Repurposing a #4 into a scrub plane - good idea?

[Greg Portland]

I have an old #4 clone (Craftsman) that I've been considering repurposing as a scrub.

1) Are #4's too short and/or light to make a good scrub plane?
2) After cambering the blade, would I just back the chipbreaker off 1/4" or so from the edge? Does blade chatter become a concern with this back-off? Should I buy a thicker blade?
3) Should I just be looking for an old #40 instead?

Thanks for your feedback!

[Mike Cherry]

Paul Sellers has a video on just this topic. I have also been considering this because scrub planes go for ridiculous prices on eBay right now. Almost to the point where a brand new Lie Nielsen makes just as much sense. Even my local antique store has a scrub for sale at $110 !!

Looking forward to the comments by more experienced neanders here.

[Mike Cherry]

Here a link for you to Mr. Sellers video on this topic.

http://youtu.be/XN5QSTaVzRQ

[Greg Portland]

Thanks for the link Mike. I'm also interested in hearing about any limitations / issues with repurposing a #3 or #4 in this manner.

[Jim Matthews]

I've seen it done with a 1" wide shoulder plane.

Worked great.

The narrower the blade, the more pronounced you can
grind the profile.

[Derek Cohen]

The question is whether you need a scrub plane, or whether a jack plane would not be a better choice?

If you are removing large areas of waste, then go for the scrub. Otherwise a jack is the better choice. I rarely need a scrub plane - a jack with an 8" radius removes waste pretty fast, and with less surface damage to clean up next.

Regards from Perth

Derek

[Greg Portland]

The question is whether you need a scrub plane, or whether a jack plane would not be a better choice?
Well, I've got a jack plane but I haven't ground any radius into the blade (corners are rounded though). I guess this thread should be "what should I do with a rusty #4 that's laying around". I was thinking of the scrub plane since I've just started dimensioning lumber by hand but maybe a higher angled frog smoother would be a more used option (maybe not since I own a scraping plane)? Here's my current list of planes:

- #4 with a good blade (used as a smoother)
- rusty #4
- Jack plane
- #7
- large scraper plane
- small and large shoulder planes
- 2 block planes

Thanks for everyone's feedback so far...

[Moses Yoder]

I have a vintage #40 with good iron, I have never used it. I have a 40-1/2 that I made two new irons for with differing radius, neither iron has ever been used except as toys. A scrub plane has a masculine iron, the biggest difference in a #4. A #5 with camber is adequate for all but the roughest stock, and for rough stock I take my wood to an electric planer.

[bridger berdel]

It sounds like you have nothing to lose by setting up the sears #4 as a scrub except perhaps a little length on the iron if you decide to convert it back. Go for it. It will probably work out just fine.

[Sam Stephens]

I'd say go for it. I repurposed an extra jack plane w/ a wide mouth to be my scrub -I think the camber is about a 3-4" radius. I used a small side dish plate as the template. Yes, a jack plane w/ a slight camber works for surfacing and thicknessing stock, but for me, a scrub (i.e. repurposed jack) is much more efficient i.e. faster and less effort. The drawback as Derek mentioned is there is some clean up from the gouges, but a jack plane makes quick work of that. A scrub like the #40 is more the size of a #3 plane so a #4 would be fine as well. Smaller is better I would imagine, b/c the size/weight of a jack plane can get tiresome. Chatter is not much of an issue b/c of the camber.

[Daniel Rode]

Based on 15 minutes of experience I concur with Derek :)

I just turned a cheap Dunlap #5 into a "scrub" plane. In reality, it's more like a jack plane with a more aggressive camber to the iron. After the first few test cuts, I actually flattened the radius a bit. That said, I'll most likely get a nicer Stanley #5. With 2 irons, I can swap between and 8" camber for stock removal and, more commonly, a flat edge for shooting. At that point, I'll convert the Dunlap to a true scrub.


The question is whether you need a scrub plane, or whether a jack plane would not be a better choice?

