Shape for a krenov plane - not so simple? . . . .

[Matthew N. Masail]

Ok, I've had it !! I need some advice. I've made way too many of these things to think that doing it again will be fun.... now it would just be fun to end up with a tool that feels right.

this is my latest:
258767

looks good right?... well... the damn thing just won't sit right in my hand, it performed (my it rest in peace) like a champ but just wasn't right, so ended up being a gini-pig for experimentation on body shape - and it's not the first.


So I have 3 Hock irons waiting for a body, and a glued up plane waiting for shaping. it would be critical for me to get it right this time as this is turning into a real aggravation. the only smoother I've made that is a keeper is a recent coffin smoother. being I've made about 6 of them that's not a good record.


They all work great, but that is useless to me if it doesn't feel like part of my hand when I'm using it.


So, 2 options:


1. sell the Hock iron and concentrate on coffin smoothers (and learn to chop it out not glue it). hoping LV will provide us with some 1 3\4 irons in PMV-11... :)


2. I'm still hopeful there is a krenov shape that will work for me. (I've looked everywhere on the web imaginable). I got the blades that are 4 1\2 inches long, but have no problem grinding them down if needed.


So, if you have a Krenov type plane that works for you, and could share a picture and a few thoughts on the shaping and grip, I'd really appreciate it.

P.S
Sorry for being dramatic, I'm a bit hyped up.

[Casey Gooding]

Use it. Make adjustments with your bandsaw. Use it. Make adjustments with your bandsaw. Use it. Make adjustments with your bandsaw. Use it. Make adjustments with your bandsaw. Use it. Make adjustments with your bandsaw. Use it. Make adjustments with your bandsaw. Use it. Make adjustments with your bandsaw. Use it. Make adjustments with your bandsaw. Use it. Make adjustments with your bandsaw. Use it. Make adjustments with your bandsaw.

Ad nauseum.

[Matthew N. Masail]

Thanks. but trust me, I did that did that did that did that did that = nothing left of the plane. of many planes. I'm under the impression now that the right shape shouldn't need such intense customizing.

this thread is coming after I've been through A LOT of experimenting, I'm hoping for some insights.

[george wilson]

I suggest not making the rear grip so slanted. If it were me,I'd make it more vertical at the bottom,and round it at the top. Look at pictures of old coffin smooth planes' rear contours. To me,your design would be to "slippery" to hold on to well.

[Andrew Hughes]

I think your plane is very handsome,I also have a few that don't feel good to use one is too wide and one too narrow.One thing I noticed about your is it looks tall.
I did hold one of James krenovs planes in my hand it seemed small to me.And it was very rough.Ron Hock had it on his table he didn't take his eyes off me.Maybe he thought I was going to run out the door.:)
I offered him twenty dollars for it as a joke. I can't repeat his words on this forum.He is a very funny guy.

[Bryan Ericson]

There are some photos of planes made by Krenov himself on the internet - do a Google image search for them. His planes are pretty roughly shaped, and they're not symmetrical - look carefully at the photos and you'll see it. You might try the terms "plane made by krenov" and "krenov made plane". In general, they're less rounded, more boxy than yours, which to me looks like the planes in Finck's book. Krenov's planes seem to be made to please the hand and not the eye.

[Matthew N. Masail]

I suggest not making the rear grip so slanted. If it were me,I'd make it more vertical at the bottom,and round it at the top. Look at pictures of old coffin smooth planes' rear contours. To me,your design would be to "slippery" to hold on to well.

