Fix a #8 with a fat blade and a narrow mouth

[Andrew Pitonyak]

Some years back, I purchased a #8 on ebay. It came with a Lie Nielsen blade and chip breaker. I do not have the original blade or chip breaker.

The plane works, but not well. I showed it to Steven Newman who took one look and pointed out that there is very little clearance for a wood shaving to come in the mouth. I figure that I have a few possibilities:



File the mouth opening to be a bit bigger. Is this fraught with danger? Any advice if I do this? The advantage is that I spend no money since I inherited a bunch of files, I probably have one that will do the job. The danger, of course, is that I will mess it up. I have no idea how finicky this is. Just try to be uniform and take a little at a time?
Find an original (used) blade and use the existing chip breaker? I just need to find a blade.
Purchase one of those fancy new blades meat to be dropped into an old plane.
Purchase a brand new super expensive #8 made by Lie Nielsen since I would then have a spare blade :D. Oh wait, no money for that.


Any thoughts or advice?

[Prashun Patel]

Re: 3. The new blades are sometimes thicker and than the old ones which can mean issues with the cap screw or the mouth.

It is common to rehab a plane by filing the mouth. Just do your homework first.

[Nick Stokes]

Re: 3. The new blades are sometimes thicker and than the old ones which can mean issues with the cap screw or the mouth.

It is common to rehab a plane by filing the mouth. Just do your homework first.

File away. Keep it as uniform as you can.

There will probably be a way to extremely overcomplicate this. But, imo, just file away the front of the mouth until you get the clearance you want.

Other factors that influence the mouth opening to look at first, are the position of the frog, and the set of the chip breaker.

Have fun.

[Patrick Chase]

Some years back, I purchased a #8 on ebay. It came with a Lie Nielsen blade and chip breaker. I do not have the original blade or chip breaker.

The plane works, but not well. I showed it to Steven Newman who took one look and pointed out that there is very little clearance for a wood shaving to come in the mouth. I figure that I have a few possibilities:



File the mouth opening to be a bit bigger. Is this fraught with danger? Any advice if I do this? The advantage is that I spend no money since I inherited a bunch of files, I probably have one that will do the job. The danger, of course, is that I will mess it up. I have no idea how finicky this is. Just try to be uniform and take a little at a time?
Find an original (used) blade and use the existing chip breaker? I just need to find a blade.
Purchase one of those fancy new blades meat to be dropped into an old plane.
Purchase a brand new super expensive #8 made by Lie Nielsen since I would then have a spare blade :D. Oh wait, no money for that.


Any thoughts or advice?

I'd file the mouth. You'll reduce the "collectible" value of the plane (inasmuch as it has any - I don't think 8s do) but you'll end up with an excellent tool. The way I've done this in the past is:

1. Paint the part of the sole just in front of the mouth with Dykem
2. Scribe in a line as close to the existing mouth as you can while keeping it visually distinct
3. Use the line as a guide while filing to keep your work straight and perpendicular. Periodically check your work with the actual blade to gauge when you've removed enough.
4. Remove the Dykem with alcohol

You probably only need to open the mouth by 10-20 mils, so you may not want to work all the way to the line from (2). It's just there as a guideline to keep you from filing a non-straight opening.

[Jason Dean]

I replaced the iron on my #8 with a Veritas blade and had to do the same thing. The original iron had a terrible belly in it and shattered whilst trying to straight via the P. Sellers method.

344837

I will second Patrick's advice, only I used a combination square and a thin sharpie rather than Dykem (lacking Dykem). You can keep a check on how you are doing with your square as you go. This is likely a half hour job as cast iron files really easily.

[Andrew Pitonyak]

Thanks much for the advice and the detailed instruction. I have both dykem and sharpies :D

I don't think that the plane has any value other than the fact that it works or does not. I wrangled an OK (but not good) price in eBay a while back, especially given the blade and chip-breaker. I assume that the seller dumped it because of the issues with the mouth.

[Warren Mickley]

I recommend looking for an original iron. Since it is better steel, it will sharpen more easily and yield a better edge. If it is thinner and laminated (both are likely), these qualities add to the ease of sharpening.

There are probably guys with original irons and cap irons in a drawer somewhere, so you might advertise for one. You might find someone willing to exchange. Or you might be able to sell the Lie Nielsen iron and cap iron and make out pretty well in the exchange.