If you are removing large areas of waste, then go for the scrub. Otherwise a jack is the better choice. I rarely need a scrub plane - a jack with an 8" radius removes waste pretty fast, and with less surface damage to clean up next.

Regards from Perth

Derek

[Winton Applegate]

I made my 1970's Stanley #5 into a scrub.
I used it once or twice (I am a slow learner).
Then I bought this (http://www.lie-nielsen.com/special-purpose-tools/scrub-plane/) and have used it and used it and used it . . .
and . . . I love it ! ! ! !
I would never ever even consider a wimpy blade plane for a scrub.
This LN has a way more robust blade, the plane is quite light because it is narrow. The handles can take horsing on and cause no trouble.

Worth every penny and it is a beautiful plane to look at.
One of the top three planes I absolutely could not do without.
I would sell my big 'O five hundred dollar jointers with out missing them (other than to look at) but if I didn't have my little LN scrub I think I would go looking for another sport.

PS: As I always say take a look at these photos and you will see by the saw dust (plane dust) which ones get used and which ones get looked at and tucked away.

[Winton Applegate]

LN scrub good.
Other stuff . ..
Nah dude, nah
(based on days and days and days of scrubbing my brains out).
I rather enjoy hogging off hard wood cross or diagonal grain.
Makes me feel like a wood worker as compared to a machine tool operator.
I would MUCH, MUCH, MUCH rather scrub plane a table than to ride a stationary exercise bike indoors or take an aerobics class.
Works the legs and abs as well as the arms and the back to some degree.

[Matthew Hills]

I put a very aggressive camber on a trashy #5 with a Hock blade.
Works well, and made a huge difference in my ability to actually flatten a board (previously, seemed like I was planing and planing and things never really seemed to flatten out)

In fact, works well enough that I haven't been motivated to check into a dedicated scrub.
(although I've also read some of the anti-scrub blogs, that opine the tool was largely for removing edge material, rather than flattening)

Seems like a few people are also fans of wooden scrubs (something about being a bit lighter; although the weight of my #5 hasn't bothered me to-date… although I was getting pretty drippy when flattening my workbench on a warm day)

Matt

[Jim Koepke]

My main scrub is made from a #5-1/4. It was beaten and abused badly, most likely while employed in a high school shop class. I also have a Dunlap (Millers Falls) 9 which is the same as a Stanley/Bailey #3 that is used occasionally for light scrub work.

I like the narrow blade which requires less effort than a heavier plane with a wider blade.

jtk

[Don Rogers]

Good points, Winton, I have an LV scrub plane and find it one of my favorites. It really chomps off excess wood with it's thick blade.
I know it will be much used in my workbench build. Probably in rough flattening the top.

Don

[Derek Cohen]

I made my 1970's Stanley #5 into a scrub.
I used it once or twice (I am a slow learner).
Then I bought this (http://www.lie-nielsen.com/special-purpose-tools/scrub-plane/) and have used it and used it and used it . . .
and . . . I love it ! ! ! !
I would never ever even consider a wimpy blade plane for a scrub.
This LN has a way more robust blade, the plane is quite light because it is narrow. The handles can take horsing on and cause no trouble.

Winton, that is not a blade ....

THIS is a blade !!!! :)

My jack plane ...

http://www.inthewoodshop.com/ShopMadeTools/BuildingaJackPlane_html_ma7dc66e.jpg

2" wide and 5/16" thick (!) D2 steel (!!) ...

http://www.inthewoodshop.com/ShopMadeTools/BuildingaJackPlane_html_m378c68a4.jpg

... ground to an 8" radius ...

http://www.inthewoodshop.com/ShopMadeTools/BuildingaJackPlane_html_48ba8327.jpg

:D

Regards from Perth

Derek

[Prashun Patel]

I have a #5 and #3 that I use as scrubs. Both have the original, Bailey blades that are hardly in top shape. They have worked fine for me.

I have a toothed blade in my Veritas Bevel Up jack that I also use as a sort-of-scrub plane, but I find sometimes it is fatiguing.

