Plane old question

[Josh Bowman]

I have a lot of old turn of the century Stanley planes and love em. Has anyone done a comparison of plain old turned up Stanleys to Bedrocks? I'm getting a hankering for a Bedrock plane because I "think" they might do a better job. Wondered if there's a good show down on the 2.
Thanks

[Jim Koepke]

I am not sure if there is a good showdown, but I have 3 Stanley/Bailey #4s and one Bedrock #604.

My main wood here in the Pacific North West is pine or other soft woods.

I am thinking of listing my #604 for sale in the next couple of days. Just need to take a few pictures and figure out if I want to leave it with the original, lightly pitted blade, or install a newer blade.

The Bedrock does seem to have a little less "feel" of the wood being worked. I think this is due to being a touch heavier and a bit less prone to vibrations than the Bailey design. That is also the likely reason they are considered better.

Of course, if you want to limit the number of planes in the shop, having one with an easy to adjust mouth like the Flat Top Bedrock is nice.

jim

[James Taglienti]

The Bed Rock plane is dramatically over-hyped. It still suffers from the one thing that all Stanley planes do - a thin iron. It's best feature is the ability to adjust the frog without removing it from it's seating. unfortunately it is on an angle, so during adjustment you will still have to fuss with the depth knob while turning the frog screw. The main flaw of the stanley-type plane is not frog seating or adjustment. It is the iron, plain and simple. I have had 4 bed rock planes and sold 2 already because they simply do not perform any better.

[Josh Bowman]

It is the iron, plain and simple. I have had 4 bed rock planes and sold 2 already because they simply do not perform any better.
That may tell the story. I have all of the Stanely Bench planes but the #1 ($$$$$$). I've sharpened all to be able to take the smallest shaveing. Over the holidays, I got into tweaking my planes and discussed with Chris Schwartz which to buy Hock blades for. He suggested 1st the #3 or 4, then the #7 or 8, he felt it was a waste for the #5 since it's suppose to hog wood. So I got one for my #4 then #7 and have been very pleased with the improved operation. So that got me wondering if the Bedrock with the Hocks might be even better. I guess it's an American thing to try to make it better. I've found out time and again, leave well enough alone.
I've actually never seen a head to head on the two designs and even wondered if there is much of a difference. I Googled around last night and couldn't find much other than opinons. If I can ever borrow one (Bedrock), I may put up a thread how they perform side by side with the same Hock blade and chip breaker. Wonder if anyone would find that useful?

[Sam Takeuchi]

I don't have a Bedrock and I've always wanted one just for the sake of it, but so far, regular non-Bedrock planes have performed superbly that I can't justify spending 3 or 4 times more for a plane that might or might not make a marginal difference.

If anything, spending that money on bevel up plane would make major difference in terms of operation and result, also the convenience of wider cutting angle to work with. Once I started using bevel up planes, I simply can't find a reason to buy a Bedrock, that's like a step back. It does have slight inconvenience of not being able to adjust blade while pushing the plane, but you'll find a way to adjust it just as efficiently, I haven't found that to be a problem or inconvenience.

[Jim Koepke]

That may tell the story. I have all of the Stanely Bench planes but the #1 ($$$$$$). I've sharpened all to be able to take the smallest shaveing. Over the holidays, I got into tweaking my planes and discussed with Chris Schwartz which to buy Hock blades for. He suggested 1st the #3 or 4, then the #7 or 8, he felt it was a waste for the #5 since it's suppose to hog wood. So I got one for my #4 then #7 and have been very pleased with the improved operation. So that got me wondering if the Bedrock with the Hocks might be even better. I guess it's an American thing to try to make it better. I've found out time and again, leave well enough alone.
I've actually never seen a head to head on the two designs and even wondered if there is much of a difference. I Googled around last night and couldn't find much other than opinons. If I can ever borrow one (Bedrock), I may put up a thread how they perform side by side with the same Hock blade and chip breaker. Wonder if anyone would find that useful?

I am sure Chris has good reason for his opinions, but that is what they are, opinions based on his way of working.

One of my #5s is set up for "hogging" and the other is set for a finer cut.
The same with my joiners, currently my #8 is set for the heavy cut. I do have two #7s, but one of them is likely to be sold soon. One of my #7s is set to do fine work. I find that after the #8 takes down the saw cuts to a point of getting an unbroken shaving the full length of a board, the #7 set to take thin shavings will come behind it and still find a few lows and highs to even out.

Of course, others might think my way of doing things is crazy.

jim

[harry strasil]

Not being a fan of iron planes other than the stanley specialty planes, it just occurred to me that with a thicker blade it will also close the mouth somewhat. FWIW

[Jim Nardi]

There is no real difference. I have 6 bedrocks and 3 regular Stanleys. I don't adjust the throat after I get a plane setup. You can spend alot of time tweaking this and that but the laws of diminishing returns quickly come into play. You do see an improvement between bedrocks and LN planes. I bought my 608 I think for 135 or so and made a 1/8" O1 blade for it and bought a LV A2 blade for it. The LN #8 is a much more solid plane that is alot heavier. For the amount of use mine see's I couldn't see spending the money. But that does lead to another argument.

[Matt Radtke]

I am thinking of listing my #604 for sale in the next couple of days. Just need to take a few pictures and figure out if I want to leave it with the original, lightly pitted blade, or install a newer blade.


I'll trade you two number 6's for that 604 ;-)

[Jim Koepke]

I'll trade you two number 6's for that 604 ;-)

I already have two #6s one a type 4 and one a type 9. Afraid one more could cause a devil of a situation in the shop.:eek:

jim