Low Angle, Jack! compare

[Dan Racette]

Has anyone had the chance to compare the lee valley veritas low angle jack to the Lie-nielsen? Just wondering what people thought of the two, in a side by side comparison.

d

[Brad Olson]

I have had them side-by-side.

This thread will probably start a LV vs LN flame war though

Search my past posts for my views of the situation here is a summary

LV High points

-Set screws on side, iron not bedded against cast iron, more precise lateral adjustment

-Norris style adjust allows lateral adjustment

-heavier toe and overall a much heavier casting

-Mouth has a set screw for more quick and precise mouth adjustment

-More comfortable tote (in my opinion)

LV Low points

-blade requires more setup time than LN (about 20 minutes more for flattening)



LN High Points

-Well polsihed with excellent finish

-Blade is ready to go out of the box

LN Low Points

-Lateral adjustment is a pain and LN recommends using a plane hammer, I concur with them, but it makes it very difficult to adjust on the fly. Some give the excuse that you should just hone the blade square, but to me this is not an excuse for a poor design

-The iron is bedded right against raw cast iron, over time I suspect this will wear out and exacerbate the lateral adjustment

-The capiron is of disappointing fit and finish for a LN plane (I've now seen this issue on 4 LN LA planes and another user pointed this out to me at a recent WWing group meeting while we were checking them out side by side).

-Overall heft of the LN isn't as great and the cast iron is thinner on the LN.




There you have it, now the rest of SMC who hasn't held both side-by side will proceed to tell me I don't know what I am talking about, but I stand by my opinion, espcially now that I have examined and used 4 different LN LA planes and 3 different LV LA jacks

[Dan Racette]

Can I ask you this then? since I am buying new and from scratch. In YOUR opinion, could a guy get more mileage and versatility by getting a low angle jack and smoother with 2-3 blades for each? vs. a dedicated smoother, a low angle, and a high angle. I see your blog has the veritas smoother on it. I was looking into that too.

[Brad Olson]

Can I ask you this then? since I am buying new and from scratch. In YOUR opinion, could a guy get more mileage and versatility by getting a low angle jack and smoother with 2-3 blades for each? vs. a dedicated smoother, a low angle, and a high angle. I see your blog has the veritas smoother on it. I was looking into that too.

Dan,

In my opinion yes I agree with you. I have decided to go down this route, because I simply do not have enough time to maintain a fleet of planes. Over the years, I have found that I was only reaching for one or two planes for a majority of my work, even though I have (or had) as many as 6 bench planes (in addition to other specialty planes etc.).

First a little background. When this whole LA business starting coming out I wasn't all that impressed with the idea, mainly because I am really a traditionalist at heart. I have a fairly good collection of regular antique stanley bench planes.

But, after actually spending some time with the LA planes (and to all that disagree with my opinions on the LN, this was actually with the LN LA Jack), I was really impressed with their performance, especialy the lack of chatter in realy tricky grain. And I was also impressed with how quick you can set these planes up from scratch compared to seting up a bedded frog type plane, thus I instantly saw the ability for a lot more versatility out of a single plane. I was then happy to see that LV had taken this idea a few steps furthers and really refined the LA jack to be extremely versatile.

What I would do is get a LA jack plane and maybe 2-3 blades over time (start with the 38 degree blade in addition to the OEM LA blade on the LV LA jack), the LA jack can actually be used quite well as a smoother and because it is so fast to adjust the mouth opening (especially on the LV with the set screw) you can switch between smoothing and coarse planing very quickly (minutes) and even faster if you have several blades ready to go with different angles. Setup on the LV itteration is also quick enough that you can pop out the blades and touch them up on a 8000 grit stone when you switch over.

Since you are likely not preparing stock from rough to ready, this will allow you to do you semi-coarse stock removal, flattening wide boards/panels and smoothing with one plane and a minor amount of setup time in between

Then if you find yoursef smoothing a lot more, pick up a dedicated smoother (the one I reveiwed accepts the exact same blades as the LV LA Jack) or if you find yourself flattening a lot of panels or wide boards, look into a jointer plane

Hope that helps with what I am thinking these days. Mainly I am into minimalism, because I have really gotten tired of spending what limited time I have tuning up planes.

[Dan Racette]

Excellent feedback for me! Thanks so much. No need to flame! :)

I am sure there are those who like LN over LV, and I have to say they both reflect some super fit and finish!

More opinions are welcome, but please don't bash anyone else's opinions on my account!

Dan

[Mike Wenzloff]

Just in case Brad wasn't clear enough<G>, the LV bevel up smoother and bevel up jack are a great combination--as I hope the bevel up jointer will be when it comes out. All blades will be interchangeable.

Great in concept. And LV has pulled off the first two wonderfully. Use the savings of the LV planes to buy your significant other something. (Ok, or the LV jointer when it comes out <G>...)

Take care, MikeW

[Doug Shepard]

Just in case Brad wasn't clear enough<G>, the LV bevel up smoother and bevel up jack are a great combination--as I hope the bevel up jointer will be when it comes out. All blades will be interchangeable.
...


