Record versus Record Marples....hand planes...help with ID and quality

[George Farra]

Hi Everyone

I recently purchased a Record Marples #7 jointer. I'm not plane expert by no means but I'm more familiar with the stanleys. It was an impluse buy, for whatever reason, and I need a jointer anyway.

By doing some research, I understand that the Marples label would indicate a mid-1980's production after the . My question is based on my knowledge of Stanley planes......I would only by WWII or older planes. I don't beleive today's Stanley planes share the same quality as those of yester-year.

What about the Record planes? Would I have been better off with a pre Marples plane or has the quality of Record planes been maintained?

FYI...I do not have the plane yet in my posession so I can't give any comments on its overall condition, but the pictures provided had it looking very clean....almost new....which has got me thinkin

TIA

George

[Michael Horan]

George,

Here is a link to a discussion on a UK messageboard. The gist of the discussion is that hand plane quality headed south starting in the 1960s, but that Record held out a little better than Stanley. My only personal experience with Record is a No. 5 plane; my best guess is that it is from the 1950s and I like it. When the "good old days" ended is going to be a gray area. Someone here may have a rule of thumb.


http://www.ukworkshop.co.uk/forums/what-constitutes-a-modern-stanley-plane-t8906.html

Mike

[john brenton]

Almost every tool is going to need work out of the box. If the sole is relatively flat and the frog sits cleanly then it's going to be a score. If you have to do extensive work to flatten the sole, then not so much. A relatively flat sole with a sharp iron and you've got a great, new out of the box #7.

[Jim Koepke]

All the opinions/observations of tool quality by date of manufacture go out the window when the plane is in hand.

The ability of the individual tool to do the job for which it was designed is what matters.

Even in the "good ol' days" a few clinkers got through the door. Even in the dark days of lowered quality some good tools were inevitable.

You really won't be able to tell until you sharpen the blade and put it to wood.

Maybe when it arrives you can post some pictures of what it can do.

jtk

[Chris Griggs]

All the opinions/observations of tool quality by date of manufacture go out the window when the plane is in hand.

The ability of the individual tool to do the job for which it was designed is what matters.

Even in the "good ol' days" a few clinkers got through the door. Even in the dark days of lowered quality some good tools were inevitable.

You really won't be able to tell until you sharpen the blade and put it to wood.

Maybe when it arrives you can post some pictures of what it can do.

jtk

Very True! One of my best planes is, believe it or not, a Footprint No 5 that was made in England (I think by Sargeant) probably in the 70s. I bought it from a friend for $25 intending to use it as a roughing plane, but it was so good that I ended up using it as more of a long smoother/panel plane. The adjustment mechanisms are as good and/or better than most old Stanley's I've used. Big (really big) heavy brass smooth turning depth adjustment wheel, nice tight but smooth lateral adjustment, and a heavy casting akin to the war time Stanleys. The only work I ever did to it was 20-30 min of lapping the sole, and I never bothered to upgrade the blade. Every time I pick it up I see the name "Footprint" on it and look at it with mistrust and skepticism, and every time I use it I am blown away by how wonderfully it functions for very fine work.

Point is, its hard to tell how the plane will function until you actually have in hand - it could be a very good user. Hopefully someone will chime in who has had hands on experience with Records from that era.

[Jerome Hanby]

I bought a group of Records that were about 20 years old (post with pics (http://www.sawmillcreek.org/showthread.php?106111-Record-Planes&highlight=record)), They all look like they are high quality. I'm currently getting them setup to go into use. I added Record 778 Rebate and 20C Compass planes to my collection and they both appear to be top notch as well. The Record 778 compared to my Stanley 78 appears to be head and shoulders better...

[Terry Beadle]

I bought a Record 07 in the mid-90's. Added a Clifton blade and stay set. Really happy with it. Results are every bit as good as a LN I think with the total price below $250.

Adjustment is very good. Sole required no flattening.

I think Mr. Koepke is right. Get it in your hand and only then you'll know what you have.

Good luck and enjoy the shavings.

[john brenton]

Every time I pick it up I see the name "Footprint" on it and look at it with mistrust and skepticism, and every time I use it I am blown away by how wonderfully it functions for very fine work.


That's hilarious. I have a few tools like that, including a 1/4" Harbor Freight chisel I ground into a dovetail chisel. Every time I grab it I feel like I'm "slumming it", and pound on it I expect to see the edge crumpled like a used kleenex, but it's fine.

[Greg Wease]

In 2001 a friend and I each took a woodworking class at our local Community College. I bought a new Record 05 based on a magazine article that rated the Record ahead of the Stanley for quality. My friend bought a Record 07. I spent an hour or two fettling the 05 and got excellent results--it is still in use today by another student. My friend spent many hours on the 07 and could never get the sole flat enough or the frog to mate properly (or to his expectations). He complained where he purchase it and it was replaced with another of the same vintage and, after several more hours, he got acceptable performance. Point is, quality is quite variable on the Record planes of that era--not sure how it relates to the Marples versions. Guess you are about to find out!

By the way, all the planes I use today are either pre-war Baileys and Bed Rocks or current Lie-Nielsen and Veritas.