Fore Plane for coarse work?

[Mike Holbrook]

I want to be prepared to turn raw hard wood into a usable element in cabinet & furniture construction. I have: Record Jointer, Record Smoother, Garret Wade Jack, LV LA Jack, LV Block, L V Shoulder. I would like something well suited for, as Schwarz would say "coarse" processing.

I am thinking about purchasing a Fore plane as my go to tool for coarse processing. I know there are various opinions about Scrub vs Fore planes for this job. The GW Jack plane I have seems pretty close to a scrub plane to me and since I have two Jack sized planes I would prefer to go with a different size that will help me to get the job done a little faster. I do not have a jointer or planer. I do have Festool: table, saw, 1400 router, vac... table saw....I would like to start out processing wood by hand and then think about a machine based solution.

I have read that wooden Fore planes are lighter and can serve very well in this capacity. I have very little idea who makes suitable planes for this task. I am well acquainted with LV and their Fore plane and certainly consider it an option. The adjustable frog and mouth that apparently can be adjusted while in use seem like they would be beneficial. Of course, this is a big heavy plane though; I am wondering if it might be a chore to use for long periods.

I did find BlumToolCo. which has an interesting selection of wooden planes including two different Fore planes:

"Available in 2 sizes:

• #6 with 2 1/4" blade x 17" long
• #6 1/2 with 2 1/4" blade x 19" long

Both sizes are extremely comfortable to work with as panel planes or as a short jointer. Like the jacks, their blades and frogs can be cambered for use as more traditional fore planes. 50° cut angle and bevel down blades.

There are some interesting features with these planes. One can order one of these planes with a cambered frog, which is designed to prevent the user from having to maintain a cambered blade, although both can be cambered. Each plane comes with it's own custom sharpening jig....These planes use a very different thinner blade and blade control system which has no chipbreaker. The chipbreaker is integrated on the unique frog. One can also order a separate "scraper frog" that can be swapped with the plane frog. I almost ordered both a Fore and a Smooth plane from BlumToolCo. but got cold feet. I was going to order the Fore plane set up for coarse work and the Smooth for fine work, including scraping. I am a little concerned with the longevity and sturdiness of the wooden bodies and the very different frog/chipbreaker. The Mesquite is described as great for bottoms: "This is our featured wood for planes. Mesquite is heavy, hard, beautiful, and very stable. It is one of the only woods where the ratio of tangential to radial shrinkage approaches 1:1." Apparently the bottoms are made thick enough to handle considerable flattening with no ill effect."

I am much less knowledgable about Lie-Nielsen planes and they seem to be a little pricey but maybe there are good options there as well?

[michael osadchuk]

I converted a house brand no. 3 bench plane (1 & 3/4" wide blade) to a scrub plane by putting a major radius to the blade edge and despite the blade being relatively thin, was surprised and pleased with how little effort was needed to move this plane to take thick shavings, compared to fore and jack sized planes...... you might want to consider either the LV or LN scrubs - similar length with 1 & 1/2" wide, 3/16" thick blades - at relatively low cost for a tier one maker product........I also see that LV carries a ECE woodie scrub for $85 and that might also satisfy your apparent taste to step off the beaten path a bit (smiley)

good luck

michael

[Chris Fournier]

If you are wanting to take a piece of lumber and process it by hand then you do not need a foreplane given your present set of planes.

If you want to do "coarse" work, you can simply set up any of existing your planes to do so. Move the frog back dial in a heavy cut and push if you can! Grind a fingernail profile on a second blade for this coarse work.

If you really want to be able to remove a lot of material by hand with relative ease then the scrub plane is your best friend. The scrub is ideal because it is set up for taking large thick chips; of course you can set the blade depth to really hog or take it easy. The fingernail profile of the relatively narrow blade allows you to remove 1/16" of stock in a pass with ease in many hardwoods. The small footprint of the scrub allows you to work smaller areas of concern as you do when you aret aking out twist.

As soon as the scrub has removed the majority of the trouble spots, you can then move to your bench planes to achieve straight, flat and smooth.

Once you have straight flat and smooth and you've flipped your board over to achieve a parallel face its time for your scrub once again as nothing removes a bulk of material like it does.

It's all to easy to get caught in the Stanley 1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8 benchplane frenzy. One you have a smoother and a large jointer start to look into the other "specialty" planes to augment your collection. The scrub will earn its keep in your shop given your desire to use handplanes to process rough lumber, the foreplane would merely be redundant.

[Jim Koepke]

The Stanley/Bailey #5 is so common and cheap, why not convert one of those into a scrub plane?

Then from using your conversion you could decide if shorter, longer, wider or narrower would be preferred. Cheap way to get a feel for what may be best for your shop.

jtk

[David Weaver]

If you want to buy something, buy a stanley 6 and some paraffin wax.

The trouble with a lot of woodie planes is that once you put a radius on them, the effectiveness of the chipbreaker is negated and you will not often fine one with a fine enough mouth to do anything to help.

Of the planes that I have, the woodies are the easiest to push, but they are they are also responsible for the worst tearout in a coarse cut on a board that's not primo straight grained stuff. A lot of times, you get through a board with no issue (or at least where following on with a try plane or jointer and then smoother gets rid of the tearout without extra work), but sometimes you will have spots in the boards that will tear spectacularly, especially if there is, for lack of a better word, a dimple in the face of the board where the grain follows down and up quickly around something the size of a dime or so. a plane with a fat mouth can pull the entire dimple of wood that grows in that depression out and feed it through leaving you either to work around (i.e., that section of the board is scrap) that or plane thickness off the board to get to it.

Long story short, I would buy a #6, not an expensive one, just a #6. In a world where you had two bevel up jacks, i'd set one more coarse than the other and run along with both, but I don't find the LV LA jack to be appropriate for facing a rough board - It just isn't as easy to keep in shape as a bevel down iron (i have the LV LA jack) and the radius is a much bigger pain to grind.

You could, too, just get a second iron for the GW jack, but if you're a shopper with discretion, you can get an entire 6 for the price of a second premium iron.

I don't like to keep the mouth open any more than I have to preparing lumber, to avoid the tearout as mentioned above. If the mouth is open slightly wider than it needs to be for the cut so that it feeds smoothly but is not totally wide open, it will serve to break chips and tearout will be less spectacular, often letting you plane back across the grain without ripping chunks out or tearing the sides off an edge inadvertently.

That's a lot of words, but it all becomes fairly elementary once you start facing rough boards.

Thicknessing is another issue entirely, for that you may want a really really rank cut. For facing, you probably won't.

[Tony Shea]

I also agree in that a Stanley #5 would be a great option for a fore plane. It is my go to fore plane in my shop with a heavy cambered blade. I also have a Stanley scrub that gets much use when hogging a lot of material as stated above. But to begin getting faces flat and true I always reach for my #5 to start the process off. It's almost a perfect size for most of the boards I deal with and planing across the grain. I also have a #7 Stanley that I use to really get the board true but all the while still taking heavy shavings. I find myself using my Stanley #7 with a decent camber just before running my LN #7 across the face.

Just checked out Blum Tools planes. What an interesting concept. Would love to see someone review their products outside of the company doing it themselves. I'm surprised I've never seen much at all about their planes, wonder if there is a reason for this.

[David Weaver]

By the way, a cheap used thickness planer is a nice thing for a hand tool woodworker to have. It's nice to go through an entire project thicknessing boards by hand, because it's a nice skill to have to be able to plane to your mark, but it is grunt work after you have the skill mastered and very time consuming - something to do for exercise, maybe, or if you just find it an escape to thickness boards by hand and get the juices flowing.

Most of the other steps by hand are not that prohibitive - facing, edge jointing, crosscutting to length, and ripping are all not so bad. A $150 used planer can get you close on thicknessing, even if it has snipe, and you can finish by hand if you like - there's really no virtue in that work if you don't find it enjoyable.

