Plane gloat

[Derby Matthews]

OK, Now that I've begun selling some tools - in part to begin paying for this baby - I feel I can post a pic as the proud owner. I would've gone out and mowed lawns to put this one in my tool chest. I'm not a collector (umm...the lie detector just went off the map), and couldn't justify the high cost of owning one of these until a big project came along that I was going to do 100% Neander. I'm building a dining room extension table with drop in leaves (exactly to SWMBO's specs), out of 150 year old, pit sawn 5/4 ", 22" wide matched solid African mahogany boards. All the work will be by hand, most of it done with this plane. Knew the wedding ring and mortgage precluded a Holtey or Brese panel plane in my immediate future. No longer pining for one of those with this one to play with

Anyone have any information on this make and model (Spiers 18"- pre WWII), like where to buy an appropriate second blade that I can convex grind? Would also like to know if this plane has any apologies to make (not super important - it's a user), apart from the obvious barking up of the tote and front handle. Any input would help a lot. Thanks all. Sorry if this gloat seems excessive, but if it's inadequate I'll post more pics :D

[jerry nazard]

Derby,

She is a beauty! Absolutely gloat-worthy!!

-Jerry

[Tony Shea]

I have no information on this plane but agree that this is def gloat worthy. Not sure what you paid for this plane but sure looks to be a beauty. I'm sure it could clean up to be an impressive looking tool as well as being very functional. How flat is the sole of this plane and what kind of condition is it's sole? I do think more pics are in order, maybe even taken apart with peices laying about.

[Derby Matthews]

OK - here goes:

[john brenton]

She "sure has a purdy mouth."

[Joe McMahon]

Derby, I sent you a PM that may help.

Joe

[Derby Matthews]

The wealth of quality info freely given on these pages. Thanks guys and keep it coming. Now that I've taken the infill plunge I can't seem to absorb enough!

[Jim Koepke]

Some day I hope to own one like that.

jim

[David Weaver]

That's the plane my shepherd kit is based on. You'll like it - it's nice to use and it hits with authority.

I would probably avoid using an iron with significant camber on it - I think you'll find it to be the plane you use to follow such a plane, and unless you're working with nasty swirly stuff, it'll leave the finish of a smoother behind - flatten and smooth all in one shot.

I was hoping to find a "real" one like yours before I put the kit together, but never really came across one that I liked and that was in my price range.

[george wilson]

I have a never used,but shop worn Norris very much like that plane,David. It is a late,cast iron body with what was once a heavy piano finish over the infill. If I had more energy,I could spend a lot of time filling in the many nicks and scratches in the heavy lacquer finish.

Its adjuster is the late type,not the earlier one with the screw within a screw. Actually,the earlier type is very delicate. It also makes no sense because the left and right handed screws cause a coarser advance to the blade. I prefer the later type. Heavier screw,and no double advance per turn.

[David Weaver]

I have a never used,but shop worn Norris very much like that plane,David. It is a late,cast iron body with what was once a heavy piano finish over the infill. If I had more energy,I could spend a lot of time filling in the many nicks and scratches in the heavy lacquer finish.



George - exactly why I never put shellac or lacquer on my infill parts. I know it's traditional to do it, but it's so hard to keep it nice. I can't imagine most people buying a plane of the price of an infill would be happy to find oil and wax, though - life's a lot easier when you only build your own tools (or more like assemble in the case of this plane), and none for other people.

I think this plane has the single adjuster like you mentioned, but I'm not sure I'd trust my memory on a bet even though I took that picture last night. It's coarse, but it works. I thought about not installing it at first, but since there is a bedding block on the plane, the fact that it (the adjuster) sits a little proud of the bed makes it easier to get the iron bedded well at the mouth of the plane. On the ones I scratch built so far, I always just use a thicker bottom instead and no bedding block - it's easier to keep the last contact with the iron farther down when there is less thickness of metal to file.

I hope to get a look at one of holtey's planes sometime to see what the adjuster is like, to see how it's supposed to be and how it's supposed to feel.

