Veritas BU Jack Plane

[Russ Massery]

They also make a toothed blade made for high figured woods.

[Harvey Pascoe]

I'm new here and after doing a search on this topic was surprised to not pull up any responses, so if there is a thread with a zillion posts on this issue that I missed, I apologize in advance. I didn't find it after looking.

Anyway, I'm a long time woodworker who doesn't use hand planes very much mainly because I work with highly figured woods on which hand planes generally do not excel. Mostly I use a flatbed sander for smoothing, but belts are getting very expensive. I had read so much about the Veritas BU plane with a secondary bevel at being great with difficult wood that I bought one and worked it to a total angle of 50 degrees. And then was appalled at how poorly this plane functions. No matter how I adjust it the blade just dives right into the wood or tears out anything but soft stuff like cherry.

I normally use an old hardware store bought Stanley that is highly tuned up and outperforms the Veritas greatly. I would continue using the Stanley but for the extremely sloppy controls which are unfixable. Other people claim to get great results from the Verita but I don't. I know planes reasonably well but surely am no expert. I'm wondering if anyone else has had this experience, and whether I'm missing something or doing something wrong. Generally I find that this plane does not work well on very hard woods and on highly figured very hard woods like bubinga, its a disaster. I wouldn't touch a piece of rosewood with the Veritas at this point but have little problem with the old hunka junk Stanley. Its a mystery to me.

Am I making a mistake in thinking that any kind of plane can handle difficult wood like bubinga, vera, cocobolo and other interlocking grain wood?

I'm about ready to ditch this thing and go for a high angle smoother. Any suggestions?

[James Carmichael]

If you're using a standard 25-degree bevel, I wouldn't expect a BU to do terribly well on hard or figured woods. Check out some of the other irons from Lee Valley, like the York pitch, etc, they should provide a higher cutting angle, which is supposed to be part of the advantage of a BU plane.

[Abi Parris]

I have the same plane and found the toothed blade to be a great frustration smoother;)
Worked well on the figured beech too!

[Harvey Pascoe]

I have the same plane and found the toothed blade to be a great frustration smoother;)
Worked well on the figured beech too!


Excuse my ignorance but how do you figure a toothed blade for a smoother? I take a smoother for a finish plane, a toothed blade for initial leveling. Am I wrong?

Will a scraper clean up what Mr. Toothy leaves behind?

[Russ Massery]

Yes, You'll need scrape after the toothed blade. not much though. Also they make a 50 degree blade also. I go to that first.

[Danny Burns]

I had read so much about the Veritas BU plane with a secondary bevel at being great with difficult wood that I bought one and worked it to a total angle of 50 degrees. And then was appalled at how poorly this plane functions. No matter how I adjust it the blade just dives right into the wood or tears out anything but soft stuff like cherry.

Try 55 degrees.

[Abi Parris]

Harvey,

Sorry for the lack of clarity... I meant that it smoothed my frustration.:D

[Jim Koepke]

I'm new here and after doing a search on this topic was surprised to not pull up any responses, so if there is a thread with a zillion posts on this issue that I missed, I apologize in advance. I didn't find it after looking.

Anyway, I'm a long time woodworker who doesn't use hand planes very much mainly because I work with highly figured woods on which hand planes generally do not excel. Mostly I use a flatbed sander for smoothing, but belts are getting very expensive. I had read so much about the Veritas BU plane with a secondary bevel at being great with difficult wood that I bought one and worked it to a total angle of 50 degrees. And then was appalled at how poorly this plane functions. No matter how I adjust it the blade just dives right into the wood or tears out anything but soft stuff like cherry.

I normally use an old hardware store bought Stanley that is highly tuned up and outperforms the Veritas greatly. I would continue using the Stanley but for the extremely sloppy controls which are unfixable. Other people claim to get great results from the Verita but I don't. I know planes reasonably well but surely am no expert. I'm wondering if anyone else has had this experience, and whether I'm missing something or doing something wrong. Generally I find that this plane does not work well on very hard woods and on highly figured very hard woods like bubinga, its a disaster. I wouldn't touch a piece of rosewood with the Veritas at this point but have little problem with the old hunka junk Stanley. Its a mystery to me.

