Bedrock planes: worth the premium?

[James Carmichael]

Well I've got the plane bug again, and rather than shell out big bucks for the premium tools, I think I'll just expand on and upgrade my collection of oldies, like adding a smoother or two and replacing or fixing my #7 which is missing it's lateral adjustment lever. I also ran into a couple collectors at a local flea market this past weekend, which has rekindled my interest (though their stuff was too high, IMO). I did see my first Fulton Bailey-style plane and was favorably impressed.

Anyway, strictly in terms of function, not asthetics or collector's value, are the Bedrock's really worth the premium they command over the bailey-style planes?

[Tim Sproul]

No.

But then again, I don't think I'd pay even $5 for a beautifully tuned and refurbed antique metal body plane. Not after experiencing the joys of a woody :eek: :D !

Knight Toolworks...... ;)

[James Carmichael]

OK, can we can confine replies to the question at hand? My last plane question got hijacked and I'd just as soon kill it now as read through a bunch of irrelevant responses.

Is the utilitarian value of the Bedrocks worth the premium they command over the Bailey-style planes? I know there are no hard and fast rules for determining value (maybe there is among hard-core collectors) but, generally, it's been my thumb-in-the-wind analysis that Bedrocks command 2 - 4 times the price of equivalent Bailey-style planes (yes, I know there are exceptions).

Thanks,

James

[Steve Wargo]

James,
I'll give your post a shot. In my opinion the answer is yes they are worth the extra money. The adjustablilty, and extra heft that a Bedrock offers are worth their weight in gold. If these weren't factors that played into the importance of plane performance then why does LN, Clifton, and LV all employ these properties into their productions planes? They all weigh in the vacinity of the old bedrock and feature the same adjustablilty of the old Bedrocks. Also there is another factor that goes into play when using tools that no one ever talks about, and that is the fact that you have a totally different experience when using an "good" tool. You have a different feeling when picking up a finely tuned infill or nicely crafted LN plane. You take a little more care of it, and the tool itself takes on its own aura. There's really no other way to explain it, but it just feels good to use a good plane. You can call it the glamour factor or whatever, but there is something to it. Hope this helps, feel free to PM me any more questions.

[James Carmichael]

Yes, that helps.

Thanks much, Steve.

[Steve Cox]

Okay, I'll take the other tack. I don't think the utility is worth the premium. Are they better planes, yes. Do you need that utility in all your planes, I don't think you do. I have a full collection of bench planes for utility use which includes a 3, two 4s, 5, 5 1/2, 6, and 7. None of them are bedrocks. All of them are very well tuned and most have replacement blades. There are very few things I can't plane with them. However, there are a few. For those instances I have a LN LA jack plane. The other point I would make is that for the premium price that you pay for a bedrock, you can buy a Veritas or LN and they are simply better planes than the antiques. If you want to buy a premium plane for use I think you are better off with a new one.

[john roy]

I have amassed a collection of both bailey's and bedrocks and I will say that I love using them...from the initial clean up and fine tuning (with a new Hock blade)to putting them to use...moreover having them in my shop I feel like I am a caretaker of history and look forward to the day that I turn them over to the next generation of woodworkers (my two young boys hopefully)...

[Roy Wall]

The other point I would make is that for the premium price that you pay for a bedrock, you can buy a Veritas or LN and they are simply better planes than the antiques. If you want to buy a premium plane for use I think you are better off with a new one.

I couldn't agree further....this is the logic I use .
An example: buy a good user #4 off ebay = $130....add a LN iron...= $35. spend a couple hours flattening, cleaning, tuning - that's worth something. Plus you get new tote/knob = $30........

A brand new, precision milled, quality hand plane is not that much more.....


Now, I have bought used planes for sentimental & user value - and I hope to justify this has merit too in the aura of WW lore,....:cool:

And Steve W. brings out another subjective factor - the use & feel of the tool is , IMHO, also superior.

Really though, you should first try some out with your own hands.....and then decide. If you have some fellow WW's with bedrock (new and old) - give them a try!!

[Marc Hills]

Anyway, strictly in terms of function, not asthetics or collector's value, are the Bedrock's really worth the premium they command over the bailey-style planes?James:

To directly answer your question, I don't see how they can be worth the price premium from a strictly functional standpoint. I say this because the price premium is, to a large extent, a function of the aesthetic and collector's value that you wish to exclude from consideration.

Most people buying Bedrock planes, I suspect, are collectors and dealers, not users. So to the extent that these planes command a significant price premium on the open market, a large portion of that premium results from their desirability for reasons other than functionality.

Certainly some of the price premium reflects their increased utility, and I concede that some of that increased utility is what is actually driving their collectability. But the market value these specimens command is way out of proportion to any performance advantage they offer.

Look at it another way, James: you're trying to reduce this "buy or don't buy" calculus to purely functional, rational criteria. But the marketplace for Bedrock planes is chock full of buyers and sellers who aren't thinking on those terms. I won't go so far to say that their criteria aren't rational, but they are certainly considering things well beyond functionality; and that is adding to the price.

[Derek Cohen]

Anyway, strictly in terms of function, not asthetics or collector's value, are the Bedrock's really worth the premium they command over the bailey-style planes?

James

There are two ways of answering your question.

Firstly, I like the Bed Rocks and prefer them over the standard Stanley. There is a moderate improvement in performance that is attributable to the better frog design, and there is, of course, a greater ease of mouth adjustment possible than with the standard plane. In practice, it is uncommon to make frequent adjustments to the mouth. We tend to set it up once and keep it there. The question that must be answered is whether the performance improvement is really significant for the costs involved.

