LV vs. LN Router Plane

[Robert Engel]

For me, + for LV is selection of irons, - is size, only closed throat.

+ for LN open throat option, looks bigger, - small selection of irons, having to use screwdriver.

I'm wondering about the size of the LV.

Which one do you own? Why did you choose it?

[lowell holmes]

I bought my Lie Nielsen for aesthetic reasons. It is a solid little plane. You don't have to use the screwdriver, but the slot is there if you want it.
I can't compare the two planes though.

I have planes from both companies.

[Patrick Chase]

For me, + for LV is selection of irons, - is size, only closed throat.

+ for LN open throat option, looks bigger, - small selection of irons, having to use screwdriver.

I'm wondering about the size of the LV.

Which one do you own? Why did you choose it?

I have the LV. Deciding factors for me were:

Larger selection of blades.
Existence of the medium and the hinge mortise planes that use the same blades.
Two-piece blades (in the larger sizes) made honing a bit easier, though I've since become more comfortable freehanding with the shaft hanging off the stone.

Keep in mind that with all of these planes you have the option of reversing the blade, and IMO that addresses some of the situations where you might want an open-mouth plane (with the caveat that the support provided by the base is *very* different with the blade reversed).

[Derek Cohen]

Add to the good points made by Patrick, the LV has ...

1. the better fence.
2. better blade holding (using the curvy washer) when changing blades.
3. An accessory for inlay (which I have used for laying out grooves and mortices on curved work).
4. a very large selection of blades, where the LN really only has one blade.
5. Although personal preference will come into this, I like the splayed handles of the LV for their wider stance. The LN are more in board.

Regards from Perth

Derek

[Mike Henderson]

I assume you mean the full size router planes and not the small ones. I have the LV and like it. I never tried the LN but I did have a Stanley which is similar to the LN. The LV is better.

Mike

[Simon MacGowen]

Unless you prefer the Stanley look, the LV large router was the obvious choice for me as I deal with narrow grooves or small surface areas a lot with its small blades.

Simon

[Brett Luna]

I haven't had my LV large router plane long but I chose it for many of the same reasons given above. About the closed throat, that was a plus for me. I don't know exactly how wide the LN throat is but it looked like it could be a bit of a problem on narrow boards. Even in LN site photo showing use on the edge of a board, it looks like there's little-to-no support at the front of the sole.

[Michael Fross]

While I generally prefer LN planes, I went with the LV. My reasons have been given above. Also it's great that the medium router plane uses the same irons. I find I use both of these planes quite a bit.

Michael

[Patrick Chase]

I haven't had my LV large router plane long but I chose it for many of the same reasons given above. About the closed throat, that was a plus for me. I don't know exactly how wide the LN throat is but it looked like it could be a bit of a problem on narrow boards. Even in LN site photo showing use on the edge of a board, it looks like there's little-to-no support at the front of the sole.

You can buy the L-N in both configurations (open/closed) so if you don't like it open you simply don't order it that way.

Like you I consider a closed sole a "must". That being the case, the question for somebody like us really becomes: Which second router plane will be more attractive if/when you eventually expand your collection? L-N's otherwise identical open-sole plane, or the LV hinge mortise plane and/or medium router? I went the second route, though I can see valid arguments either way.

I did make one omission in my previous post: The blades for the LN 271 are usable in the full-sized router plane with an adapter, so in that sense they have a counterpart to the LV medium router (though the LV can use all of the blades that their full-sized one can).

[Brett Luna]

You can buy the L-N in both configurations (open/closed) so if you don't like it open you simply don't order it that way.

Well, I'll be darned. Whiffed that one entirely. Good thing it wasn't the only significant consideration. As much as I like the looks of LN products in general, I'm certainly not unhappy with the LV so far.

[lowell holmes]

My large router plane is a Stanley 71 with a full compliment of blades. I was looking for a Stanley 271 which was not available.
I looked at both Lee Valley and Lie Nielsen and chose the the LN because I preferred it's appearance.

I have both Stanley, Stanley Bedrock, and Lee Valley planes. I have both lh and rh skew rabbet planes as well as the small plow.

[Eric Brown]

I have some Stanley type routers and a Tyzack rectangular one as well. The Stanley types can all utilize the Veritas cutters as they are held in the diamond direction. The Tyzacks hold the blade square like the Lie Nielsen. I prefer the diamond direction. However, I prefer the shape of the Tyzack which is similar to the Preston 1500.