Am I making a mistake in thinking that any kind of plane can handle difficult wood like bubinga, vera, cocobolo and other interlocking grain wood?

I'm about ready to ditch this thing and go for a high angle smoother. Any suggestions?


Hello Harvey and welcome to the Creek,

My first thing to look for when someone posts is to see if they live close enough for me to offer some hands on help. Your profile does not offer that information.

On the searching through Saw Mill Creek, it has been my experience to search for less rather than to search for more. In other words looking for > veritas jack plane < will return more results than > veritas bevel up jack planes <. To paraphrase a former governor of California, less will get you more.

The greatest asset a forum like this can have is all the people who share their experience and opinions. One of the great sharers of experience is Derek Cohen. He has a web site: in the wood shop dot com
He not only has reviews on a variety of Veritas planes, he has a plethora of information on other subjects like sharpening. That would be a good place to start.


I had read so much about the Veritas BU plane with a secondary bevel at being great with difficult wood that I bought one and worked it to a total angle of 50 degrees. And then was appalled at how poorly this plane functions. No matter how I adjust it the blade just dives right into the wood or tears out anything but soft stuff like cherry.

This is the same problem I have had with low angle block planes being used on long grain which makes me wonder about the use of the bevel up design for use in places other than on end grain. So, someone else will have to address the final word on this.

My thoughts all come down to the things one can do in trying to optimize the situation.

First is blade sharpness. I used to think my blades were pretty sharp until I learned how to get them sharper. Now I think my blades are pretty sharp, but look forward to learning how to get them even sharper.

Next is the plane's blade setting. For me, starting with the lightest cut possible is where tear out is eliminated.

Then close the mouth. This is another one of those that did not make a lot of sense to me until one of my #4s was set up with an impossibly tight mouth and a sharp blade. Of course, knotty pine is a soft wood, but it can tear out something fierce where the grain swirls. Now, after it has been planed with a joiner or jack and the tear out needs tending, a few swipes with Mr. tight mouth makes it like glass and it does not seem to matter what way the grain is running.

Finally, how tight is the blade being held. If it can wobble, this could be the cause of diving in to the grain. This is something I would look for in the owners manual or be careful as one can over tighten the blade holding mechanics with different but possibly even more disastrous results.

The good news is, as far as I know, Rob Lee wants happy customers and will surely work with you and likely even refund your money if that is the final solution.

Some woods work better with scrapping than planing.

jim

[Casey Gooding]

Did you hone the iron to 50 degrees or does the iron angle plus the bed angle equal 50 degrees??
If it is a total of 50 degrees, that's not really a sufficient angle for highly figured woods. It needs to be around 62 degrees total to be effective.
If you have honed the iron to 50 degrees and are still having issues, I would suggest two things. First, I would guess your iron isn't sharp enough. It needs to be extremely sharp for these highly figured woods. Second, make sure the mouth is very tight. You want just the slightest amount of light to peek through.
Also, make sure you are taking light cuts. Aim for a shaving around 0.001-0.002".

[Harvey Pascoe]

Thanks to all for your imput, very helpful. You got a really great forum here and somehow I've missed finding it all these years.

Anyway, I just went over the plane for the umpteenth time and find it near perfect. I've always thought the proof of the plane is in the shaving. It does a piece of cherry with slightly wavy grain just fine. The shaving is slightly thin in the center, meaning I have a tad of concavity in the blade tip, but not enough that it is visible. Stone problem there, I can correct that. I sharpen to 4000 and thats it for me; no time to go further and shouldn't have to.

Blade is a 25 degree and my notes indicate that I back beveled to a total of 50 degrees. The back bevel is probably too steep.

This blade is inadequate, plain and simple.

I don't know whether Veritas offered a 50 degree blade when I bought this several years ago, but if they did I missed it, otherwise I surely would have gotten that instead of 25. Anyway, its simply my mistake in thinking that this set up should handle tough wood. I can see no reason why the 50 blade with another 12 degree bevel wouldn't do just fine, so I'm gonna go ahead and buy it. Cheaper solution than selling it on ebay and buying a standard bench plane. And besides, I kinda like the thing and I'll have both blades for two planes in one.

Again, thanks to all.

[Jim Koepke]

Thanks to all for your imput, very helpful. You got a really great forum here and somehow I've missed finding it all these years.