Your right, "Slippery" is exactly the main problem I've been having. do you mean somthing like this infiill?:
https://www.google.co.il/search?q=coffin+smoother&hl=iw&safe=off&tbm=isch&tbo=u&source=univ&sa=X&ei=AzlaUezjPMeNtQbVyYBg&ved=0CDQQsAQ&biw=1517&bih=714#imgrc=xFOOecjeOEG7tM%3A%3BupPV7DpMQGAUUM%3 Bhttp%253A%252F%252Fwww.infill-planes.com%252Ffiles%252F2011%252F09%252FBuck-Unhandled-Coffin-Smoothing-Plane-1.jpg%3Bhttp%253A%252F%252Fwww.infill-planes.com%252Ftag%252Fcoffin-smoother%252F%3B600%3B400

I've tried the vertical approach, in different ways. but not curved into an "egg shape" like the photo. the problem I had with it is that without the blade to counter act against the hand there is no solid grip either. if I were to use an egg shape I would have to carve the plane out of a single block of wood so I'd probably just make a coffin smoother - I'm willing to go that way if I have too, I'd be happier in the end that's for sure if I carve it out of a solid block, but I'd have to sell the Hock irons and get somthing else. I'm wondering if I can get a solid grip without using the blade as part of it.

[Matthew N. Masail]

There are some photos of planes made by Krenov himself on the internet - do a Google image search for them. His planes are pretty roughly shaped, and they're not symmetrical - look carefully at the photos and you'll see it. You might try the terms "plane made by krenov" and "krenov made plane". In general, they're less rounded, more boxy than yours, which to me looks like the planes in Finck's book. Krenov's planes seem to be made to please the hand and not the eye.

good point about the boxyness.... but I have tried that..

[Matthew N. Masail]

I think your plane is very handsome,I also have a few that don't feel good to use one is too wide and one too narrow.One thing I noticed about your is it looks tall.
I did hold one of James krenovs planes in my hand it seemed small to me.And it was very rough.Ron Hock had it on his table he didn't take his eyes off me.Maybe he thought I was going to run out the door.:)
I offered him twenty dollars for it as a joke. I can't repeat his words on this forum.He is a very funny guy.

LOL..... I would have offered him 10 :D

[Stanley Covington]

If you are willing to sacrifice the plane for a brighter future in handtools, you should cut the front and back of the plane down as close to the sole as you think the plane can handle and still remain usable, leaving the sole, the angled "frog," and mouth as-is. Then drill the sole and insert a few dowels extending upwards. Then place/mold lumps of HARD modeling clay at the front and back of the plane, supported by the dowels. Then use the plane. Adjust the clay, Use the plane. Adjust the clay. Over time the pressure from your hands will mold the clay.

I suggest you do not lock the shape in so rigidly that there remains only one way to hold the plane comfortably, because you may find your technique changes over time. But I think you will find that this exercise will give you a better idea of the shape that best fits your hands and body and workbench height.

Stan

[Mark Dorman]

Good call Stanley; I was thinking along those lines as well. Cut it down until it's to small then start building it up with clay.

[Mark Kornell]

So, if you have a Krenov type plane that works for you, and could share a picture and a few thoughts on the shaping and grip, I'd really appreciate it.


Here's a block plane that might give you an idea:
258778

My hand wraps around the back of the plane, tucking in just underneath the iron. The lip provides support for pushing the plane through a cut.

With this jack, it took 3 tries to get the shape to feel good:
258779
The key was getting the area my hand grips to be narrower than what the 1 7/8" iron would typically dictate. Hard to tell from the pic, but the rise behind the iron has mild indents on both sides. Perhaps 1/8" on each side, but it made a world of difference. Prior to working out the indents, my hand would fatigue after about 5 minutes of use.

[Nelson Howe]

The back of yours looks steep and the front edges look too sharp to me to be comfortable. Here are two of mine I like.

Don't give up. You'll get one that works for you.

Nelson

[Stanley Covington]

Good call Stanley; I was thinking along those lines as well. Cut it down until it's to small then start building it up with clay.

I wish it was an original idea, but I stole it from the industrial design boys specializing in egonomics.

Stan

[Derek Cohen]

Hi Matthew

One small advantage I have is that I own a smoother made by Jim Krenov. I had dissected it here: http://www.inthewoodshop.com/ToolReviews/The%20James%20Krenov%20Smoother.html

The size is deceptive. It is 9" long ..

http://i13.photobucket.com/albums/a262/Derek50/Planes/Krenovplane2.jpg

The planes are also not very high. The originals used cut down Stanley bench plane blades or whole block plane blades. The Hock blades are short, probably made expressively for JK's planes.

