Clifton Planes

[Jerry Thompson]

How about these planes? I have seen them advertised and just saw them being manufactured on "How It Works."

[Brian Kent]

Here it is on YouTube. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s0OpsHkOxxc&feature=youtu.be

I have never held or used one myself. Reviews seem to range from OK to excellent.

[Jessica Pierce-LaRose]

I've only heard good things about their planes, although Chris Schwarz did make a disparaging remark about them in his article about shoulder planes on the WK Fine Tools site. I haven't really looked into them, but they certainly look great with that british racing green. Certainly, if you order them from a reputable dealer, you should be able to return it if it's not up to snuff. The price at different dealers seems to vary considerably compared to other places. For instance, the number 7 I've seen priced at 450, 390, and 415. It all seems close enough to the price of an LN plane that if I'm going to spend that kind of money, I might as well buy a name and brand I've had good experiences with.

Another consideration is how they hold their value. I know no one likes to think about selling their valued tools, but it seems like the resale value on LN and LV planes is higher. Good if you're buying used, bad if you're selling what was new.

[Todd Burch]

I have a Clifton Shoulder plane. One of the best planes I own. It's amazing.

[Peter Pedisich]

I almost purchased a Clifton No. 7 recently, but there was too much uncertainty after reading all I could find about them.

Just goes to show you how important it is to have a flawless (or as close as one can get) product from the beginning. Clifton may have worked out any problems years ago and be producing a product every bit as good as LN, but I'm not going to be the test subject. Call me cranky, but I certainly won't part with $400+ to have to lap the sole. I will do that on an $85 80 year old Stanley, though.

I'm sure first class companies like TFWW and The Best Things will stand behind a purchase fully, which is worth it in my book to spend $50-60 more to support them.
To my eyes, the british racing green paint, the polished edges, the round sides, and the great stamped blade all combine to make a great looking plane.

[george wilson]

So,what did Chris think was wrong with the shoulder plane? I have 2 LN's,and the one I have posted here(the Nessie shoulder plane). The LN's are very accurately and cleanly ground.

[Jeff Hamilton Jr.]

Chris Gochnour recently completed a smoothing plane review in FWW and named the Clifton and LN #4 a tie for Editor's Choice http://www.finewoodworking.com/FWNPDF/011219042.pdf. I personally use the reviewed Clifton #4. I purchased it here from a fellow Creeker, Joe Adams, and it has become one of my favorite planes (And but for the boutique brands - I own multiples of each!).

Here it is with it's "little brother," the Clifton 400 small shoulder/bullnose. I LOVE it!

229849


229848

[Jessica Pierce-LaRose]

So,what did Chris think was wrong with the shoulder plane? I have 2 LN's,and the one I have posted here(the Nessie shoulder plane). The LN's are very accurately and cleanly ground.

In an article from '07, he reviewed three shoulder planes, and on the first page he said:



Three new commercial brands stand out as the best tools in my book: Bridge City Tools, Lie-Nielsen Toolworks and VERITAS (sorry Clifton, I’ve just had a few too many defective Cliftons pass through my hands).


I have no idea how much weight to give that. I'm not even sure it relates particularly to the Clifton shoulder planes. I seem to remember that Clifton got good reviews in a recent FWW review of smooth planes. It's really just a single anecdotal data point, and not much of one at that. Not sure why I even brought it up.

[David Posey]

www.wkfinetools.com/contrib/cSchwarz/z_art/cliftonP/clifton1.asp

This is the article where Schwarz actually describes the troubles he's had with these planes. It's pretty old as it was originally written in 2004, and I'm sure they've had more than enough time to work out any production kinks. Still, it's never bad advice to buy from a dealer you can easily return the product to if need be.

[Jeff Heath]

I've owned the Clifton 410, their small shoulder plane, and it's as good as those made at LN, of which I own several.

Jeff

[Jacob Nothstine]

I have a Clifton #4 I pick it up used, had a lot of trouble getting it to work correctly. It works great now nice smooth cut. The biggest problem is there is not to many people that use them, and no place to call or go if you have problems. Had a question on a blade angle for my Lie-Nielsen called them and in 2 minutes had my question answered.