The #3 on the other hand, can be set to a heavy cut and just glides through the material. It's also good on twisty boards where I really want to work a particular area.

So, I guess it depends what you want a scrub for. For thicknessing, you might be better with a beefier blade and body so you can keep things flat as you remove waste.

But for the initial removal of large twist from your boards, a smaller scrub feels sometimes more appropriate and easy to wield.

[David Weaver]

I'd rather have a jack plane, and set it rank. You can have two - one that you use as a scrubber that has something more like a 4 or 5 inch radius, that you use for thicknessing and bulk removal and one more like derek shows as a reasonable first step in decent wood.

I have had the LN and LV scrub planes, but ultimately would much rather use a wooden jack plane. It is just as fast and, to me, a nicer feel and more slick. I can understand why someone working rough lumber by hand wouldn't have had a scrub plane in the sense of the stanley style metal scrubs.

[Judson Green]

The sole on my Stanley 40 has a pretty rounded bottom (convex from left to right) not sure if these came new that way or if one of its former users did that. Also I picked up a coffin smoother that I'm guessing must have been repurposed to a scrub very radiused iron and also its sole was very convexed in the same manner.

[lowell holmes]

I use my #3 Bailey as a scrub plane. I bought an 1 5/8" wide iron, put a severe arc radius on the bevel and use it with a #3 breaker. It works great. It will plow the furrows like it's suppose to.

Most of the time I have the 1 3/4" wide iron it sharpened like a smoother.

[Tom M King]

294705294706We use an Emmerich that I bought new. Here are some pictures. Weathering is from sweat. Wear in front of mouth is not a shadow. I like it because it's nice and light, but you can still throw shavings three feet in the air with it. We only use if for scrubbing old, dirty boards and beams. A Jack is used more often for first leveling on clean stuff.

[Greg Portland]

Thanks everyone, I'll give it a shot. I like the idea of a narrower blade for rough work while keeping my jack plane setup for final thicknessing (and cleanup from the scrub plane).

[Graham Haydon]

Nice work Tom, a proper ol' scrub. If I were contemplating making a scrub on the cheap I'd take a look at Tom's and Winton's. Narrower blades than a #4 or a Wooden smoother. Therefore a #3 would seem perhaps a sensible option. You can buy new "junk" #3's in the UK with wide open mouth for less than £20.00.

[John Fairbairn III]

My $.02 --- I repurposed a Stanley 5 1/4 to act as a scrub plane figuring its narrower cut and longer sole would work well. I think it did. And I can always re-grind the iron if I need to turn it back... I like repurposing and specializing tools based on needs. And if anyone else is like me - I collect the good 3s, 4s, and 5s whenever the price is good-kind-of-tools so I have enough to dedicate for particular uses.

john

[Winton Applegate]

Winton, that is not a blade ....

THIS is a blade !!!! :)

Derek,
You can't see me (because I instantly jumped backward into the shadows) but
I have just dropped my switch blade and am running through the hotel parking lot. I may just run until I get back to my Hood.

[David Weaver]

Nice work Tom, a proper ol' scrub. If I were contemplating making a scrub on the cheap I'd take a look at Tom's and Winton's. Narrower blades than a #4 or a Wooden smoother. Therefore a #3 would seem perhaps a sensible option. You can buy new "junk" #3's in the UK with wide open mouth for less than £20.00.

There is no real need to have a narrower blade, necessarily. the width of cut will be very limited if the radius is short like a scrub....i.e., you won't be using most of a wide iron to begin with and the conclusion in terms of how much of the iron is in the cut and how deep will be the same regardless of whether a narrower iron is used. Stanley probably chose a narrower plane and iron because if they were going to make an iron and a plane body, they weren't going to blow the material to make it twice as wide as the cut width.

[Winton Applegate]

If I were contemplating making a scrub on the cheap I'd take a look at Tom's and Winton's. Narrower blades than a #4 or a Wooden smoother. Therefore a #3 would seem perhaps a sensible option.
Not sure how you include me in there with the making a cheep scrub.