Very recently I decided to build a few Krenov planes - amongst others, including solid body planes - for a forthcoming LN Tool Event in Perth (as I shall be presenting demonstrations on plane building).

The key elements of a Krenov plane - aside from the laminated process, which is likely something that goes back a long way in time - is the cross pin and the low centre of gravity. The cross pin is shaped to turn so as to find the best angle to hold the blade. The low centre of gravity comes from the plane's height (e.g. the cross pin is about 1 1/2" up from memory). It is this low centre of gravity that gives these planes such terrific feedback. Krenov shaped his planes for comfort and feedback. His followers made them look nice because we give the tool more importance than he did. :)

I built a few smoothers and a few block planes. The smoothers has 1 1/2" wide Hock blades with chip breaker at 55 degrees. These are 7" long. They are designed for difficult grain. The block planes use 1 1/4" Mujingfang blades (from LV) and are without a chipbreaker and set at 40 degrees (also bevel up). Only a smoother really benefits from a chip breaker. They are 5 1/4" long.

Here are examples ...

http://i13.photobucket.com/albums/a262/Derek50/Planes/Planes%20for%20the%20LN%20Tool%20Event%202013/LNTE2_zps55cd3ca5.jpg

http://i13.photobucket.com/albums/a262/Derek50/Planes/Planes%20for%20the%20LN%20Tool%20Event%202013/LNTE8_zps804cb1c5.jpg

Both have very tight mouths (blades withdrawn here slightly as the pics were taken on the diningroom table.

I am so impressed with the performance of these planes. The smoothers are able to leave a clear surface on really gnarly grain, while the block plane performs as well as my best LA block planes. Both are so comfortable to hold. They mold into the palm - perhaps a good test is to use one one-handed.

Currently I am working on solid wood coffin smoothers. I will post pics of all the planes at a later stage.

Regards from Perth

Derek

[Jim Matthews]

There's a fitting article on Ron Hock's website, this month.

Isaac Fischer discusses at length an approach to handling these planes
that may better suit you; the back of his planes are curved to form a hollow
rather than a raised section at the back.

If you're taller than your bench, a raised rear section may make it difficult
to "bear down" on the workpiece.

http://us-mg6.mail.yahoo.com/neo/launch?.rand=08gflb3ld15go#shapingplanestofit


(http://us-mg6.mail.yahoo.com/neo/launch?.rand=08gflb3ld15go#shapingplanestofit)

[Jim Matthews]

The Traditional wooden body planes sold by ECE/Ulmia and others feature a small raised grip
at the top of each plane. It forms a sort of "saddle" for the intersection of your thumb and first finger.

I like the design, as it allows your hand to rest palm down on the plane.
Traditional handles flex the wrist, which isn't ideal for longer planing sessions.

The Krenov style planes (and the Gordon variant I favor) have no rear "stop" and
the result is an effort to grip the plane with the same hand that is driving it forward.

I have a flare of tennis elbow pain for the first time in more than 6 years - because of this.

My suggestion to salvaging your beautiful plane would be to
attach some sort of small grip with double sided tape to your
current design and whittle it until it feels comfortable.

http://www.adriatools.com/ece/eceprimus.html#E711

The ECE design appears to me as a sort of "stop" so that your hand
will naturally come to a rest without any gripping force;
just the drive forward should be enough to engage
the hand to your plane.

[george wilson]

Yes,I mean like the rear end of the infill plane 4th. from the left,bottom row of your pictures. Vertical rear,rounded over top.

[Jessica Pierce-LaRose]

Admittedly, the proof is going to be in use and not just handling, but if you feel like you're way off, I'd look into using cheap pine or foam or something just to mock up shapes and "air plane" on the bench to just get a starting point. See if something totally different is going to work for you.

