Use a Stanley 45 as a Dovetail Plane?

[Phillip J Allen]

Hi all,

I just got a Stanley 45 combination plane off ebay and I am still experimenting and learning to use it. I am also in the process of building an arts & craft Wardrobe with 2 vertical dividers and I was thinking about joining them to the top and bottom of the carcas with sliding dovetails.

Can I use my fancy newly aquired 45 to make the sliding dovetails?

I am visualizing cutting the socket first with a narrow groving blade. Could I then purchase a blank blade and grind a 10 degree taper on one or both vertical sides of the blade and slowly plane out the socket bevel? Then take another blank blade and cut a 10 degree taper on the leading cutting edge to cut the male end of the dove-tail (like what you would use a dove-tail plane for)?

Does this sound overly ambitious for a poor little old Standley 45? I have read that they are not great for cross-grained work and of course I am working with red oak!

regards,

Phil

[Ryan Baker]

Sounds slightly awkward to me, but it might work. I'd be interested to see how well it works for you. Post some pics if you try it.

[Jim Koepke]

Not sure how this would work, but I would like to see your experiments.

Jake Darvall used to post a lot about his different experiments with a Stanley 45 and 55. Here is one:

http://www.sawmillcreek.org/showthread.php?41979-Panel-raising-with-the-stanley-55

I think he still posts on the Australian woodworking forum.

jtk

[James Pallas]

I can see how this may work. It would take some tricky grinding to get the iron to protrude past the skate the 10 degrees to make the cut on the socket. The whole length of the blade would need to be ground so it would register properly against the plane body. I have a very nice Stanley 45 and despite all the bad press I find it to be a very useful tool. Cross grain work is problematic but can be done. Scoring is the problem for me. I did find that if I use the spurs I take a couple of passes with the iron retracted and just the spurs cutting and then start the iron in it works better. I have done a few beads cross grain in this fashion. Very sharp irons and light passes are key, at least for me.
Jim

[Jim Koepke]

Cross grain work is problematic but can be done. Scoring is the problem for me. I did find that if I use the spurs I take a couple of passes with the iron retracted and just the spurs cutting and then start the iron in it works better. I have done a few beads cross grain in this fashion. Very sharp irons and light passes are key, at least for me.

+1 on sharp blades and light passes.

Some pull the plane backwards to get the knickers to score the edge first. For me, scribing the edge with a knife is quick and easy.

On the 45, the blade has to cut at the same depth on both skates. The 55 has an adjustable skate to work with nonsymetrical cutters.

jtk

[Jessica Pierce-LaRose]

Sounds to me you're talking more of a scraping cut using the sides of the blade or am I imagining how you want to go about this wrong? I imagine you'd want a bit of relief on the edge of the blade, not a squared edge, then.

[Jim Koepke]

I could see having a a blade cutting one side of a slant and one edge being a 90º to the surface for cutting a tail, but not with the 45. One would need the 55 for my idea. For cutting the socket it seems cutting a groove and then using a side rabbet with a tilted depth guide would be the way to go.

tjk

[Tony Shea]

I just don't believe that this original idea is possible due to the sides of the blade having to scrape their way through such a deep cut. Just seems like too much material to have to scrape away and really don't think it to be possible. But if you're willing to try it then by all means, I would be interested how the effort turned out.

[Jim Koepke]

I just don't believe that this original idea is possible due to the sides of the blade having to scrape their way through such a deep cut.

Okay, it is time for a crude picture of how it works:

241997

In this configuration, the blade cuts a deeper trench with each stroke. It is like a rabbet only with a slanted bottom. The sides are not scraped away. The Stanley 55 is capable of working with a blade like this. The Stanley 45 is not made to use a blade like this, but it could be done in such away that it could be possible if one was using just the skate on the body of the plane. That might require grinding an offset on the blade like those used on fluting, match blades, some of the profile blades of the 55 and sash cutting blades.

Cutting a socket (pins) for this could be done with multiple operations using a dado blade and side rabbets.

jtk

[Jessica Pierce-LaRose]

That makes sense, Jim. I thought the OP was talking about cutting the female part of the joint with the 45, not the male part, which is why I brought up the scraping cut.

[Jim Koepke]

I thought the OP was talking about cutting the female part of the joint

This brings me to think of one of my supervisors in the electronics world. He being overly PC we didn't refer to connectors as male and female as had been common in the industry for ages. The parts were referred to as pins and sockets.

In the world of dovetails, the pins are the sockets and the tails are the males...

Now that I am totally confused I understand. (To twist up a comment from Edward Murrow)

jtk

[Borden Bleich]

What about setting twin guides #55 to do an angle cut like in the manual for the two part table edge cut

[Derek Cohen]

It can be done ... well, I've done so with a modified Veritas Small Plow ...

http://www.inthewoodshop.com/ShopMadeTools/SlidingDovetailsWithTheSmallPlow_html_427a18aa.jpg

This uses an angled fence and the skew blade from a Stanley #46.

Details are here: http://www.inthewoodshop.com/ShopMadeTools/SlidingDovetailsWithTheSmallPlow.html

Regards from Perth

Derek