Why a Stanley Type 11? I give up!

[Archie Hendrick]

I want to put together a beginner's set of useful planes. Right now I have a couple cheapo block planes and a Bailey #3 (Type 19, I think). I will shell out the bucks for a LN or LV adjustable mouth block, but I want to add a 4 or 4 1/2 smoother, a 5 and a jointer, (either a 7 or 8) and will be looking for Bailey's or Bedrocks in very good user condition. Down the road, I'd like to put together the money for an LN or LV LA Jack as well.

I've read Blood and Gore and the Type Studies for Stanleys. Very informative and the type studies help me identify which type is which. However, I can't seem to find info on why a Type 11 seems to be so much more desireable than other types. I've also read that a type 13 is pretty good. I'm sure the info is out there, but my limited search abilities don't seem to be uncovering it.

So, can someone please enlighten me or point me to a thread or site that will explain why the Type 11 is so well regarded compared to other types? Are there other good types I should consider and types should I stay away from?

Thanks for any advice you may be able to provide.

Archie

[Jason Chestnut]

The type 11 just has most of the improvements that actually improved the planes -- frog adjusting screw, lateral adjuster, etc. I think it might have had a slightly heavier casting than later types, too. Maybe. And they were pretty well made. The main reason I like them is that they were the latest type that had (mostly) low knobs. I'm a sucker for a nice low knob.

Anything pre-WWII should be a very nice plane, and even newer ones than that will give you good workers. I wouldn't worry too much about type, unless you really want your user fleet to be a collection, too.

[Pat Zabrocki]

Everything Jason said and: Type 11, I believe was the last year for the low know which many folks prefer (I do) and I believe the type 13 was the first year for the logo on the lever cap and the SW logo. Type 12 was the beiginning of the 1.25 inch adjustment wheel which I like better. All the practical features seem to be relatively similar in my view so it becomes some personal preference withing these types.
cheers
pat

[David Weaver]

It's internet sensation. I have used type 6-18, and I can't functionally find much better about a t10 or 11 than a later plane.

I think (personally) t11s look the best, but to assert they are the best users ignores that most people would prefer a larger wheel if someone didn't tell them what to like first.

After tuning the planes, I couldn't really develop a preference other than to say I like any of the planes where the frog goes all the way down to meet the casting. High knob or low knob is more of an aesthetic issue than anything - especially given that most people are only going to smooth with their planes, or possibly edge joint (and for that, they shouldn't be using the knob, anyway).

So, for you newbies out there who want to get sucked into getting a specific type because you read something, where you'd let a cherry T13 go by because you were waiting for a mediocre T11 to show up in your price range...don't worry so much about type. Learn how to set up the plane for the type of work you want to do and try to get one that's in relatively good shape and run with it. There's nothing magic about a T11. I've had probably 8 of them, and I only have 1 now, sold off the rest. They are nice planes and they look nice, but they're not worth any more money as a user than a 10 or 14 or 13 or whatever.

[Bob Stroupe]

I've never used a Stanley type 11, but I have two type 17's both a # 4 and 5. I like them. They seem to work very well, and since they are less desirable to collectors they were pretty cheap even though they were both very clean when I bought them. However neither of them have a frog adjustment screw. Do I need it? No, but I think it would be nice to have, particularly on the jack since I've been using it both for shooting and roughing.

[Sean Hughto]

Testify, David! Amen Amen.

Archie, it's silly hype. Nothing magic about Type 11s. Indeed, if I recall correctly, they lack the raised ring casting at the base of the knob - another worthwhile improvement that stregthens the knob and looks nice too. ;-)

[Tom McMahon]

Many years ago one of the first guys to have a web site with a shop tour posted pictures of his collection of type 11 planes. I don't remember his name but type 11s have been popular ever since. Many of the so called type 11s are actually type 10.

[Greg Wease]

I'm happiest with Types 10 to 15 because the fit of the slot in the frog to the rib on the base is tight, not sloppy as on the later types, and they have a frog adjustment screw. I also prefer the short knob but that's an easy "upgrade" from the tall ones. However, pretty much any of them perform well once fettled.

[Dave Gaul]

I have Stanley 4 & 5, both type 18, and they work wonderfully, and look pretty good too!

[Trey Palmer]

Tom, do you mean the 9's and 10's? They both look the same with two patent dates in the bed, and I've confused them. The 11's (3 patent dates, low-knob) don't seem easy to mix up.

I honestly thought the type 12's and 13's were the most desirable users. They seem to fetch higher prices.

Being a n00b I have four bench planes and two of them are type 10 and 11. I feel more in control with the low knob, especially on the #7 when edge-jointing. But I definitely prefer the large wheel on the other two planes (a KK and an English-made Stanley). Sentimentally and aesthetically I like the type 10-11 planes.

I think the ideal for me would be a type 12 with a low knob. My type 10 has an SW iron (added by the original owner). I'm doubtful of hype but it does seem to hold a usable edge a little longer than the others.

