Compare the LN 140 skew block with the LV moving fillister

[Tony Wilkins]

Both these planes are about the same price and do the same type of thing. Can someone compare the two for me as far a function, quirks, and use in practice?

[Chris Griggs]

Have the LV Skew rabbet but don't have the skew block so grain of salt and all but... in general

Skew Rabbet/Fillister: cuts rabbets, does it really really well, does it pretty quickly, does it both with the grain and across the grain. Has a depth stop. Does little else

Skew Block: Can cut rabbets both with and across the grain but likely with more effort than the true filletster plane. Has no depth stop (though that part doesn't matter much). More for refining joinery than creating joinery. Will trim rabbets, will trim tenons, will trim end grain, will trim probably just about anything.

It's the one trick pony vs. the jack of all trades. Take your pick depending on what you want to accomplish with the tool.

[Chris Griggs]

As far as use of the LV Skew Rabbet.

I find it to be quite comfortable. I removed front knob though (which you can just screw off) as I find that it just gets in the way. Fence adjustments are very easy and rock solid...though it pays to rough up the posts a bit just to get some extra grip for those times you apply too much lateral pressure. Blade adjustments take some practice, but that has to do with the fact that A) its a rabbet plane and B) its skewed. You just sorta need to get a feel for how far to have the leading corner of the blade stick out and how deep a cut to take. Because of that, this is one plane where having the set screws REALLY pays off. I could live with or without the set screws on other planes but they are a godsend on the skew rabbet.

Cutting square rabbets takes some practice. I still struggle with it sometimes, not sure why. The depth stop is potentially nice for repeatability, though occasionally I find that it is difficult to loosen the depth stop knob once its been tightened down. I actually find I get more consistent results if I just mark the depth and plane to it rather than relying on the depth stop, so I mostly just keep it set in the highest position anyway.

Anyway, fantastic plane; wouldn't trade it for anything. Overall easy to adjust. Love the dual fence posts and the ease of setting the fence. Again, LOVE the set screws on this one. Gets good repeatable results, and is just generally nice to use. Not without its quirks...no tool is, and this ones are minimal.

[Chris Hachet]

Glad to know someone else likes the LV Skew Rabbit, am thinking that may be one of my next purchases from up North....

[Chris Griggs]

Where's Dave? I think there was a point-in-time when he had both LV skew rabbets and the LN skew block.

[Jim Matthews]

When I took a class in making moldings with traditional molding planes, the only tool I liked was the rabbet plane.
(I found the molding planes devious, halting and capricious - I could never tell what they were doing or about to do...)

For a rabbet to be cut square, the side of the blade (typically the "handed" side of the user" must be ground sharp as well.
If the side of the blade registering against the freshly cut rabbet is sharp like a scraper blade, it shears a little as the cut deepens.

If it's not sharp, or worse yet - out of flat - it pushes the cutting edge away from the side wall you've just cut.

Think of it as an integral "nicker".

[Chris Griggs]

it pushes the cutting edge away from the side wall you've just cut.
.

With a skew plane you avoid this by having the leading corner of the blade protrude ever so slightly (like a few thous) passed the side of the plane. Since the blade is skewed only the front most corner sticks out...there is not an opportunity for any other part of the blade to contact the side of the rabbet. However, simply having the leading edge flush with the side of the plane can make it so the plane slowly gets push out ward. By having the leading corner stick just hair out from the side you in essence cut the rabbet minisculy wider than the plane body and thus avoid the issue of the wall pushing the plane outward.

This is why the skew takes some time to learn to set up and why the set screws are so nice. Getting the projection of that leading edge just right (not to little not too much) can take a little futzing at first.

(this info isn't necessarily directed at you BTW Jim, just clarifying the difference for others)

Tony, watch the video LV has on the setup and use of the Skew Rabbet, you'll see what I'm talking about.

[Tony Wilkins]

Tony, watch the video LV has on the setup and use of the Skew Rabbet, you'll see what I'm talking about.

Thanks Chris, already had so what you are saying makes sense.

[David Weaver]

Where's Dave? I think there was a point-in-time when he had both LV skew rabbets and the LN skew block.

I did. I've used the right hand rabbet a lot. When it comes down to it, I'm too lazy to get the left hand rabbet plane out to reduce tearout.

I could never find a good way to use the skew block plane. I thought I would use it to clean up something across the grain, but that's just never happened.

The skew rabbet plane chugs through hardwood and knots and stuff, and while I generally like old tools better, with paraffin in hand, the skew rabbet is easier to use and easier to be very accurate with than an older moving fillister plane (I still have both anyway, what if I change my mind?)....plus you can take a really big bite with it if you want.

[David Weaver]

I'll make one other point in the moving fillister/rabbet plane vs. the skew block planes - you will find gobs and gobs of metal rabbet planes and moving fillister planes on the market, a lot of them used very hard. (speaking about vintage)

You will find a couple of skew block planes on the market, but not too many. The difference in the number of them vs. how hard they were used gives a good indication about which you would use more in woodworking.

[Tony Wilkins]

An observation: Whenever I've asked specifically about an LN versus a comparable LV, the LV has been favored - larger router plane and this being the examples that jump right to mind. Is that generally the case - that LV makes more usable tools than LN's Stanley updates?

[David Weaver]

I MUCH prefer LN's bench planes to the LV LA planes. Haven't got a lot of thoughts on block planes, I spun off mine and went vintage (stanley 18 and 65). But LV has done a better job across all lines of use and their joinery planes (especially anything with a fence and a nicker) are real treats. My preference of BD planes is just a feel thing, though. The LV bu planes are quality goods.