[David Weaver]

I remember bob feeser on woodnet, before he ran out of steam and stopped posting, saying that he had a clifton #4 that wasn't right. The maker and the retailer both knew it wasn't right and at least the maker had stated that they were going to replace his plane. He was telling his point of view long removed from the time that he was told he'd get a replacement (perhaps a couple of years) and nobody had yet actually done anything despite telling him they'd replace his plane. He was basically sitting with paperweight with a crooked frog.

That's a point of reference for anyone who wants direct support and expects something like LN and LV provide in terms of shipment of actual goods after the sale when something isn't right.

I would expect to be compensated between an LN plane and a Clifton plane for that possibility, and for the reputation in the past that not all of their planes were accurately ground (I remember DC going over planes and saying that he had a plane that was 7 thousandths hollow, and I don't know if he said it was a clifton directly, but I gathered that's what it was because it was a precision bench plane that was not an LN - what else is there?).

Shipping to and from england is also expensive, and I'd rely on getting one used and a lot cheaper than an LN if I were going to get one. And I'd ask the person who sold it if it was right.

I know there are satisfied users who don't feel there should be any price difference at all, but in reality, when LN's bench planes are generally flawless as far as bench planes go, there's no reason to take on the uncompensated risk when the service after sale and role of retailer and manufacturer aren't as well defined in the states. Check out the cost of shipping to and from england, too, if you think you might have to go that route. Their postage is incredibly high for anything verified.

Just my opinion.

[Chris Griggs]

On paper I really like the look and certain design features (e.g. 2-piece chipbreaker) of the Cliftons better than LNs. However, if I bought one the only person I would buy is from is Joel(TFWW), just because I know that if there were an issue he would take care of it as well as LN or LV. I would have zero worries about getting a perfect plane from him. My one hesitancy about buying a Clifton is simply that they are made from gray iron rather then ductile. I have yet to break a plane from dropping it but I can be a bit ham handed and have dropped a few (new and vintage) and I like the security of having a plane that is less likely to be permanently damage if it takes it hits something hard.

[Chris Vandiver]

I know of one highly respected retailer that stopped offering Clifton. The reason, little or no support from Clifton to back up their tools. It's a long way to England and it must become cost prohibitive for Clifton to really back up their product, at least to the market here in the USA. Plus Clifton is owned by Clico, an areospace industry manufacturer. In all probability, their main focus is not woodworking tools. That being said, if the retailer will back up the tool 100%, then it's probably worth it. Clifton planes sure look good.

[Peter Pedisich]

My one hesitancy about buying a Clifton is simply that they are made from gray iron rather then ductile. I have yet to break a plane from dropping it but I can be a bit ham handed and have dropped a few (new and vintage) and I like the security of having a plane that is less likely to be permanently damage if it takes it hits something hard.

Chris,

I believe the Clifton castings are annealed, which strengthens them. They have been drop-tested as well with success. We should all have wide T&G white pine shop floors though, just for plane safety:D

[Charlie Stanford]

In an article from '07, he reviewed three shoulder planes, and on the first page he said:



I have no idea how much weight to give that. I'm not even sure it relates particularly to the Clifton shoulder planes. I seem to remember that Clifton got good reviews in a recent FWW review of smooth planes. It's really just a single anecdotal data point, and not much of one at that. Not sure why I even brought it up.

"Too many defective Cliftons pass through my hands." Really? He certainly should have provided a little more detail to backup that sort of statement.

[Chris Griggs]

Chris,

I believe the Clifton castings are annealed, which strengthens them. They have been drop-tested as well with success. We should all have wide T&G white pine shop floors though, just for plane safety:D

That's good to know! And it may sway me to give Joel some money for one next time I'm in New York (though New York seems to magically take away any spending money I might have to put towards a new plane). At the moment I'm working on pine floors, but I'm moving very soon, and if I have a shop at all lord know what the floor will be made of. I once dropped my WR no. 6 on my concrete patio (it fell of the shooting board). All 7 pounds landed right at the toe of the plane and it bounced. Had to sand down one or two burrs from the crash, but the plane didn't crack or warp or anything. IDK what WR planes are made from, but from that point on I knew that having a plane that can survive an encounter with concrete was good thing to have.

