Ugly plane needs parts

[phil harold]

While rehabbing a #5 (thanks for help on the radius!)
I looked a little closer at this #2?
that has been kicking around in a box

Needs some tender lovin care and parts
blade set, cap, and knob
where can I find some for this plane, cheap?
thanks

[Jim Koepke]

#5s are nice because there are so many of them the parts for them are not too outrageous. Lots of broken #4s & #5s around for donors.

The #2 on the other hand is a different story. In your case if you want to keep it type correct it is going to cost more than it is worth.

Frederick Skelly recently posted about his #2 having a ground down #3 lever cap as a replacement.

Yours looks to be a type 4 or earlier based on not seeing a lateral lever in your pictures.

If your blade is beyond recovery you may be better off buying a blade from Lie-Nielsen or some other secondary source. Not too many others make a blade for that size. Hopefully you can save the cap iron. Lie-Nielsen at $35 will be less expensive than trying to purchase a Stanley blade. Just found one on ebay listed at 91.99.

The knob may be easier to make one yourself if you can. The least expensive way to get a knob for a #2 is from a type 6 or earlier #45. I will try to remember to take a picture tomorrow of the two together for a comparison for you. Sometimes you can get an old main body only for parts cheap.

Good luck,

jtk

[Mel Miller]

Are you sure that's a #2? How long is it? Blade width?

[phil harold]

Are you sure that's a #2? How long is it? Blade width?
I am not sure what it is but its shorter than my no 3

length = 8.75"
blade=1.75"

[Jim Koepke]

The blade is too wide for a #2 and a #3 is only 8" long according to Patrick Leach's site.

Of course there is some variance in size from different years, but the blade sizes don't change for most plane models. The good news is your replacement parts will be less expensive.

Just looked again and your plane has the wrong depth adjuster for a #2. A #2 only has two knurled rings.

Some folks might drool over it just because it is a pre-lateral. They are usually the ones who would want it to have all the original parts.

jtk

[phil harold]

The blade is too wide for a #2 and a #3 is only 8" long according to Patrick Leach's site.
hmmm just might go back into the junk drawer till I find appropriate parts
rarely use my 3 as it is now, dont need another one

So see my #3 is 9 an 3/8 of an inch long
So I just figured it could be #2 since it was shorter

[Mel Miller]

Your #3 sounds more like a #4. #2 blades are 1 5/8" wide, #3 blades are 1 3/4" wide, and #4 & #5 blades are 2" wide.

[Frederick Skelly]

I am not sure what it is but its shorter than my no 3

length = 8.75"
blade=1.75"

Does that 1 3/4" wide blade fit the mouth, or is it perhaps 1/4" smaller than the mouth is wide? I ask because maybe its supposed to use a 2" blade. That would support Mels theory that its really a #4.

Fred

[phil harold]

Does that 1 3/4" wide blade fit the mouth, or is it perhaps 1/4" smaller than the mouth is wide? I ask because maybe its supposed to use a 2" blade. That would support Mels theory that its really a #4.
Fred
Here is a picture of my no3 and no4 together
both about the same length
the #3 is about an eight shorter
286729
please excuse the condition of the no. 3 it has been in deep storage for 25 years
the no. 4 barely gets used now since my go to is no.604 I picked up for ten bucks last summer

[Mel Miller]

The #3 ? mystery plane is most likely a #4. Try the cap & blade off the Stanley #4, or the 604, or even the #5 - they should all interchange. While the mystery plane has a Stanley cap on it, it's not a Stanley plane.

[bridger berdel]

if it's an unknown maker there's no reason it would conform to Stanley's numbering/sizing system. this would make it a bit of a rarity, but no reason that a smoother couldn't have been made the width of a 3 and the length of a 4. would that make it a 4 1/4?

[phil harold]

The #3 ? mystery plane is most likely a #4. Try the cap & blade off the Stanley #4, or the 604, or even the #5 - they should all interchange. While the mystery plane has a Stanley cap on it, it's not a Stanley plane.the picture here is of a stanley no3 and a stanley no4

http://www.sawmillcreek.org/attachment.php?attachmentid=286729&d=1396924846

the mystery plane/ugly plane is a type four pre-lateral adjustment Stanley, that is smaller than then my no 3, that is why I questioned if it could have been a no.2
here is a picture showing it is shorter than the no.3

http://www.sawmillcreek.org/attachment.php?attachmentid=286737&d=1396936830

[Jim Koepke]

The lateral lever on the top picture's #3 is not correct for a Stanley plane.

Check here for more information:

http://www.brasscityrecords.com/toolworks/graphics/plane%20id.html

jtk

[Mel Miller]

if it's an unknown maker there's no reason it would conform to Stanley's numbering/sizing system. this would make it a bit of a rarity, but no reason that a smoother couldn't have been made the width of a 3 and the length of a 4. would that make it a 4 1/4?
Most manufacturers followed Stanley's size ranges (blade width x length), and some copied their numbering system with slight modification. Ohio just added an O, such as in an Ohio 05.

[Mel Miller]

It's common for the earlier Stanley planes to be a little shorter than the later models.

[bridger berdel]

so if it turns out that this is a type 8 no.3, I have one with a broken and repaired main body casting. we could perhaps make an arrangement.

[Jim Koepke]

Bridger,

I am not 100% sure, but the only differences listed in any of the type studies to the plane base is the S or B for types 7 & 8. All the changes were to the frog. Maybe Stanley saw a market in selling frog upgrade kits to type 4 owners.

jtk

[phil harold]

The lateral lever on the top picture's #3 is not correct for a Stanley plane.

Hmmm
You got my curiosity going there so I did a quick disassemble
so we can see what we actually got here
http://www.sawmillcreek.org/attachment.php?attachmentid=286775&d=1397001511
and it is more blue than black in real life
so it has the wrong lateral lever
wrong length
yet still says its a stanley...

[Jim Koepke]

Then it is a much newer plane.

Sorry if I seem confused. This seems to be jumping around from one plane to another. This did start out something that was thought to be a #2 didn't it?

jtk

[Mel Miller]

Hmmm
You got my curiosity going there so I did a quick disassemble
so we can see what we actually got here
http://www.sawmillcreek.org/attachment.php?attachmentid=286775&d=1397001511
and it is more blue than black in real life
so it has the wrong lateral lever
wrong length
yet still says its a stanley...

That's a 60s plane. Made at the end of Stanley production, and not even considered by most people when talking about Stanley planes. It would have cleared up several questions if you would have posted this picture earlier.