I am saying buy a real scrub at full price.

aaaannnnnnnyway

Let me show you the problem I have with a #3 (keeping in mind I really like the size and tried and tried to make it work for me for general planing and finish planing NOT SCRUBBING.

My wrist hits the plank. There is a bone in my wrist right at the point of the arrow and . . .bang. The handle tends to be a miniaturized girly man version of the #4.
Funny that doesn’t work for me, since I have girly man hands, but I had to return mine and buy the #4 which I have zero wrist collision problems with.

The LN scrub has a generous full size handle on the order of the one on the BU jack but even more comfortable FOR ME.

My #5 Stanley was/is way heavier (I see no reason to haul all that weight back and forth like a sewing machine when all I am using is a small portion of the total width of that blade.
And speaking of blade the blade in the #5 buzzed and chattered and picked up chunks of wood and caused the plane to skate on chips stuck in the throat, even with the mouth open all the way (frog all the way back).
It just felt cheep and out of it’s depth so to speak.

I don’t know what kind of girly man wood:D you all are planing or the apparently minuscule blade depth settings :D

but I don’t want to have all those “benefits” if I can avoid it with a nicer plane designed for the task. I suppose one can haul concrete block in a VW beetle but . . .
. . . why would one want to ?

PS: the photo is a “reinactment” of the #3 problem. I returned the #3 before ever I was on the internet or taking digital photos.

PPS: and yes that arrow is a permanent tattoo.

[Graham Haydon]

I suppose so David. However there must be a touch of logic to a narrow blade. Why would traditional Euro scrubs like Tom's have a narrow blade? If a wider blade was just as good scrubs would be wider. I will confess I'm not up on scrubs as there is not much of a tradition of using them in the UK. The jack plane seems to be the first tool to the wood. Perhaps Stanley did go for a narrow blade for the reasons you state, I'd speculate that the narrower design was because it's a better scrub than a wide one rather than a money issue. But like I said, I'm no expert on scrubs.

[David Weaver]

Same reason as the Stanley, I'd bet. That is, they expect that the heavy camber used will keep much of the plane from being in the cut. So a narrow iron and then a narrow plane. If you already have a wide plane and a wide iron, though, you can just grind a rank camber with the iron that's there without locating a narrow one.

[Joe Bailey]

There is a bone in my wrist right at the point of the arrow and . . .

A real woodworker would have that bone removed ;)


btw - the line about the arrow tattoo was pretty good

[Michael Ray Smith]

I'm using a Stanley 5 1/4 as a scrub plane now. Sold my No. 40. I filed open the mouth a bit and rounded the blade -- not sure of the radius because I eye-balled it, but not as tight as the radius on the No. 40 blade. I set the chipbreaker right at the corners of the edge of the blade. Works fine -- not as agressive as the No. 40, but I didn't want it to be. Don't know why it wouldn't work with a No. 4, although the wider you get the less aggressive you'll want to set the blade. You wouldn't want to try to take as deep a cut with a No. 4 or No. 5 as you would with a No. 40.

[Mike Cherry]

A real woodworker would have that bone removed ;)


btw - the line about the arrow tattoo was pretty good
I concur the arrow joke was hilarious lol!

[Winton Applegate]

A real woodworker would have that bone removed ;)

And don't you think I don't wanna be a "real woodworker" (someday) . . .
I immediately realized the sacrifice that HAD to be made.
Set up an appointment with the Doc . . .
well . . .
long story short . . .
he got in there . . .
and . . . .
discovered that the string that holds me together . . .
what are the chances ?
The string that goes through all the other pivoty bits is ANCHORED at that bone. To remove it or alter it in any way would instantly and permanently put me in a wheel chair (or I believe the term he used was "basket").
He still charged me though.
Puts me back another year affording that new Marcou plane too.
I ammmmm deeeeeeeeeeepressed.
Oh well that's the way it goes.
Spend your life banging your bone and then you die.
:p