Mike - you wouldn't happen to have a link to more info on the LV jointer would you? I tried googling and searching LV's site after seeing your post but couldn't find anything. Any idea when it's going to be available?

[John Weber]

Dan,

I don't think you can go wrong with either. The LN's are just beautiful, and a pleasure to use, LV hit the nail on the head with design and it works wonderfully. I've only played with the LV's at the shows and own both the LN low angle smoother and jack. I'm not sure where all this hammer business comes from. I've never had a problem where I needed a hammer to make an adjustment, or seen anyone use one, and I've seen plenty of people use LN low angle jacks. It's just a wonderful plane that feel great to me.

As for quality of cut hard to say, we had a little hand plane contest this Spring and the first 2 places were a LN 164 and a novice with a LN 62 (MAC), they both pulled very thin shavings and were well tuned. I didn't place but might have had the longest shaving only a tad thicker, but I think my 4-1/2 york pitch left a more polished surface then the low angle planes. Just my opinion. Now we were only planing cherry, but the surface with the 4-1/2 was like water on glass. I think I could have gone a bit thinner if I went for a shorter shaving - who knows. The point is low angle or high angle, either can do a super job when well tuned.

As for multiple blades, I've not really bought into this, as I have enough planes to have different planes set up for different operations. The idea of have several blades each with different angles doesn't hold a lot of appeal. I sharpen most of my blades the same and use different syle of planes (low angle, standard, high angle) to achieve the result I need. Easier for me I guess. Not that one way is better then another, just different styles.

As for your original question, I would simply hold each and see what felt better. The LV is slightly heavier and larger, the LN has a more traditional knob and tote. If you are like me the low angle jack will see a lot of work, so best to make sure it feels good.

John

[Hoa Dinh]

... on the LV jointer.... Any idea when it's going to be available?

Where on earth is Rob Lee?

Just a guess - It's probably just in time for Christmas shopping. Prepare your wishlist :)

[Mike Wenzloff]

Hi Doug,

Rob has mentioned both the LA Jointer and a new Router Plane on the UK Forum.

The Router Plane's blades will be able to fit an old Stanley as well. As these are sometimes hard to find when one buys an oldie, that's good news. I suspect LV could well come out with more than the three Stanley did.

Here's a link to one of the several topics wherein it is mentioned:

http://forums.ukworkshop.co.uk/viewtopic.php?t=5379&highlight=jointer

Hi Hoa,

I think Rob is still on vacation until next week.

[Chris Padilla]

Just so I'm clear, Veritas has:

Bevel-up smoother (jack coming soon) as well as
Low-Angle smoother and jack

Other than the obvious bevel-up for the blade, what else are significant difference in these two "sets" of planes? I'm intrigued with the idea of minimizing my plane purchases and just sticking with low single digits numbers to work with.

The LOML picked me up a Low-angle smoother for X-mas last year...was thinking to ask for the LA jack but now this bevel-up talk has me confused/interested.

[Brad Olson]

Just so I'm clear, Veritas has:

Bevel-up smoother (jack coming soon) as well as
Low-Angle smoother and jack

Other than the obvious bevel-up for the blade, what else are significant difference in these two "sets" of planes? I'm intrigued with the idea of minimizing my plane purchases and just sticking with low single digits numbers to work with.

The LOML picked me up a Low-angle smoother for X-mas last year...was thinking to ask for the LA jack but now this bevel-up talk has me confused/interested.

The LA smoother is narrower than the new bevel-up smoother. The low angle smoother is more similar to the Lie Nielsen LA smoother. The bevel-up smoother is much different design

LAS
http://www.leevalley.com/images/item/woodworking/planes/05p2501s1.jpg

BUS
http://www.leevalley.com/images/item/woodworking/planes/05p3601s1.jpg

The new bevel-up smoother and the LA jack share the same blades.

A new bevel-up jointer is on its way that also shares blades with the BUS and LAJ

They will have a total of 4 low angle planes with the older LA smooth plane now the "oddball"

The difference between the BUS and the LAS is that that the BUS is a dedicated smoother (sides not ground 90 degrees to the sole) whereas the LAS has 90 degree sides

I think they are switching their terminology because they treat these as regular bench planes, not oversized block planes if that makes sense

[Bill Grumbine]

Hi Brad

Just yesterday I asked the exact same question Chris just asked but on another forum. I got some good answers on features, but you have explained the difference between the two, which was my question. Thanks.

Bill

[Harry Goodwin]

:confused: I only have an LN 102 block plane and have enough old stanleys for my use and don't need anymore.but the question is:
If you turn the iron over with the bevel up on a low angle plane does that not increase the bevel angle till it's no longer a very low angle. ( block planes excluded) Harry

[Mike Wenzloff]

:confused: I only have an LN 102 block plane and have enough old stanleys for my use and don't need anymore.
Ha, double Ha. It's kinda like wood. Can you really have too many/much?

but the question is:
If you turn the iron over with the bevel up on a low angle plane does that not increase the bevel angle till it's no longer a very low angle. ( block planes excluded) Harry
A low angle plane does have the bevel up.

The low angle really refers to the bed that the blade rests upon.

