Newbie to Neanderthal - Stanley No 5 Shavings, Finally!

[Garrett Ellis]

Since I'm living in an apartment, I'm venturing into the neanderthal world and learning a ton.

You will see in my picture that my 'workbench' is a particle core door on 2 saw horses. I've got a bench vise from northern tool bolted to the right end (http://www.northerntool.com/shop/tools/product_200413942_200413942) that has worked out pretty well so far. I haven't done a lot of work yet, but between a little handsawing, sharpening, and planing, the door hasn't moved. I used some 1/2" oak dowels as bench dogs and those are also holding well so far, thankfully.

I ordered a No 4 and No 5 plane from http://www.brasscityrecords.com/toolworks/new%20tools.html

Both planes I received are in great condition (fast shipping too!). I spent most of the afternoon wiping them down and sharpening the blades. Took me forever because all I am using is scary sharp and I needed to rehone the primary bevels. I also realized one of the blades was out of square after I got done putting the microbevel on it - DOH!

Anyway, several hours later, here is my No 5 after practicing (a lot) with it on a scrap piece of maple. I can't quite get full width shavings because the blade is ever so slightly radiused due to me trying to sand/file it square. It actually works out well because I think I'll use this blade in the smoother to avoid the edge marks of the blade.

177369177370

So far so good! The amount of help received from reading the forums here is a life saver.

By the way, if anyone else is restricted to the scary sharp method, I found the 100 grit sandpaper is the lowest I could go and works the best for the primary bevel. 60 grit is just too coarse and crushes under the pressure of the blade/honing jig and becomes useless after only a few passes. The 100 grit sheets were useful far longer than I expected.

Would love to get some waterstones but I'm afraid they would just be too messy for where I am now.

[Dan Andrews]

Good plane choice in my opinion. My old type 11 #5 was given to me in rusty but complete condition. After rehab it works so well. If I could only have one plane (heaven forbid), this is the one.

Thanks for the link to brasscity. I was not aware of this site, but find it very interesting.

[Rick Erickson]

Thanks for posting Garrett. It's fun to read success stories from new Neanders. Of course most of us are new neanders by yesteryear's standards. Like Dan, I've got a type 11 #5 (jimbode tools) and am very fond of it (even though I'm a new hand plane kinda guy). Keep posting progress.

[James Taglienti]

am i the only one without a type 11 #5??

[Jim Koepke]

am i the only one without a type 11 #5??

I have 4 of them and I don't think any of them are a type 11.

Garret, looks like you are well on your way to neanderhood. Dealing with vise racking and putting together a surface to work on with what can be found at hand.

Can't be much more Neanderthal than that.

jtk

[Joel Thomas Runyan]

am i the only one without a type 11 #5??

Millers Falls type 2 here. :cool:

[Kevin Lucas]

I have 2 type 11's a 4 and a 4 1/2. the #3 I dropped and broke ( I will hopefully replace it soon I really liked that one. No 5 or 7 yet but looking. Silly I guess to want to match the types but that's what I'm going towards.

[Sean Hughto]

What's the magic about 11's? Seems like hype to me. Plenty of great users from types 1 through 15, at least. Not to mention the bedrocks, Miller's Falls, etc. Did some celebrity woodworker extol the type 11 features as the be all end all or something?

The raised knob ring is nice, but so is the low knob.

The small depth adj. wheel is cool, but there's nothing wrong with the larger one.

The older totes are a bit more comfortable, but 20 minutes with a rasp and some sandpaper can quickly fix bring the squarish ones to oval in cross section.

Etc.

[Chen-Tin Tsai]

Most of my users are type 16's and 17's, with two wartime planes in the mix, and I like them just fine. Especially now that most of them are sporting Hock or LV blades/chipbreakers. It's amazing how much of a difference a modern blade makes.

[Jim Koepke]

What's the magic about 11's? Seems like hype to me. Plenty of great users from types 1 through 15, at least. Not to mention the bedrocks, Miller's Falls, etc. Did some celebrity woodworker extol the type 11 features as the be all end all or something?

The raised knob ring is nice, but so is the low knob.

The small depth adj. wheel is cool, but there's nothing wrong with the larger one.

The older totes are a bit more comfortable, but 20 minutes with a rasp and some sandpaper can quickly fix bring the squarish ones to oval in cross section.