[Niels Cosman]

Hey Mike,
With a Fore Plane or a Scrub plane. Most any half-way decent plane will do- There's really no need to spend lots of money. My personal preference is to use vintage tools for this task, although there are plenty of good modern equivalents-for coursework it seem superfluous. My go-to fores are a No.5 Bedrock and a No.40 stanley. both are pre 1930's have heavily cambered replacement A2 hock blades. I don't really know too much about woodies, Im sure the same applies. 4Scrubbing I actually pretty easy and fun work mostly working across grain, but I think it's important to have a durable blade considering that you are taking very heavy cuts and essentially hitting the exposed blade on the wood every time you start a cut.

I dont have a power jointer all of my 2 squares come from handplanes. My flattening squaring technique is as follows (assuming that the wood is rough, with significant cup/and or twist and the board is long) For me this is the fastest most efficient use of tool moving from very course to virtually finished:

1. Use the short and aggressively set no.40 to remove detectable cup/twist checking just by first eye and finishing using whinding sticks. motions are perpendicular and diagonal to the grain. I finish just as/or before the rough surface of the wood is removed so as not to put in deep gouges that need to be removed
2. use no.5 first moving perpedicular to the grain, then diagonally over the whole surface. Check with sticks. work until there is no twist.
3. use a jointer first diagonally crisscrossing then with the grain removing all of the jack marks. Check with sticks and check length for convexity with the edge of the jointer. As a last step I flip the board over and check for rocking on my bench or cast iron tablesaw.

generally the idea is to start working locally with very aggressive tool and work out globally with a fairly fine tool. this works well for me and I think having the various stages makes the work more efficient and distributes the wear out over multiple blades.
Also im left with a board that takes only a couple smoothing swipes to be finished. as least that's the idea at least.

[Johnny Kleso]

I love Gary Blums planes but I think a cambered blade would work best here..
I would buy a No5 1/4 and a No6 and add a heavy camber to the blade, kind of like a scrub plane blade has..

[Andrae Covington]

I use a Stanley #28 transitional fore with a cambered blade. It is about 18" long. I think the lighter weight of the wood body helps me not wear out so fast. A camber on the blade is essential for heavy stock removal... trying to push a 2-3/8" blade at 1/16" projection would not go very far. I keep meaning to get around to setting up a #5 jack with a less pronounced camber for smaller work or when I don't want to be so aggressive.

[Zach Dillinger]

Buy a woodie fore plane. 18" or so. Should be all of $15 invested into a decent one. Nothing better. You won't need a tight mouth on it. A thick woodie blade, who cares if the chipbreaker works, you won't need it for anything other than to make the wedge fit properly. Chipbreakers are a waste on woodie planes, in my opinion. The nice thing about this type of plane is the length. You will make your board flatter with less thought than you can ever do with a scrub plane, especially a converted smoother size. You should be able to hog off a 1/16 or so at a time, make the board flat. Since you will be unlikely to leave this as a final surface, who cares if you have tearout? If its an interior surface, you'll leave it as is, tearout and all.

One of the fastest ways to waste a whole bunch of time when doing hand work is to think like you would when using machines. Not every surface has to be perfectly flat or square. Your finished surfaces that show should be planed to fine smoothness, but if they aren't flat who cares? If your case sides aren't the same thickness, why does it matter? If it looks good / right, it is. Things should only be made as flat, square and pretty as they need to be. Anything else is an utter waste of time, effort and steel.

[Mike Holbrook]

Thanks for all the replies,
The Garret Wade plane I have is a #5 "Paragon", 14" long, with narrow 2" blade. It is rusted and would need work to be put into use but I do have resources for doing that., which is why I was not thinking about investing in another scrub or jack type plane. The Records are #7 & #4 1/2.

I bought and watched Schwarz's DVD "Coarse, Medium, Fine". In it he makes the argument that the reason people often do not work faster with hand tools is they skip steps particularly the Coarse step. He advocates staying at the Coarse step as long as possible, to move through the work faster, made sense to me. So my idea was to improve my coarse planing tools. Truth be told, I am a great example of exactly what Chris talks about, trying to do everything with a LA Jack and a #7.

The BlumToolCo. planes I found out about in a thread here on SMC, although I found no review. I talked to the owner and as I understood it, he will actually make the "camber" in his "frog" to match the desired use of the plane. The only problem being that the camber can not be removes from the frog like it can from a blade. On the other hand one can buy multiple frogs for the same plane too. His blades are smaller lighter pieces of metal, reinforced by the frog. Tightening a screw bends the blade to the camber in the frog, as I understand it (which may not be correct). As I recall the SMC poster said Schwarz had tested the Blum planes and said they were "real deal".

[Niels Cosman]

I bought and watched Schwarz's DVD "Coarse, Medium, Fine". In it he makes the argument that the reason people often do not work faster with hand tools is they skip steps particularly the Coarse step. He advocates staying at the Coarse step as long as possible, to move through the work faster, made sense to me. So my idea was to improve my coarse planing tools. Truth be told, I am a great example of exactly what Chris talks about, trying to do everything with a LA Jack and a #7.


I agree with that- especially if efficiency is the goal. At first I didn't mind spending a lot of time milling wood because I thought of it as a novelty. My view is less romantic now that it's my only real option. Of course the thing to consider while learning a new skill is that there is generally an inverse relationship between speed and accuracy. Sometimes working quicker you can get into trouble faster. This is a lesson learned while cutting/engraving glass and having taught people to do so. I feel like skill is having the intuition to know: how much and more importantly, when to stop.

[Mike Holbrook]

I was hoping to hear a little from the wooden plane owners about the benefits and challenges with these planes. I have a wooden block plane but it is hard to judge much from it. I guess it is easier to damage a wooden bottom, but also easier to fix it. I am wondering how they feel in use compared to their heavier metal counterparts. Some of them, BlumToolCo.'s for instance, look like they would be very comfortable to hold & use. Many of the wooden planes seem to be longer too, not exactly sure why. Maybe the lighter weight just makes a longer plane more manageable? I started out with a #7, which may be why I tend to like the longer planes.

[David Weaver]

Wood planes - my thoughts
* they're all over the board. you'll find some very fine old examples with a properly cut mouth, and you'll find newer 1900 era tools made by prisoners that are coarse and serviceable but poorly made compared to older ones. Poorly made meaning less attention to detail, no such thing as unusable as some of the hardware store planes made now are.
* the bottom wearing out or getting damaged isn't really an issue. The only thing you want to be really tough on the bottom is a plane where you depend on the mouth being ultra ultra tight. Woodies are not that plane and if you want them to be, you can fit something (brass or endgrain oak or something) in front of the iron.
* they are lighter than metal planes. They work well in softwoods and medium hardwoods. In hard maple and harder, a heavier plane is much nicer to use. When the grain turns on you, a fat mouthed wooden plane is a really undesirable ride. A metal plane with paraffin glides like a woodie, as soon as the paraffin starts to wear off, it gets harder and harder to push. A woodie stays easy to push the entire time you use it.
* the irons will not stay sharp as long as modern planes, and they'll also be plain alloys that you want to watch the temper on if you bring them to a grinder. They are easy to sharpen, though, and they'll leave grand black stroke marks all over your stones when you sharpen them.
* regardless of all of the above, you could get one that's in just about any condition. If you get one that the iron doesn't have deep pitting, it isn't cracked at the cheek, the sole doesn't have a lot of twist and you don't need to redo the wedge, you're ahead. Most of what's wrong, other than big cracks and cracked cheeks, can be fixed.

[Pam Niedermayer]

I was hoping to hear a little from the wooden plane owners about the benefits and challenges with these planes. I have a wooden block plane but it is hard to judge much from it. I guess it is easier to damage a wooden bottom, but also easier to fix it. I am wondering how they feel in use compared to their heavier metal counterparts. ...

You may want to take a look at the HNT Gordon try plane (http://www.hntgordon.com.au/prodcattry.htm). I've got the desert ironwood version, and the blades are short and thick. I've never had a tearout problem on anything.