Anyway, I just went over the plane for the umpteenth time and find it near perfect. I've always thought the proof of the plane is in the shaving. It does a piece of cherry with slightly wavy grain just fine. The shaving is slightly thin in the center, meaning I have a tad of concavity in the blade tip, but not enough that it is visible. Stone problem there, I can correct that. I sharpen to 4000 and thats it for me; no time to go further and shouldn't have to.

Blade is a 25 degree and my notes indicate that I back beveled to a total of 50 degrees. The back bevel is probably too steep.

This blade is inadequate, plain and simple.

I don't know whether Veritas offered a 50 degree blade when I bought this several years ago, but if they did I missed it, otherwise I surely would have gotten that instead of 25. Anyway, its simply my mistake in thinking that this set up should handle tough wood. I can see no reason why the 50 blade with another 12 degree bevel wouldn't do just fine, so I'm gonna go ahead and buy it. Cheaper solution than selling it on ebay and buying a standard bench plane. And besides, I kinda like the thing and I'll have both blades for two planes in one.

Again, thanks to all.

The proof of the plane may be in the shaving, but the plane is a tool of many parts. The determination is rather the whole is not capable of the task at hand or is it one part impeding the working in unison of all the other parts.

In your first post, you mention a secondary bevel in your later post, you mention a back bevel. To my knowledge a back bevel is not used on a bevel up plane and may actually be detrimental.

You also mention your shaving being thin in the middle. This could also be a major cause of problems. Instead of having a cambered blade, you have a concave blade. This sounds like dig in city to me.

At one time, my finest stone was a 4000. It is amazing the difference a few microns can make. I am hoping one day to acquire an even finer stone than my current 8000.

jim

[Harvey Pascoe]

Like I said Jim, I'm not a plane aficionado and I thought the bevel terminology meant the same thing as I din't know you could put a bevel any other way. Anyway, the two bevels are on the same side.

I cannot detect the concavity visually, only when I take an 0.003 shaving. That is good enough for me. I need to get work done, not play with planes all day. If it takes a nice shaving, that's all I ask of it.

[John Schroeder]

Hi Harvey,

Let me second (or third) the recommendation to increase the bevel further. I have the BU jointer and the jack, and love them both. That said, I went through a similar phase where I just couldn't avoid tear out on difficult wood. I went up to 50 degrees and it was better but still not that great. I finally tried increasing the total included angle to 57 (12 degree bed plus a 43 degree bevel and a 2 degree microbevel). That solved the problem, and I can smooth anything from BE maple to the nastiest reversing stringy hickory with great results. I also crank down the mouth. I don't find that to be too critical as long as it's not gaping.

FYI, as I think someone else noted a back bevel increases the included angle on a standard bevel down plane like your stanley, but it doesn't change it on a BU plane. I wouldn't recommend a back bevel unless it is a tiny one for sharpening purposes, a la the ruler trick the David Charlesworth uses.

[Jim Koepke]

Like I said Jim, I'm not a plane aficionado and I thought the bevel terminology meant the same thing as I din't know you could put a bevel any other way. Anyway, the two bevels are on the same side.

I cannot detect the concavity visually, only when I take an 0.003 shaving. That is good enough for me. I need to get work done, not play with planes all day. If it takes a nice shaving, that's all I ask of it.

OK, we have the bevel question figured. As John said, making the angle even steeper may bring about the results you are seeking.

In my way of working, a 0.003" shaving is about a medium. When I am really hogging wood with a jack or joiner a shaving of 0.010" is about the maximum. Once most of the saw marks are gone, the plane is either dialed down to something in the 0.003 - 0.005" range or the plane is changed to one optimized for that range. My smoothers are tuned and set up to take shaving of less than 0.001 - 0.0015". The less material being removed, the less fiber strength to hold on and tear out material from below the blade's edge.

jim

[Harvey Pascoe]

Decided I'm going to buy a 50 degree angle blade, that way i'll have two planes in one. Its worth fifty bucks to me to not continuing messing with this blade.

BTW, how about some advice on rounding the corners of the blade. Is this necessary to avoid ending up with some nasty "steps" on the surface? Or is my skill at finish planing simply lacking?