[steven c newman]

nhplaneparts.com will have an iron come through now and then. You can have Eric keep a look-out for one.

[Patrick Chase]

I will second Patrick's advice, only I used a combination square and a thin sharpie rather than Dykem (lacking Dykem).

I used to do it that way before I realized how much cleaner scribe lines are. Dykem is wonderful stuff (except the time Amazon mispacked a bottle and it ended up all over a roll of VCI paper in the same shipment, the pavement outside my garage, and presumably the inside of the UPS truck. That wasn't fun, though like most vivid dyes it bleaches pretty easily).

[lowell holmes]

I put Lee Valley irons and chip breakers in my 605 Stanley. I marked a black line on bottom at the mouth and scribed lines in the black part. It did not take long to open the mouth up enough to make things work. The reason for the lines was to define the new mouth. I scribed with an awl using a combination square as a straight edge

I do not regret it at all. The plane performs exactly like I hoped it would.

[Patrick Chase]

I recommend looking for an original iron. Since it is better steel, it will sharpen more easily and yield a better edge.

I have an L-N 8, and that's an immaculately made and processed A2 iron. I'm saying that as someone who's not a fan of A2 - IMO it's more hassle than HCS to sharpen, but doesn't deliver as much edge life benefit as a higher-alloy steel like PM-V11, so in that sense it's neither here nor there.

I can buy "sharpen more easily", and I can see how it would "yield a sharper edge" for somebody like you who uses Arks, but "better steel" seems like a stretch. More like "different tradeoffs". Needless to say different people will have different preferences in such a situation.

[steven c newman]

There are a pair of 2-5/8" wide iron on the bay right now.

I was also checking prices for complete No.8 planes.........$100 was the lowest. And, it was missing both the lever cap and the chipbreker! Most on there were over $200+........file the mouth on Andrew's plane, and loose a bunch of money.

[Robin Frierson]

Here is the way I do it.

http://www.cianperez.com/Wood/WoodDocs/Wood_How_To/INDEX_How_To_pages/Frierson_on_MouthFiling.htm

[Trevor Goodwin]

Why do all these after-market plane iron manufacturers make them so thick? Are they based around standard dimensions that tool steel sheets come in?

[Jim Koepke]

Why do all these after-market plane iron manufacturers make them so thick? Are they based around standard dimensions that tool steel sheets come in?

The 'after-market' blades are not always intended for Stanley or other antique planes. They are thicker with the idea a heavier blade will better resist vibration for a smoother feel, less chatter, when taking shavings.


Some years back, I purchased a #8 on ebay. It came with a Lie Nielsen blade and chip breaker. I do not have the original blade or chip breaker.

The plane works, but not well. I showed it to Steven Newman who took one look and pointed out that there is very little clearance for a wood shaving to come in the mouth. I figure that I have a few possibilities:



1.File the mouth opening to be a bit bigger. Is this fraught with danger? Any advice if I do this? The advantage is that I spend no money since I inherited a bunch of files, I probably have one that will do the job. The danger, of course, is that I will mess it up. I have no idea how finicky this is. Just try to be uniform and take a little at a time?
2.Find an original (used) blade and use the existing chip breaker? I just need to find a blade.
3.Purchase one of those fancy new blades meat to be dropped into an old plane.
4.Purchase a brand new super expensive #8 made by Lie Nielsen since I would then have a spare blade :D. Oh wait, no money for that.


Any thoughts or advice?

If the plane is a pristine SW or other date, then value might be lost from filing the mouth. As it is people are still buying them at current prices to be users. If it works demonstrably well, it will retain value for anyone who wants it in their shop.

The comments above pretty much sum up your options.

If you can find what is called a "safe edge" file it will be of help. These are files with smooth edges to help prevent messing up the sides of the mouth. If one isn't careful it can still cut into the sides. You will also want the file to be thin for this kind of work. I have used an old auger file for this kind of work.

My only thought if the plane is a pre-type 9 Stanley/Bailey is to remove the metal from the back of the mouth if there is room for the frog to go back. Put some tape on the frog to protect the bedding surface and then use it to get a good angle for your filing. It doesn't take all that much filing to get it to work in the range of shavings a jointer will take.

Some like to angle the front of the mouth slightly opposite to the frog angle.