Another to look at is the C&W fore plane (http://www.planemaker.com/products.html). I don't have one of these, but I do have one of their 30" jointers which I absolutely love. No tearout.

I can't compare these to metal planes. The only one I have is a LN LA jack, which is a very handy plane; but not in the class of the ones above.

Pam

[Mike Holbrook]

David, I was actually thinking of buying a new plane, probably the BlumToolCo. offering since it was the only wooden plane I had found favorable comments on until Pam mentioned some others below. I also thought of putting together a kit as there do seem to be some of those out there. The thoughts are very good to hear though and do add perspective to consider in regard to the wooden planes.

It is interesting that HNT Gordon makes a bold claim of no tear out with their wooden planes, which David mentions as a major issue. I am wondering what might make the HNT Gordon planes so reliable. I do note that they use high blade angles. It is hard for a novice to see what makes these planes special, although the workmanship is obvious. Lee Valley, for instance, offers some planes that look fairly similar for a small fraction of the cost. I imagine blade control on these planes must be done with a small hammer or mallet of some sort but I have no idea how this system would work for a newer user? The HNT Gordon web site is great. I am sure I will end up spending a large amount of time there packing my head.

[Zach Dillinger]

Wood planes - my thoughts
* the irons will not stay sharp as long as modern planes

With some irons I agree with you, but I can't agree that this is universal. I've got some very fine wooden planes with excellent, thick irons that hold an edge forever it seems. I only use wood planes in my work (except block planes) and I love them. They are light weight, easier to push, easy to repair almost any damage, easier to set up and tune than metal planes and, best of all, cheap at antique malls and flea markets. I've put together a set of wood planes (ok, more than a set) of several jointers, a half dozen try planes, eight or ten fore / jack planes and 4 different smoothing planes (these seem to be in the worst shape of all when buying "new" planes), plus a full compliment of joint cutting and molding planes. If I added up what I have into the bench planes, I'd guess its well under $300.

Tuning them is easy. The only planes that need a tight mouth are the smoothers. The jointers can be a little more open, as can the try planes, but the fore planes can have a wide open mouth with no issues. I'm talking a 1/4" here, seriously wide open. The smoothers are easy to patch to get a tight mouth. I prefer single iron planes but they are hard to find, so I usually just draw the chipbreaker back as far as I can, or take it out completely if the wedge will still lock up tight. With the thick woodie irons, they do nothing but create a place for shavings to clog. Sometimes you might have to check the bedding on the iron. See Bob Rozieski's excellent blog for info on how to do that. The irons are thick, so they are easy to hone freehand.

Nothing is better than a properly tuned woodie plane, especially if you have a lot of planing to do. I can use a 24" wood try plane all day without getting tired. The Stanley equivalent #8 would be tough to use for a few hours.

If anyone has any trouble or questions about tuning their woodie planes or buying new, feel free to PM me.

Zach

[David Weaver]

HNT Gordon planes are not like older american wooden planes.

Most old double iron wooden planes are set somewhere near common pitch, with a wide cast steel iron and a large mouth.

HNT gordon planes are made of much harder woods, the mouths are much more finely set, the steel harder and the pitch generally a lot steeper. A totally different animal.

Consider them entirely different planes

I had one HNT gordon plane but sold it before I used it (i got it used, and what came wasn't what I expected). I would consider them a more finely made mujingfang plane. As a tweaker and someone who likes to make their own tools, I consider the muji planes (where there is a duplicate style and size) to be a much better value. Every once in a while, one will need a little tuning when you get it, which I understand the HNT planes to not need. I gather that most other people are a lot less tolerant of tuning a new tool than I am, so a lot of people won't agree on my value statement.

I love the irons in the mujis. I haven't seen anyone make an iron as durable as the muji iron for what muji charges for the entire plane.

I personally wouldn't want to do hand dimensioning and thicknessing with a plane that has a 55-60+ degree iron, though. I can tolerate the tearout a bench plane makes at common pitch in a heavy cut because when you increase the pitch to 60 degrees, you have to take less cut, especially in really hard woods - it's like pushing against a wall.

[David Weaver]

Zach - the only issue with using the wide open woodies like that is if you don't have a lot of thickness to work with and grain that is not cooperative (as a lot of what's sold now seems to be - not exactly the straight grain stuff you see in old furniture), you can get in a pinch with the tearout.

If the wood is nice straight grain, then there isn't a tearout issue.

I don't have any fatigue issues with metal bench planes as long as I don't lose track of where the paraffin is. I used to have 8s, but don't own them now. There's no reason to have them if you're going to be doing a lot of dimensioning. A 7 does the same thing without being nearly as heavy.

The old woody irons are very variable, but I have probably 30 of them, and none of them would stack up well against an A2 iron at 62 hardness. Some of them hold an edge longer than others, and they stay sharp acceptably long to work compared to a modern iron, but a stroke test of two irons would show that no plain carbon steel iron is as durable, even for the very few old cast steel irons that might be 62 hardness at the cutting edge. The harder the wood, the bigger the difference in durability.

Shouldn't be any trouble for people to tune a woodie, but I think they'll come to the same conclusion as me if they have a few metal planes around for an option to go to when tearout is bad. It's nice to have all of them and adding a 5 and 6 metal plane should be less than $100. Better irons can be added as needed.

I don't share the opinion that nothing is as good as a woodie, I like mine a lot, but I think all of the planes have their strong points. I would much rather dimension hard maple with a metal jack and an infill panel plane than woody planes. Same with curly maple. If dimensioning straight grained cherry or softer, then I use the woodies.

If budget is a consideration, then obviously a compromise needs to be made and stock selection should be more careful if the planing options are limited (but I like the way the gnarly stock looks). My main lumber yard allows me to specify quantity and they bring the wood to the front, so I can't be that picky unless I want to order extra.

When the budget allows, having options is always nice, especially when from what I can tell, no one type of plane is superior to others. It's nice after a few boards of pushing to have some planes that can be pulled, too, especially for trying plane kind of work.

[Zach Dillinger]

David,

You've made some excellent points and I can't argue with you. I tend to work mostly in softer woods (walnut, pine, poplar) and wouldn't trade my wood planes for anything. I don't use hard maple, so I'm not really concerned about working it. For my work, the woodies work better for me. My whole point is to try to get people to try the wooden planes instead of only focusing on the metal planes. As you said, options are nice.

Best,

Zach

[David Weaver]

Woody bench planes are definitely nice to have, i agree. Even if someone likes metal planes, they should try them - especially as cheap as they are. You can really make hay with them in soft woods or medium straight grained hardwoods.

[Andrew Pitonyak]

I agree with Chris Fournier, just get a scrub plane and be done with it. Both the Lie Nielsen and the Lee Valley (Veritas) versions are affordable. A vintage tool, if you can find one, will be even more so.

[Orlando Gonzalez]

When I switched to wooden planes I bought Gary's smoother, 4-1/2, jack, fore, and the jointer. As a matter of fact, I sold all my metal planes - vinatge Stanleys and the 3 LV BU planes (BUS, LAJ, BUJ) - and I have absolutely no regrets. I have used his fore plane with no issues whatsoever. I also have the scraper frog for the 4-1/2 whenever I need a scraper plane.

Derek Cohen did a review of his smoother and fore planes http://www.inthewoodshop.com/ToolReviews/Blumplanereview-SmootherandForePlanes.html. Note that his planes have evolved some over the years.

I also did a mini-review on another forum on his planes.

http://www.forums.woodnet.net/ubbthreads/showflat.php?Cat=&Board=handtools&Number=5283009&Forum=f11&Words=&Searchpage=0&Limit=25&Main=5283009&Search=true&where=bodysub&Name=39954&daterange=1&newerval=1&newertype=m&olderval=&oldertype=&bodyprev=#Post5283009

I use them so I recommend them and Gary is a great guy to do business with. But this is one man's opinion, YMMV.

[Mike Holbrook]

Orlando, thanks very much for this valuable insight.

