Type 10 Stanley No 4 - Does this ruin it???

[Dwain Lambrigger]

Just looking for opinions from the experts out there. I am interested in a type 10 #4 plane, but the mouth has a small chip.



173848

Is this small enough to be fixed? Is this a parts plane? A scrub? Please let me know what you think...

Thanks!

[Sean Hughto]

The chip as at the rear of the mouth. It should no affect the plane's performance.

[Matt Radtke]

I have an 8 with a very similar chip. I patched it with JB Weld. Probably didn't need to. As is, it works just fine. Takes a fine shaving, doesn't chatter, etc.

Were I planning on keeping it forever, I'd replace it with the thickest blade I could find so that I would /have/ to file the mouth to get said thick blade to fit. I'd file the back of the mouth. The chip would largely, if not completely, disappear.

[Sam Takeuchi]

As a user, chip like that would have no detrimental effect on its performance, so you don't have to worry about that. BUT #4 of most types are common as dirt, you can pick up undamaged #4 for a reasonable price from many sources, I don't see why you would want to buy a damaged one especially however small this chipping may be. You can certainly fix it, like Matt suggests, but personally I'd simply skip this particular plane for a better alternative widely available.

If you are going to go with this particular plane, make sure there are no other damages elsewhere. Those dents and chipped blade suggests not-so-gentle handling by previous owner(s).

[Dwain Lambrigger]

Thanks for the feedback. I am in agreement with you. I put a 10.00 bid on it, and worst comes to worst, it's a parts plane, or I clean it up and try to sell again. If I do keep it I am planning on getting either a Hock or a Lie Nielsen blade, thick as possible. Decisions, decisions.

[Jim Koepke]

Usually the frog can move back enough to take that bit out and have a fine plane if your bid wins.

Also, the body is the same on the later types.

If you do file the mouth, be sure to align your file with the face of the frog. Maybe put some masking tape on the frog to keep from scratching it with the file.

jtk

[Joel Goodman]

Would not worry about a chip behind the blade at the rear of the mouth -- it's just cosmetic. If you go with the regular LN blade made for their planes you will probably have to file the mouth and as Jim K says you may be able to clean up the back of the mouth as well. The 1/8 blade is at the limit of what the regular adjuster can handle. I have one in a K5 and in a type 15 and both work but with more backlash. There was a thread a while ago (pre Cosman IBC tabs) about soldering tabs on the iron to help that. I think the poster used a LN .140 blade in a #7 successfully.

BTW use a file with a safe side like an auger file so that you don't accidently widen the mouth -- don't ask me how I know that!

[Dwain Lambrigger]

I will definately need to replace the iron in this plane. As a beginner with plane, I want to build a good user set. I have two type 11' s and would like to continue to build a set. I also have a lot of corrugated planes. So to expand on original post, what replacement iron and chipbreaker should I look into? I want something that will work well without having to file the mouth if possible.

Thanks,

DWain

[Sean Hughto]

This is largley a matter of opinion and the limits of the responders' actual expereince with the alternatives. I will limit my response to what I actually know. That is, other options may exist that are excellent as well. I personally have never been let down by Lie Nielsen's Stanley replacement blades. They are intended to replace Stanley or Record, and are not as thick as the ones in their own planes (but I beleive are slightly thicker than Stanley's originals). They work fine with the Stanley chip breaker - there is no need for a replacement (cleaning up the mating edge on a stone perhaps) and they have never required that I do anything to the mouth. They also function perfectly with the adjuster. Fine A2 that holds a keen edge a long time.

[Jim Koepke]

I will definately need to replace the iron in this plane. As a beginner with plane, I want to build a good user set. I have two type 11' s and would like to continue to build a set. I also have a lot of corrugated planes. So to expand on original post, what replacement iron and chipbreaker should I look into? I want something that will work well without having to file the mouth if possible.

Thanks,

DWain

What is wrong with the original blade and chip breaker?

Of the many planes in my shop, all of them work fine with the original Stanley blade or a Stanley replacement blade.

Some have been fitted with Hock blades. The new blades do have an advantage over the old blades, but it is not that great. The A1 and A2 blades are able to hold an edge better, but they may chip a little more.

The biggest advantage to a new premium blade & chip breaker in my opinion is not having to do as much work to make them useable.

There is also a little bit more mass to dampen vibrations (chatter).

One thing to remember on heavier blades is the honing is a bit more work. This chore can be lessened with micro bevels, but eventually more area will have to be worked.

One of my favorite planes is a bevel up with a 3/16" thick blade. It is almost impossible to hone by hand without a micro bevel. There is just too much surface area on the stone. The surface tension makes it very difficult to move back and forth on a stone. It is also an A1 or A2 blade. It will get little micro nicks along the edge so it takes a bit more honing than an O1 would require.

jtk

[Joel Goodman]

I will definately need to replace the iron in this plane. As a beginner with plane, I want to build a good user set. I have two type 11' s and would like to continue to build a set. I also have a lot of corrugated planes. So to expand on original post, what replacement iron and chipbreaker should I look into? I want something that will work well without having to file the mouth if possible.

Thanks,

DWain

Typically the Hock, LN and LV Stanley replacement irons do not require filing the mouth. All are very good -- but in my limited experience with Hock (1 iron) they require more flattening of the back. The LN and LV's I have were basically flat out of the box. If you elect to replace the chip breaker the Hock is very good as I'm sure the LV is -- the LN is not made for the Stanley but for their planes. You can also easily tune up the Stanley chip breaker.

[Mike Brady]

the LN is not made for the Stanley but for their planes. That is not quire right. LN blades for their planes may be too thick for use in Stanley planes, but LN has a whole range of irons that are made to fit Stanley planes without any alteration of the plane. They are listed on their web site and are excellent.

[Joel Goodman]

That is not quire right. LN blades for their planes may be too thick for use in Stanley planes, but LN has a whole range of irons that are made to fit Stanley planes without any alteration of the plane. They are listed on their web site and are excellent.
Not to be a pain but if you read the sentence in context you will see that I was referring to the LN chip breaker which is not made for Stanleys, while the LV and the Hock chipbreakers are.