You will likely want to smooth the edge where the filing is done.

Good luck,

jtk

[Andrew Pitonyak]

Here is the way I do it.

http://www.cianperez.com/Wood/WoodDocs/Wood_How_To/INDEX_How_To_pages/Frierson_on_MouthFiling.htm

Well done write-up, thanks!

[steven c newman]

MadjesterToolworksinc has a pair of #8 irons on that auction site. Right now it is under $20 for the pair. Just a heads up info, I'm NOT the one selling them..

[Patrick Chase]

Why do all these after-market plane iron manufacturers make them so thick? Are they based around standard dimensions that tool steel sheets come in?

Lie-Neilsen's blades are designed for use in their own planes, which can accomodate the thicker blades without modification. It would appear that somebody put one of those into Andrew's #8, leading to the problems discussed here.

Hock (http://hocktools.com/products/bp.html) and Veritas (http://www.leevalley.com/US/Wood/page.aspx?p=70671&cat=1,41182,43698&ap=1) make thinner blades specifically for classic Stanleys. Those should be usable without modification, so that would be yet another option here.

As to why the blades that modern makers use in their own planes are so thick, my snarky answer is "disinformation about chatter". People have become convinced that chatter is a huge issue (it isn't) and that a monstrous hunk of tool steel is the best way to avoid it (it isn't).

[Trevor Goodwin]

Patrick the Lee Valley link you posted says: "The bench plane blades are 0.100" thick, 25% thicker than the industry standard of 0.080". Increased thickness reduces chatter." That extra thickness still causes problems. I bought a Veritas blade and chipbreaker for my Record #3 and there wasn't enough clearance. The mouth was too small so I decided to stick with the stock blade and use the Veritas chipbreaker.

On another note, I recently purchased a Kunz Plus bevel-up jack plane. Absolute beauty of a plane, probably my favorite now. Unfortunately they use a blade that is 5mm thick. I'm dreading the day that I get a chip in the blade and need to grind it out.

[Andrew Pitonyak]

MadjesterToolworksinc has a pair of #8 irons on that auction site. Right now it is under $20 for the pair. Just a heads up info, I'm NOT the one selling them..

Is that a typo? google is not showing them.... I mean the auction site.

[Glen Canaday]

As to why the blades that modern makers use in their own planes are so thick, my snarky answer is "disinformation about chatter". People have become convinced that chatter is a huge issue (it isn't) and that a monstrous hunk of tool steel is the best way to avoid it (it isn't).

+1. Correct irons can be had every day of the week for far less than the future devaluation of the plane. The proper irons aren't the cause of chatter.

[steven c newman]

I found those irons simply by doing a search for #8 jointer planes. It had 4 bids last night. They are made for Union #8 planes, and will fit the Stanley #8 without any problems. Union was so good, Stanley had to buy them out back about 1920....

[Ron Hock]

A couple of issues in this thread that I'd like to elaborate upon: One is that thicker irons in Stanley-style planes often render the depth-of-cut adjuster inoperable or semi-operable. The adjuster lever reaches through the blade to engage the breaker. If the blade is too thick, it won't reach properly and often not at all.

Thicker blades do not improve performance in a bevel-down plane. In that configuration the bevel is unsupported for its full length. Adding thickness just adds to the length of the unsupported bevel. So no improvement. A thicker blade also requires a wider mouth, perhaps wider than the frog adjustment can accommodate. So, with the potential adjuster problem, the mouth width problem and no upside, it's best to stick with thinner blades. Ours, ahem, for example are 3/32" thick which is as much thicker as they can be without poking the hornet's nest.

If your plane chatters there is something wrong that a thicker blade won't address. There is usually something loose in the system that's allowing the blade to wiggle. Take it all apart, clean everything, making sure that metal-to-metal contact points are truly metal-to-metal -- no paint or crud in between. And be sure the blade is sharp.

One other thing, a lot of plane owners think the frog should be adjusted so that the frog ramp aligns with the rear edge of the mouth opening in the sole. This is in no way necessary nor even desirable as the blade doesn't bear on the sole at all. The blade rests entirely on the ramp so adjust for your preferred mouth aperture.

[Ray Selinger]

I've just finished fitting frogs on a couple of #7 I'm rehabing . Neither frog face was flat.I think Stanley had a habit of milling green cast iron, that's sorta like working with green wood. They were from '47 and mid 50s. I like frogs where you can see their ribs,the lower friction makes for smoother adjustments.