I'm still a little foggy on a thing or two about the sharpening. First the very different blade is very interesting to me, wrestling with big heavy plane blades has been a difficult thing for me. Since I have limited experience, I don't have pre set notions concerning the necessity/tradition of the larger blades. I get interested when I encounter the notion of not having to wear out half my sharpening gear trying to wear those ornery things down though.

I am not clear on one particular point. I know Gary provides a sharpening jig with each plane, but I believe Derek ended up using a Veritas Honing Guide MK II, set at 35 for a 30 degree bevel. In the ensuing discussion in your review I believe you mention using this guide too? My question is, can Gary's blades be sharpened in the MK II without modification? Were one interested in putting some camber in these blades how would you suggest one do this? I also wonder if you ordered any of your frogs with some camber as I understand this modification can reduce or eliminate the need to camber the blades.

[Pam Niedermayer]

... It is interesting that HNT Gordon makes a bold claim of no tear out with their wooden planes, which David mentions as a major issue. I am wondering what might make the HNT Gordon planes so reliable. I do note that they use high blade angles. It is hard for a novice to see what makes these planes special, although the workmanship is obvious. Lee Valley, for instance, offers some planes that look fairly similar for a small fraction of the cost. I imagine blade control on these planes must be done with a small hammer or mallet of some sort but I have no idea how this system would work for a newer user? The HNT Gordon web site is great.

That's why I mentioned that the blades were thick. Keep them sharp and you'll be in heaven. Let them get dull, and you'll get some chip blockage that you have to clear. The Mujingfang are also very good planes, so I'm told, and they certainly look a lot like the HNT; so why not try one. They aren't identical, but clearly HNT and Muji have a common ancestor. :)

Pam

[Pam Niedermayer]

...I don't share the opinion that nothing is as good as a woodie, I like mine a lot, but I think all of the planes have their strong points. I would much rather dimension hard maple with a metal jack and an infill panel plane than woody planes. Same with curly maple. If dimensioning straight grained cherry or softer, then I use the woodies....

I have to disagree with this statement. I've got almost all woodies from Japanese (the vast majority) to western, and they work very well in all sorts of wood. Occasionally I have to make a dai with steeper bed level, but that's about it.

Pam

Pam

[Pam Niedermayer]

Woody bench planes are definitely nice to have, i agree. Even if someone likes metal planes, they should try them - especially as cheap as they are. You can really make hay with them in soft woods or medium straight grained hardwoods.

David? They are nice to have and use, even if one dislikes most metal planes. And cheap? Not in my book, they're often much more expensive. I honestly don't know to whom I'm speaking and listening right now. One minute you're extolling Japanese planes and the next talking about tearout. Bad night?

Pam

[David Weaver]

Talking solely about push planes here, Pam.

The english and american woodies are cheap, but tearout can be an issue. The only expensive true-to-form beech planes I can think of are old street tool and philly (if he makes bench planes). There are gobs of old tools that have a lot of life left. I've paid more than $25 for them exactly once. I have gotten three irons and chipbreakers at once for $10 or less several times (it just makes no sense to get them one at a time when they cost the same or less than shipping).

Japanese planes are an entirely different story. I think everyone should try them, and in earnest. you can pull them through stuff that a light weight push plane doesn't tolerate, and they tearout less at the same effective angle. We'll get there, but I think this thread is about push planes.

[Chris Griggs]

I find a no. 6 to be a bit heavy for very fast, very heavy scrubbing. I use a heavily cambered old stanley jack for that.

BUT... for most fore plane work a no. 6 with a moderate-heavy camber works well. A heavier cambered, lighter plane is nice for thicknessing or for removing high spots in very rough or twisted boards.

In my limited experience I find a 6 excels when set up with less camber than most peoples scrubs and more camber than most modern jointers/try planes.

I love my no. 6 and once again it's great for most fore plane tasks, but I think there are better options for heavy hogging.

[Orlando Gonzalez]

Mike,

When Derek did the review, and I bought my planes, Gary hadn't developed his new sharpening jig which I use. Yes, the MK II option is a viable one since that's what I used initially.

Gary and I have had some conversation about the jig and I've relayed to him what has worked for me. Gary recommends a 30* bevel and a 2* micro-bevel for his blades, which incidentally are A2 steel. To set the 30* primary bevel you set the blade into the slot as deep as you want then lift the UHMV shoe so that the jig is parallel. This ensures you of the 30* angle. Run it on 150 grit sand paper until the new bevel is ground. I talked to Gary about that the shoe was wearing faster than expected because it was also on the sandpaper. What I do is to cut the sandpaper into 3" wide strips, adhere them to a glass plate, set the blade on the paper with the shoe on the glass, lift the shoe so the jig is parallel front to back, and start grinding.

Once the primary bevel has been ground I move to either my oilstones (Soft Arkansas, Hard Arkansas, Translucent Arkansas) or my waterstones and continue sharpening/honing. After I finish with the soft Arkansas or the 1K waterstone, I lift the shoe 2 notches which gives me the 2* micro-bevel. Then I continue with my sharpening/honing routine.

You can camber two ways: 1) Use the MK II with the camber roller and set it up as Derek shows, or 2) using Gary's jig put some pressure on the outsides of the jig as you sharpend/hone.

I don't have the cambered frog, I only have the scraper frog, but you would need to camber the blade if you want it to be set up as a traditional fore plane. The camber on the frog is only about .002-.003 across it's width so the amount of steel needed to be removed to camber the blade is minimal as opposed to a BU blade.

If you contact Gary he will be more than happy to assist you in any way he can.

[Mike Holbrook]

More great info. everyone, great thread!

So I am thinking about trying one of the Japanese wooden planes that can be pushed and pulled and one of Gary's. I want a Fore and a Smoother. Derek seemed to like the Blum Fore plane better than the Smooth plane but I am thinking about going the other way. I think a Blum Smooth plane with two "frogs" could be both a smooth plane and a scraper. I am assuming that the smooth plane would be better as a scraper, size wise. I think a HNT or Muji would be great as a fore plane due to the ability to push and or pull it across the work. Actually I could argue it either way. Maybe the Blum Fore plane would be easier to camber the blade on, making it easier to maintain with a more heavily cambered blade for stock removal...I guess I will do a little looking around on the net for the HNT and Muji, not sure if they can be bought on this side of the globe or not?

My question about the sharpening has a wider application than just the next two planes I am going to order. I plan to place an order for a coarse diamond sharpener, another water stone or two and probably a LV sharpening jig. I am determined to be prepared to sharpen well and I seem to like doing things by hand on a waterstone/sharpener the best. Great inside tips on sharpening the unique Blum plane blades Orlando.

I have talked to Gary, I agree he is great to talk to and work with.
Again some great information here, all spot on.

[David Weaver]

mujis can be bought from LV, JWW or the one that I really think is worth having, the largest continental smoother from woodworker's supply. Don't get any of them any smaller than the largest, anything smaller is much smaller.

The continental smoother is common pitch, it is difficult to sharpen if you have trouble sharpening anything because it is HSS. Once you learn to sharpen it, it is a fantastic all-purpose plane to use, stays sharp at least twice as long as an a2 iron plane, in my experience, and is impossibly tough. It's not a long plane, though.

[Pam Niedermayer]

Talking solely about push planes here, Pam.

The english and american woodies are cheap, but tearout can be an issue. The only expensive true-to-form beech planes I can think of are old street tool and philly (if he makes bench planes). There are gobs of old tools that have a lot of life left. I've paid more than $25 for them exactly once. I have gotten three irons and chipbreakers at once for $10 or less several times (it just makes no sense to get them one at a time when they cost the same or less than shipping).

Japanese planes are an entirely different story. I think everyone should try them, and in earnest. you can pull them through stuff that a light weight push plane doesn't tolerate, and they tearout less at the same effective angle. We'll get there, but I think this thread is about push planes.

