Plane Identification Help

[Charles Wiggins]

I am brand new to bench planes and recently acquired this Bailey-style No 6 from another woodworker and I am trying to figure out what it is. It came without irons or the lever cap so I am wondering if Stanley parts will work.

The only markings on the body is "No 6" on the heel. The print is raised and the long underline is inset.
The sole is 17 11/16" long x 2 13/16" wide.

202921202922202923
202924202926202927

See next post for more info and pics.

[Charles Wiggins]

The frog is ~2 1/4" wide and has a flat bottom and a Stanley style lateral adjuster. The lever cap screw is 2 9/32" on center from the base of the frog. Is has "6" and "A" stamped into the back. The body appears to have been designed to receive a different kind of frog but it was drilled and tapped further back to accommodate this one.

The footprint of the tote is somewhat smaller than the cast receiver, but it appears from the wear line on the receiver that it has been there from some time, if not original. The wood and finish of the knob and tote appears to match, although the tote shows more wear.

202928202932202933
202935202936202934

I would really appreciate any insights anyone might have.

[Bill Houghton]

Even if it's not a Stanley...if you've got a Stanley frog on there, a Stanley iron and lever cap should fit. The 2-1/4" wide frog implies that it's an early No. 6 - the later ones are 2-3/8". I believe the later ones are easier to get, but a little digging around should yield you what you need.

My experience has been that most, though not all, of the Stanley bench plane clones will take Stanley parts - or Union, Millers Falls, etc.

[Tom Hamilton]

Charles, it is definitely a Stanley/Bailey. It is not unusual for parts and pieces to be AWOL from a tool made in the first half of the last century.

http://www.supertool.com/stanleybg/stan0a.html

The link is to the definitive source for dating Stanley/Baily planes. From there you can determine if you want to restore, renovate or rehab.

All the best, Tom, in Douglasville, just a little south of Rutherford, NC

[Jessica Pierce-LaRose]

In my experience, as long as you get the right width for your plane, lever caps, blades and chipbreakers are pretty swappable. Kind of looks (to my untrained eye) that you've to a Bailey style plane modified to (sort of) take a Bedrock frog.

[Mel Miller]

I don't think the body is Stanley. The frog receiver is not like any in Roger Smith's type study, nor is the way the No. 6 is cast into the body. The knob does not appear to be Stanley, and the handle is questionable. The frog looks like Stanley with the Stanley style lateral lever, but I've not seen one marked 6 A like that. Lateral levers are not hard to change. If you want to use it, irons and lever caps are pretty interchangeable as stated above.

Mel

[Charles Wiggins]

Thanks for starting me in the right direction. After doing some preliminary research I think I have a No-namo body with a Stanley #605 1/2 frog, which means there is extra space on either side of the frog. The frog is 2 1/4" and the mouth is 2 15/32", so it will accommodate a 2 3/8" cutter.

So, if I decide to do a rehab and make a user out of it would it be better to get a 2 1/4" cutter to match the frog or a 2 3/8" cutter to match the mouth?

Or should I just part it out?

[Dave Ring]

Very interesting. It looks like someone has drilled and tapped an unidentified No.6 body to take a No.605 1/2 Bedrock frog.

[Dave Ring]

I'd part it out. The frog might bring you enough $$$ to buy a good No.5 1/2 or No.6.

[Mel Miller]

Not sure that is a Bedrock frog. Note the differences between this one and the OPs, including the lack of a tab for the fine frog adjusting screw, and the raised bosses around the mounting screw slots.

Mel

[Jim Koepke]

It doesn't look like a Stanley Frog. The end of the depth adjusting bolt is different. The pawl on the yoke and the followers on the other end do not look right. The brass adjuster even looks different.

The lateral lever's peening looks like it may have been done outside of the factory. The screw holding the frog do not look like the most common Stanley issue fasteners.

Just because I have never seen a Stanley frog with 6 A in the casting doesn't mean they didn't make one. Usually the A designation was for aluminum planes.

If you have a thread gauge we could maybe learn more by knowing the pitch counts of the various threads.

Does it say Stanley on the lateral adjuster? Are there any dates also on the adjuster?

jtk

jtk

[Charles Wiggins]

Jim,

The only marking on the lateral adjuster is the one in the photo. And I don't have any way to measure the threads.

[george wilson]

You can use a ruler. Measure the number of thread CRESTS in a whole inch. If you can't hold the ruler still,put a piece of masking tape exactly where the inch starts and ends. You may not have 1" of threads to measure if the bolt is short. It could be unscrewed from the frog and measured,if that would give you !".

[Jim Koepke]

The threads of interest to me are the ones for the knob and tote and the frog screws. Stanley used 20 threads per inch on those. I think others used different threads.

I wonder if anyone tried copying Stanley's tiller end for their lateral adjuster.

The plane could be total Franken plane or just some off brand pretender.

The way it looks is the frog does not give much support to the blade near the mouth.

jtk

[Charles Wiggins]

Jim,

I used a 1/4" 20 tpi bolt to compare and the threads on the frog screws and the long tote screw meshed with it. I can't check the one for the knob because the bolt is bent and it may destroy the knob to remove it. The short tote screw and the cap lever screw threads are finer.

[Jim Koepke]

Jim,

I used a 1/4" 20 tpi bolt to compare and the threads on the frog screws and the long tote screw meshed with it. I can't check the one for the knob because the bolt is bent and it may destroy the knob to remove it. The short tote screw and the cap lever screw threads are finer.

That is a good way to check threads. On Stanley planes the short tote screw and the frog screw should have the same size and thread. It could be someone just jammed a different screw in the tote toe screw's place. Then again, it could be a different maker's choice.

jtk

[James Taglienti]

Neither the frog nor the body are Stanley, I am almost certain... The frog and receiver look like vaugh and bushnell but i thought their numbering was different. I dont know if they made planes without the flat top like a bedrock has ... A friend of mine has an Anchor brand plane with similar numbering but it says anchor on the body. Thats a strange plane!