[Stewie Simpson]

Excellent advice from Ron Hock.

http://www.hocktools.com/faq/a2-vs-high-carbon-o1.html

A2 vs. High Carbon (O1)

Our High Carbon Tool Steel is the finest-grained tool steel available and the finer the grain the sharper the edge. A2 is a newer alloy that will hold its edge longer; the alloying elements that increase edge retention form large, tough carbide particles during heat treatment. It’s a little harder to sharpen and bit more expensive but if edge life is paramount, you can’t go wrong with A2. But if ultimate sharpness and ease of sharpening are more important, high carbon steel will allow you the sharpest edge possible.

Warren Mickley's advice is also well founded. imo


I recommend looking for an original iron. Since it is better steel, it will sharpen more easily and yield a better edge. If it is thinner and laminated (both are likely), these qualities add to the ease of sharpening.

There are probably guys with original irons and cap irons in a drawer somewhere, so you might advertise for one. You might find someone willing to exchange. Or you might be able to sell the Lie Nielsen iron and cap iron and make out pretty well in the exchange.

All the world is mad save for me and thee, and sometimes I wonder about thee. – Old Quaker saying

[Jerry Olexa]

File the mouth backward...

[Patrick Chase]

A couple of issues in this thread that I'd like to elaborate upon: One is that thicker irons in Stanley-style planes often render the depth-of-cut adjuster inoperable or semi-operable. The adjuster lever reaches through the blade to engage the breaker. If the blade is too thick, it won't reach properly and often not at all.

Thicker blades do not improve performance in a bevel-down plane. In that configuration the bevel is unsupported for its full length. Adding thickness just adds to the length of the unsupported bevel. So no improvement. A thicker blade also requires a wider mouth, perhaps wider than the frog adjustment can accommodate. So, with the potential adjuster problem, the mouth width problem and no upside, it's best to stick with thinner blades. Ours, ahem, for example are 3/32" thick which is as much thicker as they can be without poking the hornet's nest.

If your plane chatters there is something wrong that a thicker blade won't address. There is usually something loose in the system that's allowing the blade to wiggle. Take it all apart, clean everything, making sure that metal-to-metal contact points are truly metal-to-metal -- no paint or crud in between. And be sure the blade is sharp.

One other thing, a lot of plane owners think the frog should be adjusted so that the frog ramp aligns with the rear edge of the mouth opening in the sole. This is in no way necessary nor even desirable as the blade doesn't bear on the sole at all. The blade rests entirely on the ramp so adjust for your preferred mouth aperture.

I agree with everything you say (hence my reference to "disinformation about chatter") but that last bit about ramp/opening alignment will likely prove contentious. I said the same thing in a thread a few months back, and it took a few days for the embers to die down. Perhaps your unimpeachable reputation will flameproof you :-).

[steven c newman]

I think this is the area ( and type of frog) that Andrew is dealing with. The #8 he has is a newer model, and has that rib for the frog to straddle. IF you move the frog back, the rib will get in the way.

344901
I usually try to get the front edge of the rib and the face of the frog as coplanar as I can. Older Stanleys had a flat face, as in solid iron. No ribs. There IS a slight ramp right behind the mouth opening. Some have BIG ramps, some barely have one. It is the part of the sole the iron touches last, before it emerges out the mouth's opening. If one moves the frog ahead of that little spot, the last little bit of the iron above the bevel sits in mid-air. That might be a cause of the Infamous Chatter.

The Madjester is a seller's name on the auction site. She does have a pair of Union MFG Co. 2-5/8" wide irons. They will also work just fine in a Stanley #8. So fine in fact, that Stanley bought out Union in about ...1920 and used their parts up.

[steve swantee]

Andrew, here's my journey to put a Lie Nielsen iron in a No.8... http://www.sawmillcreek.org/showthread.php?99429-Plane-Iron-Experiment

It works wonderfully by the way!

[Andrew Pitonyak]

Andrew, here's my journey to put a Lie Nielsen iron in a No.8... http://www.sawmillcreek.org/showthread.php?99429-Plane-Iron-Experiment

It works wonderfully by the way!

Thanks for the link..... Taking my getting to this.... A bunch of things are popping up that I need to handle