Secondly, you must keep in mind that the performance envelope for Stanley planes, be they standard or Bed Rock, is limited by the bed angle of 45 degrees. Even if you add a super duper aftermarket blade and chipbreaker combination (I like the LN version), you are still limited to softwoods and timber with non-demanding grain. Forget anything else - you would be better off spending your money on a different type of plane, preferably one with a high cutting angle.

So is a Bed Rock worth it? The answer depends on what timber you plane to use it on.

Regards from Perth

Derek

[JayStPeter]

I do like my single Bedrock better than any variant of Bailey that I have. It's still a pain to adjust, but I had an easier time getting it set up and working than any of the Baileys. I think the way the frog attaches makes it easier to ensure good solid contact.
I like my LV planes better than any others I have. Seems like the ebay price of a decent condition Bedrock is pushing into the range where a nice new LV is in range. My plan is to get a couple more LVs to finish out what I feel I want in bench planes and be done with it. If I find a real good deal (like Bailey price) on a Bedrock in a size I need, I might buy it. Call me a plane snob, but I no longer buy Baileys at any price ... just don't like them. On the opposite extreme, I haven't tried a LN bench plane yet.

Jay

[Robert Tarr]

I do not think the performance difference is in line with the cost difference. While having said that, I would prefer that all of my planes were Bedrocks, I am not willing to pay the price difference. On some of planes, I have purchased LN with the Bedrock style body and I love using them. So here are my thoughts;

1) Bedrock frogs are more supportive of the stock thin blades (closer to the cutting edge, especially on a tight mouthed smoother) than baileys and easier to adjust (but I don't adjust my frogs once they are set, or at least not more than once a year...)
2) If you are going to buy older planes, I would buy Bailey styled planes and replace the thin blade and chipbreaker (usually with the LN set), thus eliminating the need for support right up to the cutting edge. The stout blade really makes for a huge difference. I think the upcharge for a new blade will almost always be less than the upcharge for the Bedrock, which may still benefit from a new blade.

Hope that helps.

Robert

[John Weber]

James,

I think a talented guy can plane just as well with a cheap but tuned plane. That said, Stanley's, Bedrocks included, are better with newer thicker irons. For me I like new LN's over older Bedrocks, they take very little work to plane well. Already have thick blades and chipbreakers, and I believe are made to higher standards not as easily obtained when Bedrocks were in production. So I guess yes, Bedrock style planes are worth more to me, and they easliy do a MUCH better job then the older (rough work) Stanleys I have.

John

[James Carmichael]

John & Robert,

I think you're both right on. Maybe I'm just too dumb to know what I'm missing, but I've been plugging along pretty well with my clunky old Baileys and current-model Stanley adjustable LA block.

I think Robert made an excellent point, for less 1/2 the cost of even a marginal old Bedrock, a Bailey can be upgraded with a premium iron. Being the el-cheapo I am, I'll probably go that route, I've already got Clifton chipbreakers on some from when WWS sold them for $12 apiece, and then maybe build a Krenov-style woodie with one of Hock's irons and some of this scrap jatoba I've got lying around.

[Brent Richardson]

I believe that I have read somewhere that the difference in price today between Baileys & Bedrocks (2x to 4x) is nowhere close to the difference in price Stanley originally priced them at. I recall that original price in early 1900's for Bedrocks were in the $6.00 range and Bailey's were about $4.00. I'm going from memory so someone in the know, can correct me if I'm way off. If these numbers are close to correct then I guess the answer to your question would be that Stanley, the maker of these planes, did not feel any justification for the premium prices we see now on Bedrocks.

Just something to think about.

Brent R

[Clay Craig]

James,

The premium, and therefore the answer, also varies somewhat among Bedrock models. The 604-606 range does not seem to command the same percentage premium (at least on the 'bay) that the 'extremes' of the range do. (And the premium on the 602s and 603s seem higher than the 607s and 608s, but by a lesser margin.)

I certainly have not done research on the prices, this is just my impression. My only Bedrocks are a 604 and a 605, and they do perform better than the standards, though I agree that the iron and chipbreaker upgrade gives more benefit for the buck than the Bedrock premium. Certainly as a user I'd choose a standard Stanley with Hock iron/breaker over a Bedrock with Stanley iron/breaker. If it's of any help, IIRC Patrick Leach opines in B&G that he thinks the Type 2 Stanleys are actually better users than the Bedrocks. I'm of the same mind as the above post - if a steal of a deal came across my path on another Bedrock, I'd take it, but I don't spend a lot of my time and effort hunting.

Clay

[Hank Knight]

James, in my opinion, Bedrocks are not worth the high premium they command on today's market. I acquired a number of Bedrocks before the prices went throught the roof, and I have some matching older Baileys. They're all well fettled and I keep the irons sharp. I use them interchangeablly and I dont' see a lot of difference in performance between the two. Many people tout the ease of adjusting the mouth as a Bedrock strong point. Derek remarked earlier that, once his planes are set up, he rerely adjusts the mouth opening. I agree wholeheartedly. I can't remember the last time I adjusted the mouth opening on one of my bench planes. I don't find chatter to be a real problem with my Baileys. I use American hardwoods, so I don't run into many extreme situations where I need a high angle frog. When I do, I have a Norris A5 with a monster LN A2 Cryo blade that's my favorite. It subdues the most uncooperative planks. The cost of Bedrocks today is crazy. Unless you just want to own them, which in my view is a perfectly good reason to buy them, you would invest in better performance buying top-of-the-line Lee Valley or Lie Nielsen tools. They are more refined, use modern materials and are truly better performers than the old Stanelys or similar classic hand planes. My $.02.