OK, thanks, I was about to be concerned for my sanity. :) I think the ECE Primus reform planes would dispute this. In fact, the one I used produced a surface that rivaled my Japanese smoothers, albeit a bit less burnished. Now the blade mounting/adjusting is a bit tedious, but once set up it shines.

Pam

[Mike Holbrook]

There seems to be a wide variety of planes made by Mujingfang (Muji). It appears that the manufacturer is often not even mentioned. I had seen the LV models, they refer to them as Taiwanese and Hong King-Style planes. The Japan Woodworker offers the largest selection I found. I never found the Continental Smoother that David mentioned. There seems to be a wide variety of blade steels and blade angles. The prices are amazingly low for a product that is largely made with hand tools.

There seem to be two main body styles, one with side handles and the other without. I believe the handles can be easily removed. Most of the ones I see are smoothing planes although I also see a 11" Jack PLane and a 18" Jointer. They seem to be made of a Rosewood or Ebony. Since the 11" Jack I see is short for a fore plane and the 18" jointer seems to be designed for smooth work too I might have to go with a Blum Fore plane and try a Muji style smoother. There is a 8.5" plane that is designed more like the HNT planes with a 63 degree angle (for hard and highly figured woods) that can also serve as a scraper.

[Orlando Gonzalez]

Mike,

I have his 4-1/2 with the scraper frog because it's a bit heavier and wider. But I'm sure you can get by with the smoother which is like a #4.

The muji that you want is what JWW calls the 18" ebony jointer with the blade set at 45*, which is the same length as Gary's fore plane.

I had a HNT Gordon 18" Try and gave it to a very good friend of mine. Terry Gordon produces amazing planes. You can see the HNT Gordon Try plane on the Craftsman Studio website. They are in California and Bill Kohr at CS is a great guy to do business with as well.

Good luck with your search and decision.

[David Weaver]

There are two Muji planes that are good to get, I think, and a lot of the others can be avoided because they're either too small or too narrow.

the ones to get:
* a 63 degree smoother in either 48mm (roughly 2") or 42mm (1.75") size.
* the continental smoother in 48mm iron size (which is the largest one, all of the others are too small for productive use - they all have irons less than 1 1/2 - trust me, I've seen 4 of the sizes because a seller in china - "keroucscabbie" or something - ripped me off and sent me two little tiny ones when I ordered the big one and never made it right)

I wouldn't get any of the planes that look to be bigger or longer if they have narrow irons, it'll make it tough to use them productively.

The one that LV sells as a "jack" plane is too small to use productively, too. I ordered it and got it thinking it would maybe be similar to a 60mm kanna in use, but the body is very very small and it should be avoided for anything other than smoother use - even then, i think the body is too small and low to use it productively.

Woodworker's supply, i think, is the only place that has the large continental smoother now. Woodline used to have it, but places are having trouble stocking it because it used to be ebony, and I think they've run out of ebony. It is some kind of ironwood now, similar in hardness to ebony, not as pretty, but plenty functional and still easily worth buying.

if you get the wrong muji planes (the really little ones or one with an iron that's too small), you will be unhappy about them, which is unfortunate because the couple of models that are good to have are really good planes if you can sharpen HSS.

[Orlando Gonzalez]

Dave,

Did you ever use the 6" muji with the 63* blade angle which is similar in looks to the HNT? I still have one but I'm getting a 7" coffin smoother in English Boxwood with the blade at 60* from Phil and I was debating whether to keep it or sell/donate it.

I was getting that continental smoother from Woodline but had to cancel when the owner told me that they had stopped ordering them due to lack of stock/production of this plane. It sure was a beast.

[Pam Niedermayer]

Did you ever use the 6" muji with the 63* blade angle which is exactly like the HNT?...

The Muji and HNT look very similar; but the Muji is not exactly like the HNT. Why did you give away the HNT try plane?

Pam

[David Weaver]

Orlando - I think the one I had was bigger, it was the 2" blade version. I sold it or gave it away once I built a 55 degree infill, because the chances of using it after that were pretty small.

The nice thing about the high angle smoothers, at least about the one I had, was that the mouth was really tight and the angle too steep, so if you set the plane too deep, you just literally couldn't push it. If the cut was light enough to push it, then there was no tearout. It was almost impossible to get tearout with the plane, but there is some compromise in the cleanliness of the cut on anything that isn't pretty hard when you use an iron at 60+ degrees. However, if the choice is between shine with tearout or less shine and no tearout, it's pretty easy to make.

[Orlando Gonzalez]

I wasn't using it and I tried to sell it but no takers so I sent if off to a dear friend who has always wanted one. It is a great plane and the craftsmanship is outstanding but it was just going to collect dust and I felt it deserved a better life than that. Trust me Pam, it took a lot for me not to keep it, but in the end I just couldn't get comfortable with the style.

You are right about the Muji and the HNT. What I meant to say is that Muji and HNT are not exactly alike but that they resemble each other in looks but not in craftsmanship and/or function. I'll edit the post to be more clear on this point.

[Terry Beadle]

I have a Stanley transitional plane with a hock blade that I use to hog off and flatten panels. I've got maybe $60 in it and it really does a good job. The mouth is opened up to about 3/16ths and almost never jams. I think such a plane is better than the scrub planes as you can get a flatter surface and less trenching groves. It's lighter than a #6 by a wide margin so your arms and back will appreciate it a whole lot.

I also think you should look at Steve Knights razee jack. I had him make me one out of cocobolo and added 2 inches to it ( about 17 inches long ) and it came with an O1 blade. This oversized jack plane has an adjustable mouth and the blade is really good. With in a couple minutes I can open the mouth and tap the blade to take 7 ~ 10 thou shavings easily. Couple of taps and readjust the mouth a little tighter and it's a super smoother similar to David Charlesworth's 5 1/2. I don't have an excessive camber on the blade. I've not found it to be needed on the stock that I buy as most of it is surfaced two sides. Steve's razee kit is $120 and he is very reasonable it you want a longer body.

If I have a really rough bit of stock, the Stanley transitional takes care of it toot sweet. The Hock blade speaks for itself and keeps going long after my needs.

Something to think about too is Steve has a scrub plane for about $80 if you "must" have a scrub... pretty too!

[john brenton]

The woodies.

I can't add to much to what david has said. All of my planes are woodies and I haven't met a piece of wood that they couldn't handle....but I also don't have much experience with the "premium" planes.

The house is divided when it comes to scrubs vs. Jacks. Very competent craftsman use either and it works for them. I use a jack with a big heavy camber, but I like a nice horn handled scrub too. I understand the theory on longer jacks instead of scrubs, but most of us aren't working on 20" wide rough cut boards. You would get your 4 and 6 inch width boards dimensioned before edge gluing and HOPEFULLY you shouldn't have to hog anything after that. Even if you were, you could still make the scrub work.

Wooden planes with traditional wedges are a joy to use. I've become partial to the ulmias, but there are lots of other older woodies. Look for lots of three or more wood planes for cheap, and you'll quickly learn the difference between a plane that has real potential and a plane that has the scrap beech or fruitwood to make a potential plane usable. Inlaying a planes mouth is easy. I used to do it with a chisel alone, but now I finish up with the little dremel router to get it perfect.

The scrub is about the only wood plane I would even consider buying new...but I wouldn't buy the ECE. I don't like their horn.

[Jamie Bacon]

I use wooden planes exclusively and all of mine a vintage save one Clark and Williams smoother. I love using them but even if I used metal planes for finishing, I think I'd still go with wooden as my fore plane for coarse work. I have 3 fore planes, one with a 5" radius camber, one with an 8" camber, and one sweet marples fore plane that I keep ground flat and use as a multi purpose go to plane for taking fairly fine shavings. The other two with camber are fantastic at removing large amounts of wood quicikly. And for coarse work with a cambered iron, you don't have to be too fussy with setting the iron perfectly.

Jamie Bacon

[David Weaver]

We've had the discussion before, but there's not a lot of reason to use a true scrub plane unless you are thicknessing stock, or as came up last time this discussion was had, removing some board width without sawing.