[Matt Radtke]

Meh, type-studies, shmype-studies. I don't have strong opinions, my general preference is "Anything old enough to have a pre-ogee frog. Bonus points if it has the frog adjustment screw." That said, my favorite plane is a ogee frog having, stained knob, user-replaced-tote number 8. Also really like my 6, and it's pre-frog adjustment screw.

In theory, that 8 shouldn't be desirable at all, but I just sold a type 12-ish 8 instead of this one. And I plan on keeping it until I there nothing better to spend $500 on except a LN 8.

[Richard Dooling]

A strong +1 on David's comments.

Also, unless you're a collector with specific goals, don't overlook the Sargent and Millers Falls planes. Both made some excellent tools. There are others also, Union for instance, but I'm not too familiar with them.

[David Weaver]

A strong +1 on David's comments.

Also, unless you're a collector with specific goals, don't overlook the Sargent and Millers Falls planes. Both made some excellent tools. There are others also, Union for instance, but I'm not too familiar with them.

Union planes are fine, the basic planes that look like stanley planes are...an awful lot like stanley planes. the only planes I had that I really didn't like at all were KK series keen kutter. The frog drops off support of the iron way up, and the way the frog mates to the body is junky - they are a huge disappointment compared to the K series.

[Richard Dooling]

I also picked up a Shelton that came with a couple of nice Stanleys once. It was poor quality.

.

[Jason Chestnut]

I had another thought. I think one of the reasons that type 11 planes are popular is because they are pretty easy to spot. Low knob with 3 patent dates. Easy as pie. Never mind that late type 11s have high knobs. :) Most of the reasons are silly. My real preference is the low knob with frog adjustment screw. The rest is nice, but not as high on my list. Type 11s are just an easy way to get it.

[James Taglienti]

I really dig the type 9. The 3 thru 5 size have a unique frog thats a big old slab of iron, and it milled to sit on the bed perfectly. Next best frog to bedrock for sure!

[Jim Koepke]

A lot of the hype for type comes from people who are respected in the field saying something like, "this type was made during Stanley's golden age of tool making," or "this type is as cute as socks on a squirrel."

Then all of a sudden all the blog followers are out beating the bushes for a particular type and "quoting the experts" all across the internet.

It is nice to have all the bells and whistles of the type 10 and later, but I do not adjust my frogs that often.

I like the low knob of the earlier type, so my type 12- 13 #3 now has a low knob. I like the larger adjustment wheel. So most of my pre type 12 planes now have a larger adjustment wheel.

My type 6 #4 wouldn't get traded for another #4 of any type. It is beat up, has rust spots and is just generally funky, but it sure can smooth wood. I have had other #4s including a couple of Bedrocks that have been sold because they would bring more money than this one and not do the job any better.

In the opinion of many, Stanley made their best planes between 1902 and the early 1930s.

There are also a lot of people who want a particular type for a gloat factor among their collecting friends.

In my opinion, knowing the type of the particular plane is helpful and does give an idea of the tools age. In my opinion in some cases it is a lot of hype.

If it is a good plane that makes the surface of the wood smooth, what more can one ask?

jtk

[Archie Hendrick]

Thanks, everyone, for the responses and especially for the education. Knowing that I don't have to wait around for type 11s to turn up really opens up my options for putting together a basic set of planes to get started with (at a reasonable cost).

I've been reading up on tuning and have been working on my sharpening with some old irons and even bought a #5 Hock blade to hone even though I don't have a #5 plane yet :o . I think I'll start shopping.

Arch

[anthony wall]

at last, some common sense coming into a thread ,tools arent any better because someone tells you so even some cheap tools can work great,when i arrived in thailand after leaving my tools in the uk i needed a plane so went out to buy a stanley type steel plane .could only find the cheap wooden type so i had to buy one cost of 260 baht about $9.00 after i sharpened it and set it up i find it works just fine ,now that i have more tools around me i still use the cheap plane in preference to other more expensive models at times
A lot of the hype for type comes from people who are respected in the field saying something like, "this type was made during Stanley's golden age of tool making," or "this type is as cute as socks on a squirrel."

Then all of a sudden all the blog followers are out beating the bushes for a particular type and "quoting the experts" all across the internet.

It is nice to have all the bells and whistles of the type 10 and later, but I do not adjust my frogs that often.

I like the low knob of the earlier type, so my type 12- 13 #3 now has a low knob. I like the larger adjustment wheel. So most of my pre type 12 planes now have a larger adjustment wheel.

My type 6 #4 wouldn't get traded for another #4 of any type. It is beat up, has rust spots and is just generally funky, but it sure can smooth wood. I have had other #4s including a couple of Bedrocks that have been sold because they would bring more money than this one and not do the job any better.

In the opinion of many, Stanley made their best planes between 1902 and the early 1930s.

There are also a lot of people who what a particular type for a gloat factor among their collecting friends.