So, in the case of the Lee Valley line of low angle planes, the bedding angle is 12 degrees. A bevel down plane such as a Stanley bench plane (they also made low angle planes) is bedded at 45 degrees. For figured woods that would tear out with such a plane (a bevel down plane), if you add a back bevel to it of say 15 degrees the included cutting angle is now 60 degrees. An included cutting angle is the sum of the bedding angle and the back bevel, if any.

But, just honing a back bevel is not enough to prevent tearout. Assuming the plane is well tuned (flat sole at the 3 critical areas of toe, in front of the mouth and the heel--but it should be flattened its entire length), one also needs to adjust the frog (the assembly the blade attaches to) forward to make the tip of the blade as close as possible to the front of the mouth (the slot in the sole that the blade protrudes through).

This is possible to do with an old Stanley. Some of the Stanley's have a better mating surface between the frog and the body of the plane. This provides a stronger "bond" between the two and helps to reduce chatter (one also should get a thicker blade too). They are also a pain to adjust and usually one sets it for a type of work and leaves it set.

Conversely, a bevel up plane has an inherently better bed on which to attach a blade to. Also, a bevel up Stanley, LV or LN plane has a mouth that one adjusts as needed to fit the work, e.g., a coarse or fine shaving.

It is also possible to have fewer planes that cover a broader range of work, at least if one does not mind swapping out blades. In the case of LV, as the bevel up smoother, the bevel up jack and the coming bevel up jointer, they all can utilize the same blades. For some people, especially people starting out aquiring planes, this is a very cost effective scheme in which to get "tooled-up."

So how does the whole effective cutting angle that applies to BU planes work? Effective cutting angle is the sum of the bed angle and the bevel angle. So, a 38 degree blade would make the effective cutting angle 50 degrees, 5 degrees more than an old Stanley (45 degrees). Add the 50 degree blade and its effective cutting angle is now 62 degrees--enough for most of the highly figured woods.

I really shouldn't drink coffee in the evening, or at least get out more:rolleyes:

Mike

[Chris Padilla]

Keep going, Mike! We are learning, we are learning! :D

[Mike Wenzloff]

Hi Chris.

So am I (learning). Wouldn't life be a tad boring if we didn't constantly find ways to learn?

I really don't know what more to add to this thread. So I'll probably bow out at this point unless something specific comes out. I'll leave by adding this. Both style of planes (BD & BU) can be made to work extremely well no matter what wood is placed before it. Failing that (and I have wood that even a scraper struggles with) good old sandpaper works just fine.

Most of the plane style issues come down to preference. It may be traditional styling vs. a more contemporary styling vs. wood vs. metal.

I have not met an old plane in reasonable shape that cannot be made to perform extremely well in most woods. This thing we do with hand planes does not have to cost a lot of money. Old planes can be much less expensive.

I have planes from centuries gone by to ones made by Knight. I have user made planes in both metal and wood (even one from MDF). For some people, myself included, I really like finding and rehabing old planes. I now give or sell most of them away (same with old saws and chisels). Not because they cannot work well--they do. But because I cannot possibly use them all but enjoy the process a lot. I also make tools for my use and for others as gifts and what not.

My daily users tend to be LV, LN, an old Sargent #6, and old Ohio #8 and a few Steve Knight planes. The others are more task specific. I recently picked up two pattern maker's plane sets to use on coopered doors, which I maybe make a set or two a year. Same with the H&Rs and the #55. I use a #45 on most jobs for at least drawer bottom grooves and a moving fillester for making raised panels that is used on most jobs.

Most of those old planes have cost me very little--far less than the LV and LN planes I have. The main choice for me comes down to price vs. time and interest. If I were now starting out and did not have any hand planes or very few and did not desire to rehab an old one, I would pick the current LV low angle planes with a few extra blades. I would have one or two block planes (the LN 102 in brass is always on my bench or in my pocket) and a shoulder plane. I would then as needed add to those as my needs grew.

Ok, back out to the shop. I enjoy talking about this stuff, but making something--anything--the beauty and feel of the wood--and in the process, using these tools--is where I find my joy.

MikeW

[Javier Gonzalez]

Great info Mike. I had the impression from what I've heard that the new Bevel
Up smoother is alot heftier that the LAS. I think the casting is heavier.

[Mike Wenzloff]

Hi Javier. Yes, the BUS weighs in about 5 lbs. The LV low angle smoother with the straight sides which aid in shooting, weighs in at about 3 1/2 lbs. As a comparision, my LN # 4 1/2 weighs a couple ounces less than 5 1/2 lbs.

Mike

[Brad Olson]

Yes, Javier, ithe BUS is extremely heavy, the pictures on LV's website do not do it justice.

Click on my WWW link in my profile and you will see a side-by side picture of the BUS next to a stanely #5. It is amazing they packed in all the weight even with the lack of a frog assembly

[Javier Gonzalez]

Thanks Brad. I was looking for that preliminary review which I caught on woodnet forum.
Can't wait to see Part II completed and some shavings.;)

[Derek Cohen]

Here is a little advance look at the new LV BU Jointer. It will be out in September, according to Rob Lee.

Teasingly from Perth

Derek