The only time I have ever used a scrub preparing stock without the intent to thickness was a 16/4 chunk of wood with an enormous amount of wind in it, but even then, a jack would've been fine.

You can easily set a jack rank enough with camber to be less than productive when preparing rough boards that are not way out of flat, no need to go one further.

If someone took away my scrub plane tomorrow, I probably wouldn't cry about it.

[john brenton]

If I recall, that last discussion turned into 5 pages of "tastes great!" Vs. "Less filling". That's all it is.

[Mike Holbrook]

Ohhk, I finally got "hooked up" with the HNT planes at Craftsmans Studio, thanks for that hint Orlando. Apparently they even have them in stock. However, I see two major types of HNT planes the Asian/Oriental style and the A55s which are more conventional with a sort of modified "Norris" style blade adjustment mechanism. All the information and reviews I have seen are about the Asian style planes. My early experience is with LV planes and I am planing on trying a Blum plane too. I am thinking the A55 will be closer to what I am use to and have a more consistent feel compared to my other planes. The HNT A55 Smoothing Plane: 10" long, 2" wide blade, 2.7 lbs looks like a very nice smoother to me and it looks like it would be similar in feel to the Blum planes. This plane has a 55 degree bedding angle, reversible to 85 degrees for more of a scraper "cut", a little less dramatic than the 60 degrees on the other models. Does anyone have experience with the A55's?

[Orlando Gonzalez]

Mike,

You can't go wrong with either plane maker. Although I have never tried the HNT Gordon A55 I'm sure that it is top notch as the Blum's are.

I had the 18" Try that is usually referred to as Hong-Kong style but I never really felt comfortable with it. Like you I prefer the toe and knob except on my Japanese kannas.

[David Weaver]

I had one sans rear tote and adjuster - actually, i think what I got was referred to as a "jack", but it was a similar plane. I won it on ebay, but I ended up selling it off for two reasons:
1) i finished a 55 degree infill plane shortly after getting it
2) i didn't realize from the listing that it was a laminated body plane, and I really couldn't get into that

It was, however, a very tidily made, and I'm sure it would've worked *very* well. the lamination line was very clean such that it didn't show up on the ebay pictures I viewed.

Perhaps that's changed, the folks who have used them, like Derek, could tell us if the newer planes are cut from a single piece of wood.

[john brenton]

There was a set of a largish horned smoother and a small one. The combined price was like $30 something bucks I think. It was a weird looking plane though...none of the style you find with a European horned smoother. But for that price who cares.

[David Weaver]

where was that?

I got one of the sets on ebay, it was supposed to be the largest one and the smallest, but instead the crooked seller sent me two useless medium sized ones, charged me $30 to ship them from china and refused to refund anything, claimed he resent the order, and waited for the clock to run out on paypal :( All of that made possible by the fact that shipping from mainland china is slow enough that one shipment and a return shipment goes past the deadline.

That guy was an american, too, so i'm not making any statements about ordering things from china (I've never had any trouble otherwise, and I've ordered a lot of things from china and hong kong).

[David Keller NC]

Mike - A comment to add to the confusion.

Specifically, I use planes to surface and 4-square most of my stock, so they see a lot of use. Regarding a fore-plane sized plane: You will find that blades bedded at more than 45 degrees will substantially increase the force required to take big, thick shavings (which is what you want if you're going from rough-sawn to ready-to-glue). Moreover, while you don't want a heavy plane for this purpose, you do want a heavy blade. There's a reason that a L-N scrub plane has a nearly 1/4" thick iron, and why antique 18" - 22" long woodies typically have single, thick irons. For this purpose, I would advise getting either a traditionally-styled (British traditionally styled) wooden plane, whether that's a new one from Philly, D. L. Barrett or Old Street Tools (formerly Clark and Williams), or a bailey-style Lie-Nielsen #6.

As for the size of the plane - a fore-plane sized plane can be used relatively mindlessly, and it will still flatten a board across its width and somewhat along its length. However, you can effectively use a scrub plane or a jack plane for this exact purpose, but you must be more mindful - you have to determine where the high spots are, only plane those, re-check, plane some more, then switch to the jointing plane when it's close.

Personally, I think you're in for a rude surprise with how much work a steeply-bedded, fine-mouthed plane is going to be when put to work as a roughing plane. Unless, of course, you wish to work primarily in eastern white pine (which I love because I'm primarily a hand-tool user; hard maple sucks!)

[Pam Niedermayer]

I got a cheap little horned European scrub some years ago; and I love using it. Granted, I only use it when roughing out stock straight from sawing trees/limbs; but boy, is it effective and necessary. At several points I examine the thickness of the chips to determine whether I should be sawing/hatcheting/yari kannaing rather than scrubbing. It is very rewarding to work with wood at this level, speaking from the perspective of someone who's probably a bit anal retentive, as witnessed by the pure joy I experience when removing shavings.

Then other planes come into play.

Pam

[Mike Holbrook]

David,
It has occurred to me that steeper angles may make it harder to push a blade through the wood. The Blum Fore is 50 degrees, bevel down and both the frog and blade can be cambered to reduce friction. The Blum blade may be thin but it is attached to a 3/4' steel frog and covered by a 5/32" backup iron, making it very stiff. The mouth on these planes is different too. Although it is wooden the unique frog gives it what amounts to an adjustable mouth. The point being that I believe there are some other unique features of this plane that may offset the points you make.

The HNT planes I am still learning about, especially the A55s. I know enough to feel that there are some special features regarding these planes too. I don't think the issues you mention will be as important on the Smoothing plane either.

I have a LV LA Jack and a Garret Wade Jack that I can press into service if I need to.

[David Weaver]

50 degrees, you won't notice much.
55 you'll notice a good bit
60+, a heavy shaving is like pushing a bulldozer

Common pitch is nice for heavy wood removal, 50 is OK. I'd stop at 50 as a max.

[Mike Holbrook]

Pam I'm not even sure what all those tools are, but I think I know what you mean.

David that is pretty close to the way I had it figured too. The HNT Asian style plane is 60 and although Derek seems to make it work I finally eliminated that tool for my experience level and the work I plan, although I might revisit the idea for medium stock removal. The HTN A55s are 55 which I am considering for a Smooth plane.

I will be talking to Gary about a Fore plane again. I believe he can help me with appropriate set up and modifications for his frog and blade that should give me a good shot at making it work for me.

I will be talking to Craftsman Studio again about the HTN A55 Smoothing Plane: 10", 2" X 1/4" blade, 55 degree, reversible to 85 for scraping, brass mouth insert, Body- Gidgee wood, "Norris" style adjustment, 2.7 lbs. I think this plane will be less of a transition from the Blum or LV LA Jack than the Asian style planes would be, at least until I hone my skills. They suggest a HSS blade instead of the TS blade if the plane will be used for scraping. They tell me I can swap out for the HSS + another $50.

Assuming I don't chicken out tomorrow I should be back before too long with plane reviews.

[David Keller NC]

Mike - Cambering a blade isn't generally thought of as reducing friction and/or the effort required to push a plane - it's primarily a way to accomplish taking a very thick shaving without the corners of the blade digging in. A good analogy is a carver's "quick gouge" - so-called because a gouge with a #9 or higher curvature can be used for very quick removal of wood on a carving rough-out without having the corners of the blade digging in and splitting the work.

[David Weaver]

Has anyone ever done a scientific experiment to see if a cambered blade removes more volume of wood than a straight blade?

I think the error that most people would make in such a test would be to camber a wide blade and compare it to a flat wide blade.

I wonder how a 1 1/2 inch square iron in a deep cut would do - that would maybe be closer to approximating the geometry of a cambered iron that is actually in the wood.

[Chris Fournier]

It's really very simple, the scrub plane is designed to remove large quantities of wood quickly and with minimum effort. When should you consider using a scrub plane? Any time you want to remove large quantities of wood quickly and with minimal effort.

The scrub can also leave a very interesting surface texture if used carefully so I guess this would be a good scrub time too.