Anyway, I've always been intrigued by the massive blades and 2-piece chipbreakers on Cliftons, but then again, I also like the frog adjustments on the BD Lee Valleys, and the interchangeable frogs on the LNs. On paper, they all have different advantages and its good that we have so many options. One of these days I can hopefully make it out to a show and try them all side by side to see what I like the best. Or maybe I'll save some money and just keep using my old stanley smoother which if I'm honest with myself does everything I need a smoother to do.

[Terry Beadle]

I bought a #3 Clifton about a decade ago. It took about 30 ~ 45 min to tune the blade and true the sole. It will take sub-thou shavings and it's worked reliably the whole time. The blade is very good steel, takes a really good edge and keeps it. It won't keep the edge as long as A2 but certainly will give O1 a run for it's money.

I use it exclusively as a smoother. I've used it on a wide range of hardwoods. Results have been what one would expect of a really good plane. I paid far less than the LN as I bought mine early in the first release to market. If memory serves ( and some times it doesn't ), I think I paid $245 for it back then. I would not hesitate to recommend them. The three piece blade/stay set design is wonderful. You can remove the blade, give it a quick set of licks on the honing board/belt, with out removing the cap iron base, and be back working in less than 2 min.

It's pretty too ! Hoot!

Given a choice of LN #4 or Clifton #4, I would take the LN. I checked the current price on both and they both are priced the same.
I don't think you'd do wrong with either but the LN has the A2 blade but the Clifton has the 3 pc blade but the... etc.

[Jim R Edwards]

I own LN, LV, and Clifton planes. My Clifton plane performs beautifully and is built to very high standards, you won't be disappointed.

[Johnny Kleso]

I own one and have sold two other off..
Unless you got them at 50% off like I did, I would pass..

The blades are first rate but the geometry for chip breaker is not great and the depth adjuster is almost coming off the thread when plane is set a small gap..
The are OK and high quality but not good as a LV or LN plane IMHO..

[Jorge Rico]

I purchased a #4 & #5 when they became available about 8 years ago. Both are well made and have not required any fettling. On the plus side is the thicker iron, the removable chip breaker and the bedrock type adjustment system. They seem a bit more solid and heavy than my older user Stanley's. The only complaint is that the finish on the #5's cocobolo tote exhibits crazing near the heel, however, that is cosmetic and does not affect performance.

When I bought my two planes the prices were well below what you would have paid for the equivalent L-N planes. Looking at current prices, if I am going to spend that kind of money I will probably go with an L-N.

[David Weaver]

I own one and have sold two other off..
Unless you got them at 50% off like I did, I would pass..

The blades are first rate but the geometry for chip breaker is not great and the depth adjuster is almost coming off the thread when plane is set a small gap..
The are OK and high quality but not good as a LV or LN plane IMHO..

Johnny, glad to see you on here!

[george wilson]

I am glad to see you posting too,Johnny.

[Todd Burch]

I was wrong. My fav plane is a Record 78, not a Clifton. I do have a couple Clifton spokeshaves - a concave and convex. They're OK. Got them on clearance ~15+ years ago.

[Joel Goodman]

From what I've heard there are sometimes QC issues and it's not like dealing with LN or LV who are 110% there with customer support. I'd feel easier with a LN or LV for a high ticket item -- I don't know (but I suspect) that they may have more QC issues but more to the point it's how easy (or hard) it is to resolve them.

[Zahid Naqvi]

I too have a Clifton 410 shoulder plane (which coincidentally came from Chris Schwarz when he was thinning his tools way back in 2004/2005) and have previously used the Veritas medium shoulder plane. I would put the machining on both at about par. Never used their bench planes.

[David Weaver]

If one watches "how it's made" on clifton planes on youtube, it's interesting how similar everything looks to the LN process. Like nearly identical, except that clifton really does forge the irons with a power hammer in shop. They should be really good irons if they are tempered correctly, but they are exorbitantly expensive to buy individually.

The tsunesaburo plane irons are really nice, maybe the nicest iron I've used for a smoother, but they aren't exactly out there in droves, and they come in one thickness (which suits me fine, but the wide iron users won't like the 2.2mm thickness that's similar to a stock stanley iron).