At any rate, though, I wouldn't conclude there's any jointer out there nicer in hardwoods than the LN #7. The LN bench planes in general are super top shelf.

[Derek Cohen]

An observation: Whenever I've asked specifically about an LN versus a comparable LV, the LV has been favored - larger router plane and this being the examples that jump right to mind. Is that generally the case - that LV makes more usable tools than LN's Stanley updates?

Hi Tony

I have a number of comparable LN and LV, notably in the block plane area. The reason is that I purchased the LN planes before the LV came out, and then I was fortunate enough to evaluate the LV versions in their pre-production stage. As a result I am in a position to state that the two companies offer comparable quality - we all know that - with LV producing extremely clever re-designs that do offer advances. Having said this, in some cases the differences between the companies would likely go unnoticed unless you used them alongside one another. This reflects that both work, and if something works, one does not question the result.

In some cases LV planes are just far ahead of LN - the skew block plane is an example. The LV has set screws and an adjustable mouth. This type of plane is more difficult to set up, and LV makes this easier. For those that choose planes on their looks, the brass of the LN is like a shiny lure.

In some cases, I return to the LN plane just because I find it easier to use, even when past early experience indicated the opposite. For example, the two side rabbet planes of LN (#98 and #99) just appears less to set up that the flip-over handle combined version of the LV.

Whether one gets the LV or LN block plane is up to you. I think the LV block planes are just superb in design, ease of set up and work just as well as they look, but the LN design will appeal to the more classic-orientated woodworker, and it works just as well once set up, which does take more care - however you would not notice this if you do not have the planes alongside one another.

David reports preferring the LN bevel down bench planes over the LV bevel up equivalents. This type of comparison is always going to be biased by the way we prefer to work. Both companies make superior hand planes, and it comes down to whether you want a BD or a BU plane. I would argue strongly that your hand strength problems would prefer the BU variety. Further to this, generally LV manage to make more ergonomic planes than LN simply because they are not repeating the designs of Stanley but starting with a fresh page. This point needs to be emphasized for others here when you seek advice on choosing a plane.

Regards from Perth

Derek

[Tony Wilkins]

Tangential question: The LV router plane just went backordered till August. Is it worth waiting for or should I go ahead and get the LN? (ie is the LV that much better)

[Jim Koepke]

My opinion is just that... my opinion.

As an owner of a Stanley #140 it doesn't see a lot of use.

The Veritas® Skew Rabbet plane would likely see more use in my shop.

The LN #140 looks like an update of the Stanley with some added features. It is sure to be a fine plane.

The LV plane appears to have a few features not present on the LN.

Just my 265731.

jtk

[Chris Griggs]

Its not that the LV is fundamentally better BUT it has a more versatile fence , more blade options, and the extra blades are less expensive. Those things are important to me so its just a more appealing as a total package for me. If those things are important to you it is definitely worth waiting for. Buy the tool you want and but it once. If those things don't matter to you and the LN speaks to you in other ways, get that.

[David Weaver]

. I would argue strongly that your hand strength problems would prefer the BU variety. Further to this, generally LV manage to make more ergonomic planes than LN simply because they are not repeating the designs of Stanley but starting with a fresh page.

My wrists ache just thinking about using a few BU planes from rough to finished lumber, especially for coarser work. I think the latter is true for joinery planes, but for people with a regular height bench, I think any of the bailey pattern or vintage wooden bench planes are miles ahead.

[Bill Fleming]

I just purchased a LN 140 and love it. I love all of my other LV & LN planes as well but when selecting the skew block it just seemed many of the LV bells and whistles would go un-used. Both brands make great tools. My 2 cents is that it is my experience that some of the little added features on a LV plane are helpful until one is more comfortable with the use and adjustment and then they don't get used much. That said I use the LN skew block and LV Skew Rabbet for different tasks.

Cheers - Bill

[Derek Cohen]

http://www.sawmillcreek.org/images/misc/quote_icon.png Originally Posted by Derek Cohen http://www.sawmillcreek.org/images/buttons/viewpost-right.png (http://www.sawmillcreek.org/showthread.php?p=2127872#post2127872)
. I would argue strongly that your hand strength problems would prefer the BU variety. Further to this, generally LV manage to make more ergonomic planes than LN simply because they are not repeating the designs of Stanley but starting with a fresh page.



My wrists ache just thinking about using a few BU planes from rough to finished lumber, especially for coarser work. I think the latter is true for joinery planes, but for people with a regular height bench, I think any of the bailey pattern or vintage wooden bench planes are miles ahead.

Hi David

That is partly true. Some of the handles on the LV BU planes are better suited to higher benches. They are geared towards pushing forward at this height. While still using older, high bench, I changed a couple out for Stanley style handles. Within a month I was back with the original handles. They just were more comfortable in this context. Then I built a new bench, which is a few inches lower than the old bench. As a result of this I changed the handles again. So far, about 18 months later, they are still on the planes ....

http://i13.photobucket.com/albums/a262/Derek50/Planes/LV%20planes/NewHandles1.jpg

One plane that does not require a change of handle is the LV Small BUS. This is a wonderful smoother: light, nimble, precise, easy to use with any cutting angle you prefer.

http://www.inthewoodshop.com/ToolReviews/TheVeritasSmallBUSmoother_html_m18d37a64.jpg

Review of SBUS: http://www.inthewoodshop.com/ToolReviews/TheVeritasSmallBUSmoother.html

Article on Centre of Effort in planes: http://www.inthewoodshop.com/Commentary/ToolingForFeel.html

Regards from Perth

Derek