Of course my thoughts about the #5 and #6 are that they are expensive drawer spacers between the #7 and #4! Biased? Perhaps a bit.

[Larry Williams]

here ya go:

183993

BTW, unless you have a foundry and are prepared to melt and re-pour, you're not going to turn a jack plane into a scrub plane. If you camber the iron of a jack plane and set it up for roughing you'll have a jack plane--one set up for use just as they have been since Moxon was writing more than 300 years ago. Or just as Nicholson wrote about almost 200 years ago or as they were used until very recently when every bench plane became a smooth plane. I have no idea what everyone does with all these smooth planes.

[David Weaver]

300 years ago, they didn't have scrub planes. 200 years ago, they didn't have them.

Why do we need them now?

(i have one, but I think it's a legitimate question).

I wonder what percentage of them that are bought ever thickness 50 board feet of wood. Mine hasn't.

I kinda like smooth planes. It's nice to have a lot of them. It's not that exciting to have a bunch of them that are exactly the same, though.

[Zach Dillinger]

I think Larry nailed it here. Final finishing planes (smoothing) should be set up to put a fine finish on the surface, there is no doubt or argument. Every other bench plane should be set to take as thick a shaving as possible to speed the work. There is absolutely no reason to take smoother-like shavings with a jack, fore, scrub or any other bench plane. The possible exception is the jointer plane, since that sometimes puts the final finished surface of the board, but even then you can usually make a pass with a smooth plane to clean up the surface if necessary without goofing up the edge.

That said, I still find use for a old horned wood scrub plane. I use it to plane-rip boards when I need to narrow them slightly, usually a 1/2" or less, as it is easier to hog-plane that amount than it is to rip. Any face planing, including the removal of large amounts of stuff, is done with my fore plane, as it allows me to work down the board quickly but limits the chance that I'm going to plane too much in one area and create a thin spot.

There is a reason that most furniture was made from softer woods in the hand tool era. Anyone who wants to work hard maple by hand must be a masochist (no offense intended). Give me walnut, pine, poplar or cherry any day of the week. Cherry is about the hardest wood I work with on a daily basis. Anything else requires way too much effort to thickness and few people are willing to pay the kind of money necessary to make me work with it.

[David Weaver]

i'm not sure i understand why we care if some people set up all of their planes as smoothers.

There's two groups of people, I think, people who dimension their wood with planes and people who don't. the ones who don't, really don't need any planes with cambered irons. If they buy a bunch of planes to play with and set them all up as smoothers, as long as they don't promote themselves as the expert on dimensioning wood by hand, well.....i'm too lazy to care.

I guess i'm too lazy to care no matter what they do.

I think i'm just too lazy in general, but that's not a topic for this thread. Maybe there are some other like thinking lazy folks who don't let so many things bug them.

[Mike Holbrook]

To put a little perspective on my goal for this thread. My interest was to have at least one good plane for coarse, medium and fine work. I felt least prepared for the coarse phase of work.

As a relative newbie I do not plan to try and remove large quantities of wood from large areas. I intend to buy wood that is in good shape, not too hard to work and sized for my early projects. I still need to work this wood though and I don't want to be using a medium or fine tool to do the coarse part of "normal" stock removal. I think the 17" fore plane I just ordered will serve me well. I got a couple blades for it so I can camber one a little more for initial stock removal and have a second with slight camber that will allow me to use the Fore plane as a short jointer too.

I don't even have a usable smooth plane so I will be buying one of those to hone my fine wood dressing skills with. I have a 22" jointer and a LV 15" LA Jack plane with which I am relatively confident I can handle the medium phase of my work, including dealing with end and problem grain.

As far as the scrub plane being "the tool" for removing large quantities of wood, there seems to be more historical evidence suggesting the scrub is a fairly new plane, with only a short history in which some have used it for that job. Whereas, the fore plane probably served that purpose for a much longer period. A period in which removing larger volumes of stock was a much more common occurrence. In my own personal history with planes I believe the Jack plane was considered the coarse tool among a typical collection of Jack, jointer, smoother. I don't even recall hearing scrubs mentioned for a large part of my history.

My Jointer Record #7 and more recently my LV, LA Jack Plane have been my favorites so I'm sure my tastes run towards longer planes. In the end I guess we all use what works for us on the work we do.

So now all I have to do is figure out whether to spend a little more money for a HSS blade for my smoothing plane or just stick with the stock TS blade. I am told the blade on the plane can be reversed for scrapping. The HSS blade is suggested for scrapping.

[Jim Koepke]

To put a little perspective on my goal for this thread. My interest was to have at least one good plane for coarse, medium and fine work. I felt least prepared for the coarse phase of work.

You have my agreement on this perspective. Currently my shop has a pair of #6s. One for fine shavings and one for coarse shavings.

There is normally a pair of #5s also set up this way, though currently there are 4 #5s in the shop due to a couple that were just begging me to buy them. The two regulars are set one fine one medium. Since there are extras, one is set up very coarse and the other is set up just the way it kind of came together. A couple of them will likely get sold when a new shiny object catches my eye and needs some money to purchase.

Then there is also a pair of #4s in my shop. You have likely guessed that one is set up for very fine shavings and the other is set to take a thicker cut.

Finally, there is the #7 & #8. The #8 is for the heavy shavings and the #7 for when just a little stock removal is desired.

My way of thinking it is easier to have a plane set up to do a particular job instead of adjusting the frog or changing a blade. I do like my LA BU planes with adjustable mouths, but they also have their own specialties to work on.

jtk

[Jim Koepke]

Of course my thoughts about the #5 and #6 are that they are expensive drawer spacers between the #7 and #4! Biased? Perhaps a bit.

Of the 4 #5s currently in my shop, only one of them cost more than $10.

One of my #6s was $35, the other was $10.

Of course, they all required different amounts of work. The $10 #6 required more work and parts than the one for $35 which was complete when bought.

jtk

[John Coloccia]

FWIW, I use my LN#5 more than any other bench plane. I use it for quick stock removal, jointing short pieces, shooting boards, etc...

[Mike Holbrook]

I just don't have enough real life experience to know exactly what I will like yet. I do like Jim's idea of having differing set ups for the same but different planes. Sounds like something I may end up doing. The fore plane I ordered from Blum yesterday will have a little camber in the "frog" and two blades one with a fair amount of additional camber and one with very little. This will give me the opportunity to try a 17" fore both ways. Eventually I can see buying or rebuilding a similar plane and having two planes dedicated to each of the two tasks.

I decided to start with good new planes as I figure there are enough variables and frustrations in the learning phase without trying to figure out how to tune the tool I am trying to learn to use. Since I am not going to be getting paid to do this "work" I intend to have fun doing it. Matter of fact, I pretty much make work that brings in money fun too.

[Andrew Pitonyak]

I used to do all my "rough stuff" with an old Stanley #5. I had a couple of them. Dumped them for a Lie Nielsen #5. With my inexperience, I certainly felt like I had more control with the #5 than I do with my new and not used much scrub plane (which really removes the material quickly).

[Mike Holbrook]

I have been putting considerable thought into this blade angle issue. Both of the planes I have been looking at offer an option to use the "plane" as a scraper, either by reversing the blade or using a specially designed frog. As I understand it scraping can create a smoother surface than even a smooth plane. I believe scraping is especially good about making a smooth surface without tear out. My question then becomes shouldn't higher blade angles in conventional planing produce a surface somewhere between common pitch and a scraper? Assuming one is using a smooth plane and making small shavings wouldn't this produce a better surface in many situations?

[David Weaver]

The lower the angle and the sharper the iron, as long as you can avoid tearout, the shinier and more pleasing the surface.

You can tell when a 45 degree bedded plane did a surface vs. one at 55 if sharpness is the same and you have both pieces together - as long as they haven't been finished. If they've been finished, I don't know if you can.

You can easily see the difference between a scraper, but your assumption that a high angle plane surface is somewhere between scraping and planing with a lower angle is correct if there are no issues with the planed surface.

