo jack.

A lot of what works best depends on the user. If one is mostly making keepsake boxes the smaller planes may be the best fit. If one is making large cabinetry the larger planes or a combination of sizes may be the best strategy.

For me such decisions are difficult so it was easier to just get one of each. In reality some of my planes have multiples in their size. This is handy for a plane like a #5, aka jack plane as in Jack of all trades. One can be set up for use as a scrub plane with a smallish radius to the blade. Another can be set up with a bit less radius (camber) to follow up. One can be set up with a rather straight blade for use as a short jointer and one can be set up for light shavings as a long smoother. The hard part is remembering which is set up for what.

jtk

[Marshall Harrison]

Thanks David & Jim.
I'll check out thoe resources. I've got this book on my Amazon wish list - https://www.amazon.com/dp/1440329605...8IFUDOU6&psc=0

Hoping to purchase that soon and use it for a resource. I'll also check out more Youtube videos which is where I have learned what little I already know.

[Patrick Chase]

I was able to get the silky smooth result with the 62 and can see where sanding from that point would ruin that beautiful finish. My disconnect is that once I got the wood to the silky smooth finish I would then start my process of dovetailing to create the box. Since most boxes seem to get sanded after joining the dovetails wouldn't this negate the silky smooth finish? If I was building furniture or just doing large panel glue up I could see the advantage of finishing with a smoother.

I classify surfaces based on whether they'll be accessible to a smoother after assembly. For the ones that won't be I take them to final finish before assembling joinery, and try my best to keep them clean. If I fail then I'll typically use a scraper to refine them after assembly (or maybe a rabbet plane for "simple" inside corners parallel to the grain).

For surfaces that will be accessible after assembly and where handling is a major concerrn, I stop short of final smoothing, assemble, and then take a light smoothing pass over the finished piece. I do this 100% of the time with box sides, for example. I typically smooth them with a #2 or #3 after I surface the DTs with a block plane as Jim outlined. It sometimes takes some clever fixturing/clamping, but it's worth it.

[Bill Sutherland]

I classify surfaces based on whether they'll be accessible to a smoother after assembly. For the ones that won't be I take them to final finish before assembling joinery, and try my best to keep them clean. If I fail then I'll typically use a scraper to refine them after assembly (or maybe a rabbet plane for "simple" inside corners parallel to the grain). For surfaces that will be accessible after assembly and where handling is a major concerrn, I stop short of final smoothing, assemble, and then take a light smoothing pass over the finished piece. I do this 100% of the time with box sides, for example. I typically smooth them with a #2 or #3 after I surface the DTs with a block plane as Jim outlined. It sometimes takes some clever fixturing/clamping, but it's worth it.

This is where I’m trying to get. Eliminating those power tools I seldom use or don’t enjoy using and building boxes and smaller items like that with hand tools is where I want to end up. After my exercise yesterday taking the boards to final dimensioning convinced me I could do it with the tools I have and possibly eliminate ones I don’t like. I didn’t realize that planes could be used in the final finishing of boxes. That’s encouraging. I won’t be getting rid of my power saws but would sure enjoy using different planes to get my boards ready for final assembly. I realize jointing one face and then using power planer to finish up is the normal procedure but to me it isn’t any fun and after spending 6 hours planing the boards to identical thickness I really had fun.

[Normand Leblanc]

...after spending 6 hours planing the boards to identical thickness I really had fun.

Yes, like many others here I enjoy hand planing and have fun doing it. I can't believe that I had all that dust/noise/danger around me before. My shop is entirely manual tools, no electrons.

[David Eisenhauer]

I believe working primarily on smaller boxes (at first anyway) may be a good way to jump into hand tools because the sheer volume of donkey work to be performed with hand tools on a project would be a lot less and also allow for quicker feedback on the effectiveness of your technique on the different tasks involved.

[Brian Holcombe]

Jointing and thicknessing is excellent training. You'll learn much much more about wood properties.

Make yourself some winding sticks and a straight edge. Make certain that you have a sturdy work bench.

[Patrick Chase]

Make yourself some winding sticks and a straight edge. Make certain that you have a sturdy work bench.

OK, so I have a long-standing nit to pick here. Winding sticks are great, and absolutely essential for long and narrow boards, but I see a lot of people using them in cases where they're really not the most efficient or accurate way to work.

If the board is reasonably wide relative to it's length, say 1/8 as wide as long or wider, then you can just check the diagonals for flatness with a straightedge. If the center and both diagonals are flat (or at least have the same concavity/convexity), then the board isn't twisted. You can detect VERY small amounts of twist that way, arguably at least as small as you can using winding sticks. Winding sticks magnify twist and make it easier to see by being wider than the workpiece, but they also add several sources of imprecision and variability.

[Warren Mickley]

I think you are making extra work for yourself by avoiding winding sticks, Patrick. We typically use the winding sticks early on the process to help make a mental map of the surface. This helps avoid planing areas that are low to begin with, saving both effort in planing and thickness of stock.

We also use winding sticks in making an edge joint.

Winding sticks are mentioned in 17th, 18th, and 19th century texts.