I haven't used a lot of smoothing planes besides Baileys, but one that I really enjoyed the feel of was Konrad's tote-less smoothers, I got to try one out at a Lie Nielsen event.

http://www.sauerandsteiner.com/gallery2/main.php?g2_itemId=972

Similar to George's comments - a more vertical back that's rounded over.

I think this may have been the actual plane I handled :

http://www.sauerandsteiner.com/gallery2/main.php?g2_itemId=1553

[Matthew N. Masail]

Wow.... thanks everyone! a lot of good ideas. I've tried some of them and it's incouredging and refreshing to my mind to read the advice and ideas. Derek's point about keeping them low makes sense, I worry about my fingers staying about ground. I think what I will have to do is make a batch of planes out of pine, all the same, and then shape them one by one trying different ideas from you guys. this should get intresting.... Thanks again for giving me a fresh breath of wind !

[Jack Curtis]

I understand the desire to fit plane to hand like a tennis racquet, not a bad thing. However, I love using Japanese planes which are plain rectangular with nary a nod to ergonomics as we know them, and Japanese saws which have straight rather than fitted handles, etc. Go figure.

[Klaus Kretschmar]

Hi Matthew,

I like your plane lookswise a lot! And by the proper shavings it seems to produce, it would be a shame to throw it on the boneyard. Try some changes of the rear shape and it should be possible to make this little gem comfortable to use.

Klaus

[Stew Hagerty]

The Traditional wooden body planes sold by ECE/Ulmia and others feature a small raised grip
at the top of each plane. It forms a sort of "saddle" for the intersection of your thumb and first finger.

I like the design, as it allows your hand to rest palm down on the plane.
Traditional handles flex the wrist, which isn't ideal for longer planing sessions.

The Krenov style planes (and the Gordon variant I favor) have no rear "stop" and
the result is an effort to grip the plane with the same hand that is driving it forward.

I have a flare of tennis elbow pain for the first time in more than 6 years - because of this.

My suggestion to salvaging your beautiful plane would be to
attach some sort of small grip with double sided tape to your
current design and whittle it until it feels comfortable.

http://www.adriatools.com/ece/eceprimus.html#E711

The ECE design appears to me as a sort of "stop" so that your hand
will naturally come to a rest without any gripping force;
just the drive forward should be enough to engage
the hand to your plane.

I have one of their 711 Improved Smoothers and a 703 Jack Plane. Now, don't get me wrong, I love my Stanley's but these are so very comfortable to use. They feel just like an extension of my body, albeit a part with a wicked sharp edge. I set the 703 to be much less aggressive than my #5 while the 711 is dialed in for the wispiest .001" shavings in my plane arsenal. But like I said, the biggest thing about them is the way the feel in my hand. You're right, that "saddle" behind the blade invites you to just snuggle the web between forefinger & thumb right into it. It's a truly great design.

[Jim Matthews]

I understand the desire to fit plane to hand like a tennis racquet, not a bad thing. However, I love using Japanese planes which are plain rectangular with nary a nod to ergonomics as we know them, and Japanese saws which have straight rather than fitted handles, etc. Go figure.

If Matthew were pulling this plane, I suspect he would have a similar sense of the difference in physicality. People are built to pull, not push.
If the blade isn't particularly sharp, it takes more work to drive through a given shaving... the "fast back" design of the current plane
shown would force the wrist to flex under load, that's a recipe for strain.

None of those forces come into play when pulling a plane.

[Jack Curtis]

...People are built to pull, not push....

Really? I know I'd rather push a car than try to pull it. Why do you say this?

[Tom Vanzant]

Several years ago, I read an article written by a woodworker, possibly one on this forum, who had been given a plane by James Krenov. It was roughly shaped, assymetric, and totally lacking in finish, downright crude in appearance. The right rear corner and left front corner were sculpted to fit the hands of the recipiant, the other corners left rough. As that woodworker/writer wrote, the plane would be left as is, unaltered and unfinished, for several reasons. Essentially, it was one of the last planes JK had made, a treasured gift, it was given to him personally, one woodworker to another, and it was perfect. I have never seen that said about any Japanese plane.