Etc.

Types 10 & 11 are considered to be at the peak of manufacturing by many. Type 12 was the beginning of the SW era. For some, those planes get a few more $$$.

I like the large depth adjuster, but it will not work on my type 6 and earlier planes. I bought a lot of them at one time and retrofitted a lot of my planes.

I like the low knob, even though on a #4-1/2 a tall knob might prevent the hair on my fingers from getting under the toe of the plane.

The totes from the type 9 (I think) and later are also some of the best. On my type 6 tote, the area at the curve to the toe has so much wood in the web that it is impossible to get my pinky around the tote.

The type 10s are a bit rare, but they are the first with the frog adjustment. I used to think this was important, but I rarely adjust a frog once it is set. In many cases, it is just as easy to have another plane set to a tight mouth if that is what is wanted.

After the beginning of the SW era, the costs of manufacturing began to weigh more heavy on the makers of hand tools. Not only were they competing with each other, they had a new competitors in the power tool arena. At the end of the SW era, the frog on Stanley planes was designed to require less machining. It also reduced the area of contact between the blade and the frog. The totes were easier to make flat sided and may have even used a little less wood. From the beginning to about 1930, most of the design changes were made with the purpose of making a better plane. The type 9 change did have an element of increasing casting yields. It also was to improve the seating of the frog. After 1930, most of the design changes were made to lower the cost of making planes.

Just my 2¢

jtk

[Sean Hughto]

Even by your logic, the planes are good up to Type 15. Type 11 is like the teens decade IRRC. 15 takes you up to 31-32. I have Stanley's of various types up until WWII, and I have to say there are fine planes throughout. Each to their own, but limiting oneself to 11's will keep many neanders from owning plenty of nice planes. Their loss.

[Andrew Gibson]

I have 2 number 5's, a Union #5c and a craftsman #5 with a broken frog. The craftsman works quite well as a scrub without the top third of the frog, and the Union does it's job as a lightly cambered jack.

[Andrae Covington]

...Would love to get some waterstones but I'm afraid they would just be too messy for where I am now.

I have DMT diamond stones and I usually use them dry. When I do use water it's not very much. Alternatives are mineral spirits, mineral oil, kerosene, WD40, etc. I have one Shapton ceramic water stone that is comperable in micron size to my coarsest diamond stone and it seems to cut a little faster. It's not too messy in use, since you don't have to soak it. However flattening it requires more water and in no time at all you have oodles of ceramic sludge and that turns into a big mess.

[James Scheffler]

Did some celebrity woodworker extol the type 11 features as the be all end all or something?

I think I remember a Chris Schwarz article where he specifically mentioned type 11s. I believe it was an article about lower end modern handplanes. He said users should skip them and buy a type 11. He didn't say all the other types suck.

I have a couple of type 11s (No. 3 and No. 6). They are good planes, but once tuned I don't see much difference in use between them and my other Stanleys made before or after.

Jim S.

[James Scheffler]

Would love to get some waterstones but I'm afraid they would just be too messy for where I am now.

I use both methods. When I use waterstones, I have an old tupperware plastic container I put them in. This particular one is pretty wide and has fairly low walls. It keeps the mess pretty well contained, and doesn't get in the way.

Jim S.

[Johnny Kleso]

My Favorites are Type 14 and 15
IMHO any type from Type 10 to 16 is great but its better to have a clean type 20 than a rust bucket type 14

All planes before type 10 have a different type frog and while they work they don't support the blade as well..

177514
177515

[Kevin Lucas]

The type 11's were what I ran across first when I started looking for planes so they just hold a weird fascination I guess )

[Jim Koepke]

The type 11's were what I ran across first when I started looking for planes so they just hold a weird fascination I guess )

For some folks having uniformity among their tools and planes is desirable.

My thoughts is that it is all about what makes a person comfortable. At one time, I wanted planes with the frog adjustment screw. After finding that it is seldom used, it did not make that much difference to me.

As someone else said, once the plane is well tuned, it doesn't matter what type it might be, it matters what kind of shavings it can make.

Just as much as my favorites have a low knob, someone else may like tall knobs with a ring around the base. What ever smoothes your wood.

jtk

[James Scheffler]

What ever smoothes your wood.
jtk

That expression is a keeper!