How does one get an unused infill and never have the urge to use it? :confused::)

[Tony Shea]

I would love to have the oportunity to handle on of these infil planes, or any infill for that matter. They are very beautiful if nothing else. I'm curious though as to what the advantage of an infil plane is over a standard Stanley Bedrock style bench plane such as the offereings from LN and LV? One small potential advantage I see is the front knob. I like the infill style as there seems to be a bit more control compared to an average bench plane front knob.

[george wilson]

The infills are more massive than modern style planes. David,the lacquer on my Norris must be 1/16" thick. The British seemed to like to put these huge finishes on some things such as the wooden dashboards of fancy cars. Williamsburg got someone over there to make a coat of arms for the Governor's Palace. It was oval,and convex,and as shiny as if it had been dipped in heavy varnish and instantly frozen!

[David Weaver]

Different feel, and more weight. I can't speak to what the advantages are of vintages, but with new ones, when you're making or assembling them, you can really control how tight the mouth is, how well the iron is bedded (and keeping it from contacting/bedding where you don't want it to), and how well the lever cap fits the iron.

Tight mouth, lots of weight, a lever cap that grips evenly all the way across, and a good proper bedding of the iron way down close to the bevel and they give you a sinful feeling.

So far, the difference vs. a bench plane for the panel plane is that I can run a thicker shaving through it and have it still be working comfortably. If you get a bench plane set right, you should have very little tearout, and since a lot of the panel planes seem to be common pitch or close, the tearout shouldn't be that different. If it is, then the bench plane making worse tearout should probably be fiddled with.

I don't know if I'd say that they are any better than a LN 6, though. More novelty, heavier, but work much better in average day to day work? Maybe if you only worked hard maple for hours, and by hand.

I wouldn't stick my neck out and say that because I don't know that I could prove it preparing stock. An LN 6 makes an awfully nice panel plane, and the iron in it will last with or outlast anything that isn't a nastier alloy.

[Derby Matthews]

This is fascinating... Any ideas on wheter I should get a second (period or modern replacement) blade and grind it on a convex?

[David Keller NC]

Derby: You have a Spiers infill "panel" plane from Spier's late period (roughly, 1920's). It's in reasonably decent shape - the vast majority of them have some roughness on the tote and front bun from hard use. The ones that are pristine (no roughness to the wood), have an original finish, lever cap and iron/chipbreaker go for pretty big money (in the low single thousands) at tool auctions.

If you want to replace the iron for a better fit, I would advise buying a purpose-made Hock infill replacement blade from The Best Things:

http://www.thebestthings.com/newtools/hock.htm (scroll to the bottom of the page for "Parallel Irons for Norris and Other Infill Type Planes")

If you decide you want a really tight mouth, you'd want the thicker blade, but I'll warn you - Lee is not kidding when he tells you that removing the necessary thickness from the blade will be a tedious process. Personally, and so long as the plane had low collector value, I'd file the mouth - it's the difference between 20 minutes of light work and 3 days of hard scrubbing on a diamond plate or a belt sander.

[David Weaver]

I personally would wait on buying an iron to make a more cambered iron. Put just a little more camber than a metallic smoother plane would have on that plane (or relieve the corners just a tiny bit farther if you only like to relieve the corner of the iron) and use it as is with a heavy and with a thin shaving. It's not intended to be a thicknesser, but I think you'll find the mass adds enough versatility that you can use it for a pretty heavy shaving after a jack or coarse fore and then back it off some and smooth most woods.

I think that's preferable time-wise to switching irons in and out, it has been for me so far. I've been pleased with the ability to bull a thick amount and finish the surfaced with the same plane - it's saved time on the two projects I've used it on vs. using separate planes.

[Derby Matthews]

I'm afraid you may have helped create a monster. My local Antique Tool Dealer (it's alway cool to have a longtime Stanley expert in your home town)
sold me a Spiers 6" by 1/2 Rosewood Shoulder Rebate Plane with dovetailed construction a couple of months ago, but I wasn't hooked until I started reading up on infills, mostly right here, but also in the tool collecting books I dusted off and began reading with renewed interest. As a non-neander (OK, pre-neander - it's a reverse evolutionary process I guess) it was frankly astonishing to me how well these planes work without all the adjusting mechanisms we've come to expect over the years. I now greatly prefer these planes to my old Stanley and Record standbys. Maybe it's just that they seem a better fit for restoration work. Dunno.