In my opinion, knowing the type of the particular plane is helpful and does give an idea of the tools age. In my opinion in some cases it is a lot of hype.

If it is a good plane that makes the surface of the wood smooth, what more can one ask?

jtk

[Martin Cash]

Actually the type 11 did have most of the improvements that Stanley introduced to its planes along the way - all except one.
All of the types up until that point came with the small brass depth adjuster.
It was only after the type 11 that the larger depth adjusting wheel was introduced.
To my mind this is often forgotten as a huge improvement in performance. The added mechanical advantage of the larger depth adjuster made it possible for depth adjusting on the fly, simply with the fore finger on a well tuned plane.
The small depth adjuster virtually precluded this. This depth adjuster improvement actually brought about a change in the way planes were used, and was so much more efficient and a great time saver.
So type 12's onwards are the best of them for me.
Cheers
MC

[John Powers]

I'm 63 and I guess my 3,4,5 and 7 are all as old as me. Don't know type from shinola. The 3 with keyhole is a sweetheart and works so well I can't bring myself to buy a new iron and chip breaker. The ward master 4 is a gem, pitted chrome and all, the 5 with the hock iron is a workhorse and the 7 from an old forumite does the job. I build little boats and the planes help me do that. Did I mention I love my 90 and 93?

[Jim Koepke]

It was only after the type 11 that the larger depth adjusting wheel was introduced.
To my mind this is often forgotten as a huge improvement in performance. The added mechanical advantage of the larger depth adjuster made it possible for depth adjusting on the fly, simply with the fore finger on a well tuned plane.

Guess my technique must be wrong, I do the same thing with the smaller adjusters. My biggest problem is remembering to turn it the correct way. Most of my planes with the small wheels are type 6 or type 4. They adjust the opposite of the later planes. This usually gets me when using my type 9 #6 since the type 4 is used more often. I kind of feel dumb when trying to adjust the blade and wonder why the cut is getting thinner or thicker when I want the opposite. Then comes the slap the forehead moment.

jtk

[Bob Jones]

What a funny coincidence. This weekend I bought 6 different type 11 planes to tune up as users. I got 3 thru 8. None of the fraction sizes. I will post pictures when they all come in. I guess I gave in to the hype!

[Sam Takeuchi]

Guess my technique must be wrong, I do the same thing with the smaller adjusters. My biggest problem is remembering to turn it the correct way. Most of my planes with the small wheels are type 6 or type 4. They adjust the opposite of the later planes. This usually gets me when using my type 9 #6 since the type 4 is used more often. I kind of feel dumb when trying to adjust the blade and wonder why the cut is getting thinner or thicker when I want the opposite. Then comes the slap the forehead moment.

jtk

I do the same. I have no problem making depth adjustment on the fly with small depth adjustment wheel. My hands are not big, normal size and fingers are short, but even then, I can easily reach and turn small depth adjustment wheel on even larger planes like No.7. If depth adjustment wheel is hard to turn or need more than a finger pressure (I normally do it with just middle finger while the rest of fingers stay put), lever cap is too tight or depth adjustment wheel is not turning smoothly.

I use mixed bag of planes (Stanley, Record and LN BD planes, LV LA/BU planes, wooden English planes, Japanese planes) and this adjustment on the fly never seemed that important. I don't tend to change cutting depth all that much once it's set, so even if small adjustment wheel makes it impossible to change cutting depth on the fly, how being able to do that revolutionalized plane technique is a mystery to me. It's a convenience that may save a few seconds from more traditional hammer/mallet tapping method, but you can achieve very precise adjustment with hammer/mallet, too. I mean I do it when I'm using metal bench planes, but I don't feel that it has contributed that greatly to planes' performance or time saving as a whole. So it doesn't upset me if it doesn't work.

As far as original topic goes, what happened to all the praise SW planes used to get (type 13 to 15)? I seem to recall until very recently SW era planes were considered as the hallmark of quality and features amongst the Stanley bench planes (I don't. I think it's just an easily identifiable era when Stanley made quality tools. A safe bet). I didn't know type 11 became so popular these days. My Stanley planes tend to be type 9s and 11s. If anything, I'd go for type 9 if I could choose. I just don't care for frog adjustment screw. But really, don't trust the hype over type. It's fun for those who can spot different types of Stanley planes, and some people like to collect certain type, but no one particular type was ever exceptionally better than the rest. Differences are subtle, some small things in a type appeal to some people (like my "post type 9 but pre-type 16 frog, no logo lever cap, oh low knob and I don't care for frog adjustment screw if possible" pretty much narrows it down to type 9 to 11). Stanley made good quality planes, but they weren't great by any stretch of imagination. They never bothered to produce consistently good blades (aside from M2 blade Stanley made down in Australia). Some were usable, but they were never great. Contrary to popular belief, SW logo-ed blade isn't any different from the rest of early 20th century blades. There was nothing special about them.