[Mike Holbrook]

But,
Isn't tearout usually the issue? Gordon says he builds his planes with higher blade oitches because he believes they are the best all around users. It seems to me that a little rougher finish on a softer piece of wood would be very easy to deal with. On the other side of the coin though, lots of tear out on harder and or more figured wood might not be so easy to deal with. If this is the case I can understand Gordon's reason for building planes with higher blade pitches.

[David Keller NC]

As I understand it scraping can create a smoother surface than even a smooth plane.

Mike this isn't actually true in all circumstances - just some circumstances. In the circumstance of having a board of well-behaved, straight-grained hardwood, the smoothest finish you will ever be able to acheive on it is planing with the grain with a very sharp handplane set to take a fine shaving with a blade pitched with a cutting angle between 40-50 degrees. Scrapers are indeed useful tools that I use every time I'm in the shop, but they are best at dealing with difficult situations. Generally speaking, it's scraping a piece of wood with a high degree of figure or burl that can't be planed any other way. They are also the tool of choice when following a toothed plane blade (typically used in planing highly figured wood in a veneer situation).

Verifying that this is so is fairly straightforward - compare the surface left by a very sharp scraper and a standard cutting angle bench plane on a piece of softwood with straight grain such as eastern white pine or basswood. What you may notice almost immediately is that the handplaned piece will have a high gloss (i.e., it's been "burnished"), while the scraped surface will not. The soft nature of these two species magnifies the effect, but a similar thing happens on cabinet grade hardwoods like walnut, mahogany and cherry. Neither surface will be at all deficient in any way once a film finish is applied, however.

[Mike Holbrook]

I think we are saying similar things from different angles now, which tells me I am getting close to basic understanding. Obviously the Aussies have to deal with some very tough woods that we may be able to avoid, still sooner or later I am thinking I/we will run into challenging grains, especially if I decide to process some of the wood on my property: black walnut, sycamore, maple, both oaks, hickory, ash, poplar, pine, birch.... Isn't it the rougher woods that often capture and hold our interest?

[Sam Takeuchi]

If wood you listed are the ones you will be mainly dealing with, high angle smoother isn't your ideal candidate. These materials don't pose that much of a challenge even for ordinary bench planes and I don't think you'll be scraping much. A more commonly pitched smoother and dedicated scraper (if you ever need one) would be a better setup I think. Unless your main material is really hard and difficult grain materials, you should consider high angle plane as a specialty tool. It's tiring for one thing, they really don't leave good surface on softwood. At this point, what you don't want is end up with is having a not-so-optimum plane that isn't suitable for your work and materials.

While I think learning all this is good, but personally I don't think it's a good idea trying to analyze what you would do and need, buying tools accordingly without making anything or using tools. Tools and their functions will come to make sense as you take those tools to complete certain tasks, when a certain tool is too big or behaving less than optimum, you'll know if you need a smaller/larger, high/lower cutting angle, rougher/finer plane etc. If you want to try what it's like to have a high angle smoother, take your Record smoother, give 18 degree back bevel and see if it'll produce acceptable wood surface for your general smoothing. It'll make so much more sense than thinking about it.

[Mike Holbrook]

Hi Sam,
Actually do something, there is a good idea! I have been missing several pretty critical pieces. I don't actually have any hardwood to work with yet. I have been trying to talk a buddy who does a great deal of wood work into making a trip to Griffin to pick some up. He finally offered to give me some to play with, which I may do soon. Will probably go spend a day with him too, but he does not use the hand tools much. He finds planes to be too slow. I think he needs better sharpening skills & tools, but sometimes it's hard to convince us old codgers. I actually have a similar problem with my sharpening devices and skills that I am working to remedy. I need to either repair or replace several of my planes as they are not really in usable shape. I do have a LV LA Jack that I can put into service once I resharpen the two blades I have for it. Our dog park is open 6 days a week dawn to dusk and we have had a bunch of construction projects going on that have kept me tied to home. We are closed Monday so I am hoping to be able to get out in the truck and get some materials to start cabinets and a home repair project with. I have just a little more clean up and sharpening to do too....

I thought hickory, oak, maple and sycamore were suppose to be tough woods to work?

[Johnny Kleso]

If you want to stop by here I can give you a sharpening lesson...
I'm about 20 mins south of ATL
Most any day is good for me but the shop is out doors in the driveway so best its a good weather day..

If you have some old hand planes we can tune them up also..

[Sam Takeuchi]

It's always nice to have a piece of hard and difficult wood to test your planes on. It doesn't have to be a full size working material. Just a scrap is fine. Having that to test new planes and/or different settings on it will help you with basic understanding of what all these things mean.

These woods you mentioned, you'll be really fine with non high angle smoother. They aren't the softest or easiest woods, but they don't belong to the hardest and meanest group of trees either and they are relatively well behaving woods. I think Gordon planes's background as Australian production, emphasis on higher cutting angle and scraping action is appropriate for their woodworking climate whilst it may not be so for the majority North American woodworking population.

Regardless of what other people may think of back bevel, giving back bevel to raise cutting angle on standard angle smoothing plane will work quite well if the situation calls for it. I think it's better to have a good quality standard angle smoothing plane that can work on most of your materials well than high angle plane(s) that don't shine all that well in half of your materials. Or maybe if you are unsure, settle with one BU smoother with extra blade so you will have no problem achieving finest surface on the soft wood while also tackling difficult and interlocking grained wood with high angle blade in the same plane. You already have a LV LA jack, a LV BU smoother will compliment that plane well and can share blades. It is one formidable and capable smoother on most materials, so you won't be left helpless in case you need a high angle smoother. If you'll ever need a scraper, simply get a dedicated scraper.

Take it easy and play around with your planes before you make another purchase. I bet everyone has plane(s) they thought they'll use or need, and end up not using them at all...it's okay to do that, but it's not a good feeling to have good quality tools to be collecting dust. While in use, you realize a lot of things can be improvised and covered by existing plane(s). It's nice to have a good selection of planes and other tools, but if you don't have them, you'll find a way to do whatever you need to do with what you have. So don't worry too much about trying to acquire everything for now.

[Mike Holbrook]

Johnny that is a very generous offer. I will have to table that thought for a little. The wife's car was totaled ( fortunately no one was hurt) a few weeks ago and the rental just ran out so we returned it. We actually have two new cars (MINI's) that are due to arrive soon, but until then we are limping along with just a truck that needs to go to the dealer itself. I ordered stones from Stu at Tools From Japan that I hope will arrive before long too. I can sharpen fairly well by hand, "side sharpening". The old King stones I have are just slow on some of the steels.

I did put the purchase of another plane on hold for now Sam. When the Gary Blum plane arrives I will spend time with it and see if I like it before buying anything else. As you say I could share blades between my LV LA Jack and a LV LA Smoother or I could buy a Blum smoother that could share blades with the Fore plane. Because of his unique "frog" Blum's blades are around $10. A Blum smoother can be easily used as a scraper too, with a second frog.

The car issues and an early spring have been keeping me from getting somewhere to buy wood. I'm also trying to figure out my first hard wood projects, probably cabinets, with plywood carcasses and all or part hard wood doors, maybe a glued up hard wood top or two. Drawers provide lots of opportunities. Only problem is the cabinets are a fairly big project. I usually make my purchases based on projects. The fore plane seemed like it might get the most use for what I have planned.

Back to the original theme of this thread. I am toying with building a Steve Knight Wooden Plane kit. He has a "15 Razee Jack that I could use for even heavier wood removal that my fore plane but since I have a 17" fore plane on order and the LV LA Jack.... There is a 24" Razee Jointer that fits in well on the other side of my fore plane. Either one of these fits in with the fore plane well and gives me a classic wooden plane to try out. At least I would get to work with some real hard wood and get away from all the 2x4's & sheathing grade plywood I am use to.

[Johnny Kleso]

Mike,
Just shoot me a PM when you want come down..
I have enoght sharpening tools and stones for several shops..