[Jack Curtis]

Several years ago, I read an article written by a woodworker, possibly one on this forum, who had been given a plane by James Krenov. It was roughly shaped, assymetric, and totally lacking in finish, downright crude in appearance. The right rear corner and left front corner were sculpted to fit the hands of the recipiant, the other corners left rough. As that woodworker/writer wrote, the plane would be left as is, unaltered and unfinished, for several reasons. Essentially, it was one of the last planes JK had made, a treasured gift, it was given to him personally, one woodworker to another, and it was perfect. I have never seen that said about any Japanese plane.

Inomoto-san gave me a smoothing plane he made in seminar and it was perfect. There, I've said it.

[Matthew Hills]

That Isaac Fisher article that was mentioned above has a youtube video in which he discusses how he customizes each of his planes to fit his hand for each role:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Lly59iv-rSA&feature=youtu.be

Matt

[george wilson]

Your plane has nice lines,but I can't see why everyone seems to make Krenov type planes with such sloping rear ends. I have old,worn hands by now,and trying to hold onto slippery slopes would not be the most comfortable thing for me by now. Pretty soon,I'd have pain.

[David Weaver]

Your plane has nice lines,but I can't see why everyone seems to make Krenov type planes with such sloping rear ends. I have old,worn hands by now,and trying to hold onto slippery slopes would not be the most comfortable thing for me by now. Pretty soon,I'd have pain.

Neither can I. They would lead you to bear down on the back of the plane. One needs only to go to about 1800 to find out what the rear end of a plane should look like to be comfortable to use (the coffin smoother types).

Best I can tell, you want to be able to hold the plane down just enough to engage the cut but put the rest of the force in pushing the plane through the cut. There still needs to be some downpressure as the iron dulls, but probably a fraction of what most people apply when they bear down hard on a plane. That just makes friction and wear that does nothing productive for planing, but bearing down like that makes me tired fast, and it makes the plane seem more dull than it is. That is especially true with metal planes in a heavy cut.

I know most people don't do this, but it's another reason that going back and forth between japanese and western planes (if you're someone like me without a jointer and you need to prepare rough stock) is nice both because it keeps you from getting as fatigued and falling more and more onto the plane as you get tired, and because there really is no way to bear down on a japanese plane like that with your weight, anyway.

I've never made a krenov style plane, but only because I can generally find bench planes cheaper than I can find a good iron for a krenov plane.

[Derek Cohen]

Hi George

As you know I have many different plane types. Now I am not saying that the sloped rear styling will suit everyone, but I do find it exceptionally comfortable in a small plane. The little block plane has quickly become one of my favourite planes. It nestles in the palm and becomes part of it. The low centre of gravity of these planes offer terrific feedback and, because they have are cut down to be low slung, they are very light, which means they are nimble.

Regards from Perth

Derek

p.s. Chris Vesper will be coming to stay in a fortnight. Can you join us? :)

[george wilson]

I have carpal tunnel in both wrists,arthritis to some degree,and a completely worn out thumb joint. Therefore,I am more conscious of comfortably holding onto tools than I used to be. My left shoulder(am left handed) is loose in the worn out socket,too. That makes bearing down more of an issue.

It would be great to come down and visit. Maybe I can,sometime. Thank you for the invitation. Hope Chris's broken fingers are going to be fully healed up.

I don't know if I could handle watching the toilet water swirl the wrong way!!!!:):):)

[Paul Saffold]

Jim, thanks for mentioning the Issac Fisher video. I got Hock's newsletter, skimmed it and deleted it without looking at much. Issac has many good ideas and explains why certain shapes are comfortable to work with. He also shows some of his first Krenov style planes pointing out their deficiencies.

[John W Johnson]

Hi George

As you know I have many different plane types. Now I am not saying that the sloped rear styling will suit everyone, but I do find it exceptionally comfortable in a small plane. The little block plane has quickly become one of my favourite planes. It nestles in the palm and becomes part of it. The low centre of gravity of these planes offer terrific feedback and, because they have are cut down to be low slung, they are very light, which means they are nimble.