That said, can you recommend any particular planes that would fill the large gap between these two. I'm not a brand loyalty guy or a collector, and these planes will see daily use in my shop, so perfection is the opposite of what I'm looking for. I'd rather have a bunch of these in Good + user condition than to wear down one expensive example I should leave to the collectors.

Thanks again for your comments. I hope there's more good info where all this has come from. Guess I'll have to break open the creaky wallet and become a FOTC now.:cool:

On another note, our 15 year old AC blower motor breathed it's last yesterday. Anyone got an extra window unit lying around? I'll drive a long way to get one!

[David Keller NC]

That said, can you recommend any particular planes that would fill the large gap between these two. I'm not a brand loyalty guy or a collector, and these planes will see daily use in my shop, so perfection is the opposite of what I'm looking for. I'd rather have a bunch of these in Good + user condition than to wear down one expensive example I should leave to the collectors.

That's a tough question, because it depends very much on you - what level of condition you're willing to pay for, and to what use you're willing to put one of these infills that will (slightly - see below) diminish their collector's value.

Specifically, the major manufacturers (if you can call them that) of British infill planes in the late 19th and early 20th century are Norris, Mathieson, Spiers, and Slater. There were also quite a few very small shops or individuals producing them - one particular individual that's highly collectible was George Miller. Many of his planes were very graphic in form, and a lot of them are not marked, making the marked examples that much more valuable.

As for a user, whether you'd choose a Norris or a Mathieson/Spiers or Slater depends on your preference for an adjuster. Norris was the only British manufactuer that had such an adjuster in the early 20th century, and his products are sought be collectors and users alike, and they're priced accordingly.

Still, some of T. Norris adjustable planes are more common than others. An A5 coffin smoother, for example, is far more common than the straight-sided A6, and can be had for around $650-$1200 in decent condition with the original blade. A nice condition A6 is going to run around $2k with an original blade.

A Norris without the original blade brings far less. Partly this is due to a loss of originality to a collector, and partly its due to (usually) a dimunition in usability to the user. That's because period replacement blades didn't usually fit very well, and either left a wide mouth, gaps between the sidewall and blade, or both. However, you can fix the usability problem by buying one of the Hock infill replacement blades and custom-fit it to the plane. Under such circumstances, the plane will perform at least equal to, or better than with the original blade the plane was manufactured with.

One caution with Norris planes - an aerospace company bought the Norris name after WWII, and quality declined precipitously. These planes can usually be recognized by the presence of a screw down through the top of the front bun, and the fact that the infill wood is ebonized beech rather than rosewood. I would stay away from these planes - you'd be better off saving your cash and getting a Brese, Konrad Sauer or Garibaldi and Sons plane.

Mathieson and Spiers go for less than Norris planes, though rare models or top-condition and early examples can go for near what a similar model Norris will go for. Once again, the presence of the original factory blade greatly influences price.

My suggestion is that you call Lee Richmond at The Best Things and talk to him about an infill smoother. Lee is probably the foremost expert on these planes in this country, and more importantly, is scrupulously honest about describing the defects that a plane has. This is definitely not true of several big english dealers of these planes - I've seen many of their planes described as "all original" with obvious breaks and repairs to the infill wood and replaced blades.



On another note, our 15 year old AC blower motor breathed it's last yesterday. Anyone got an extra window unit lying around? I'll drive a long way to get one!

If you're handy, you can replace this part yourself. Grainger will have an outlet in your city, and it's one of the better places to get a replacement squirrel-cage motor for a central HVAC system. Mine went out about 5 years ago, and I replaced it myself for $110. An AC contractor would've been in the $500 range.

[Derby Matthews]

I agree. I have no trouble opening the mouth a tiny bit. I've done the iron polishing thing and it's a thankless and tedious job. Any suggestions on one or more complementary planes to fit in the wide gap between this and my 6 x 1/2" infill shoulder plane (also by Spiers)? What recommendations does anyone have on an infill Jack, Fore or Block plane equivalent/ Any particular models your guys suggest?

Thanks!