[Chris Friesen]

There's really no need to buy the higher-angle blade...a small secondary bevel on the low-angle blade works fine and is easier to sharpen since you're removing less metal. The higher primary bevel angle is really only useful if you hone freehand (that is, without a jig).

To avoid the "steps" (also known as "plane tracks") you can radius the corners of the blade or else make the whole edge of the blade slightly curved. This curve is known as "camber" and you should be able to find lots of information about it online. Basically the idea is that you curve the blade slightly such that when you're cutting a typical shaving thickness in the middle it thins out to nothing at the edges of the blade.

[Jim Koepke]

Decided I'm going to buy a 50 degree angle blade, that way i'll have two planes in one. Its worth fifty bucks to me to not continuing messing with this blade.

BTW, how about some advice on rounding the corners of the blade. Is this necessary to avoid ending up with some nasty "steps" on the surface? Or is my skill at finish planing simply lacking?

Check out Derek Cohen's site:

http://www.inthewoodshop.com/WoodworkTechniques/index.html

This page has a lot of information including cambering bevel up blades.

jim

[David Keller NC]

Harvey - You mention that you hone on a 4000 grit stone and that's it. Understand that this will not be close to good enough, especially with very hard, figured woods. The standard for "sharp" is very, very different for a hand plane blade or a chisel than it is for a power tool blade like a jointer knife or a table saw blade.

Generally speaking, you should be able to see yourself (like a mirror) on both the back side of the blade and the polished bevel. Moreover, if you are not hollow-grinding the blade first before honing it, you must be very careful that you polish the very edge of the blade instead of just most of the bevel - this is very, very easy to do starting with a flat instead of hollow bevel.

The best "sharp" test I know of is to hold a piece of standard printer paper in your left hand, and your blade between your thumb and forefinger in your right hand. The blade should cut the piece of paper under its own weight like it was not even there - even a little tearing suggests an unsharp blade. Note that being able to shave your forearm with your blade is not only dangerous, it's not a sufficient test of sharpness.

OK, assuming that you do indeed have a very sharp blade, you may have run into a problem that is shared by bevel up planes - they are not, despite internet forum indications to the contrary, superior to bevel down planes. In particular, they suffer from exactly the symptom that you describe - a tendency to dive into the wood when the grain is more than 60 degrees out of parallel to the surface. This generally manifests itself by the plane stalling, and/or taking out a big hunk of the surface. Because of the bed angle, this is generally not an issue with a bevel-down plane unless the blade is very thin or the plane's sole is not flat.

However, note that an unsharp blade will mimic this disadvantage of bevel-up planes, and based on your sharpening description, that is where I'd look first.

[lowell holmes]

I have the bu Jack Plane and all of the irons. I have worked soft curly maple while building a chair. The 50 degree iron handled the maple quite well. My LN 4 1/2 or my Stanley 5 1/2 would not. Neither would my 604, 605, and 607 bedrocks with their Hock irons.

I would not want to be without the 38 degree bevel iron, it is the iron I use most. I rounded the corners of the iron in order to eliminate the plane tracks. It worked!

The 50 degree iron is harder to push through the wood. The iron is 2 1/4" wide and creates a wide shaving. It is a lot more work to use it.

I would not hone the 25 degree iron to a steeper angle because that is the iron I use on the shooting board. It handles end grain easily.

As far as the superiority of a bevel up versus the bevel down planes, IMO it is really a matter of preference. I have just about quit using my LN 4 1/2 smoother and my Stanley 5 1/2 jack plane. I prefer the bu jack.

[Harvey Pascoe]

My 50 degree plane iron arrived and after honing it up to a total bevel of 62 degrees, put it to the test on some of my orneriest stock like bubinga and figured cocobolo. All I can say is wow! What a difference. I then went totally nuts grabbing pieces of stock off the rack and trying it out on them. Tear out free on everything but tiger maple.

As a smoothing iron, its perfect. I get a sandpaper free surface with only a tad of scraper touch up remaining. Wouldn't want to try to flatten a board with it though.

Just want to say thanks for all the advice.

[Jim Koepke]

It is a wonderful feeling when something finally comes together, isn't it?

jim

[Harvey Pascoe]

Yep, its kinda like "where have I been all my life!"