Regards from Perth

Derek

p.s. Chris Vesper will be coming to stay in a fortnight. Can you join us? :)

Derek,

I've always enjoyed your contributions here and elsewhere. Do you apply any finish to your wooden planes? I received a gift of a Hock block plane a year ago, made it, and use it often. But it looks naked whenever I remove it from my apron.

[Derek Cohen]

Hi John

I use Danish Oil on the planes. The sole will burnish as it is used, but the upper surface, especially where the wood is gripped, can become grimy and slippery as the pores clog with sweat, etc.

Regards from Perth

Derek

[Pat Barry]

Jim said "People are built to pull, not push." I don't necessarily agree with this. For example the human triceps muscle is larger than the biceps muscle. Triceps is for extension of the arm = pushing, not pulling. Therefore I would argue that the push motion is more natural for the planing process because it employs a larger and stronger muscle group. Pushing also allows a person (standing) to use their body weight and leg power to perform the task. From what I have seen (very limited I admit), the Japanese examples are of seated workers. In this case the abdominal muscles are big factor and would lead to the pulling method being preferential. Lets discuss.

[Matthew N. Masail]

I used to do bodybuilding when I was 14-19... and I also studied body motion. we aren't built for one or the other, it just depends on what we are doing.
from my experimentation with planes, and mind you, making my own tools is my first real project in woodworking (a mistake, maybe), pulling is by far a more
"correct motion". "correct" does not refer to muscle group (even though pulling is a lager muscle group because of your back and legs), it refers to skeleton arrangement and moment. there is no joint\back\shoulder twisting when pulling, and you can use a much more "macro" motion to do it - that is to use the body to pull, not the arm. when pushing,
you arm and shoulder motion is much more involved, and the twisting of the palm joint is what this thread is all about!

I'm looking to make planes that are effortless to hold and push, not ones that strain -I'm young, but I can feel the pain too. after a light elbow joint problem from bodybuilding and learning how to move the right way, I can identify when a movement is bad for me, and all the krenovs I've made so far are no good.

[george wilson]

No doubt pulling or pushing ability or choice is developed over years of doing which ever. I'd kill my back trying to pull a plane. In the museum,when people would ask why the Japanese pulls planes,I'd tell them that gravity works backwards on the other side of the World!!:)

[Matthew N. Masail]

lol:) for sure the muscles you use everyday will get used to the motion. although pulling is a better motion for planing from a medical standpoint, I ain't gonna flip my head around !

[Pat Barry]

Hey Matt, lets get a picture of it in your hands in your typical working position. What I'm interested in is the height of your work surface compared to your arm and wrist angles in the desired working position. Maybe seeing it in action will spur some ideas. By the way, thats a nice shaving you got from the table cloth in your first picture. LOL

[Matthew N. Masail]

Hi Pat, it's a ralph loran cloth we got for our weeding, very soft - easy to plane!:D

I would have loved to take a picture but that plane is long gone, as I said above "may it rest in peace". it now looks like an ece block plane.... not giving up on it yet.
I think my bench is rather high for me, I need to change that, but I don't think that is what makes the difference between good - bad, do you? I'm thinking maybe between good and very good, bad - very bad. what do you think? I tried bending to change the wrist angle to see how it goes, didn't make too much of a change to the "no solid grip" problem.

[Sam Babbage]

No doubt pulling or pushing ability or choice is developed over years of doing which ever. I'd kill my back trying to pull a plane. In the museum,when people would ask why the Japanese pulls planes,I';d tell them that gravity works backwards on the other side of the World!!:)

Tangentially, I'm curious... Assuming Stanley/Bailey type handle/knob plane configurations: if in the case of reversing grain or what not on a large board impractical to easily turn about, do people pull their planes dominant-handedly or push their plane off-handedly, or even do they "suck it up" and spin the board? I was trained to pull my plane, but one of my colleagues was trained to push offhandedly. Which is why I ask the question.