Recently I "upgraded" to a Walke-Moore (walkemooretools.com). It has the shape of the Preston, holds the cutters like the Stanley, but gives many more cutter position unavailable to the Stanley types. The downside (besides price) is that only one cutter currently available. The LV ones can be modified by cutting a single notch and will work fine. If interested you will have to wait until full production starts. Should be available by end of year.
345051

[Chuck Hart]

LV all the way. Have you put the LN in your hands? If you have medium to large hands the grip is awkward. Think about how you push something, you spread your hands out not close in. The selection of blades is great. 1+ on the inlay tool.

[Patrick Chase]

Recently I "upgraded" to a Walke-Moore (walkemooretools.com). It has the shape of the Preston, holds the cutters like the Stanley, but gives many more cutter position unavailable to the Stanley types. The downside (besides price) is that only one cutter currently available.

"Besides price"... I like that. For those not in the know, we're talking about a $300 router plane here. I'll be the first to admit I've found it tempting though.

[Derek Cohen]

I have some Stanley type routers and a Tyzack rectangular one as well. The Stanley types can all utilize the Veritas cutters as they are held in the diamond direction. The Tyzacks hold the blade square like the Lie Nielsen. I prefer the diamond direction. However, I prefer the shape of the Tyzack which is similar to the Preston 1500.

Recently I "upgraded" to a Walke-Moore (walkemooretools.com). It has the shape of the Preston, holds the cutters like the Stanley, but gives many more cutter position unavailable to the Stanley types. The downside (besides price) is that only one cutter currently available. The LV ones can be modified by cutting a single notch and will work fine. If interested you will have to wait until full production starts. Should be available by end of year.
345051

Hi Eric

I am puzzled by this router plane. It looks pretty in bronze, but it is twice the cost of the LV for half the features. For example, there is nothing more than a rudimentary fence (similar to the Stanley and LN), a single blade (which looks like they cut down one of the Veritas ones), and the antiquated blade clamping system of the Stanley. I know that the design was made popular by Paul Sellers, but other than that, what is the attraction? Surely it cannot be the changing positions of the knobs and blade holder? One could purchase the Large and Medium LV router planes, and have change!

Regards from Perth

Derek

[Trevor Goodwin]

Derek, I believe you are paying for the versatility in the Walke Moore router plane. Not only can it be set up as open or closed throat, the cutter mechanism can be swapped with either of the handles, useful for cleaning long tenons I imagine. Not sure why they went with bronze though, ductile iron would be more durable.

[Derek Cohen]

Hi Trevor

I do not see the point of this versatility. I use router planes a lot. Even make them. Inlay, stopped rebates, grooves, dados, hinge mortices ... I swap between a large LV and a small woodie I made. You can turn the blade to an outboard position on the LV router planes as well. I've just never needed to use them this way.

Keep in mind that WM advertise their router plane at $280-320 (USD) and the LV Large is $159 (USD). The LV Medium is $109, and the LV Small is $55. Hell, you could purchase all three LV router planes for the one WM (with one blade)!

Regards from Perth

Derek

[Trevor Goodwin]

Fair enough. I have a LV large router plane sitting in a box next to me that I haven't had a chance to use because I've been swamped by study all year :(

[glenn bradley]

Happy with the LV. The LN felt awkward BUT, this is very dependent on your hands, arm length, stance, etc.

[Robert Engel]

thanks guys I was leaning toward the LV.

now all I have to do is tell Santa. :)

[Michael L. Martin]

It seems I went against the trend by getting the LN. I have both the 71 and the little 271, and I think they'll do whatever I'll ever need. Nothing against the LV. It appears to be a very nice plane.

[glenn bradley]

It seems I went against the trend by getting the LN. I have both the 71 and the little 271, and I think they'll do whatever I'll ever need. Nothing against the LV. It appears to be a very nice plane.


Not at all. the "best" hand tool for the job is the one that fits best in your hands ;-) Out here on the left coast I don't get to try LV and LN side by side anymore ;-( Good thing I'm already pretty well fitted out.

[Simon MacGowen]

Hi Eric

I I know that the design was made popular by Paul Sellers, but other than that, what is the attraction?

Regards from Perth

Derek

Paul Sellers himself finds the LV large router a great tool to use and has written about it on his blog.

Any router that can only be used with one cutter can't claim to be versatile in my book. I have used LV's to cut stopped grooves, clean up dados, fine tune tenons, cut hinge mortises, and fit inlays. I can't think of a job that it is not "versatile" enough to handle as compared to any other brands.

As regards attraction, I actually find the shape of MW unattractive and its size too large. Even if it were priced the same as a LV's, I wouldn't root for it.

Simon

[Patrick Chase]

Hi Trevor

I do not see the point of this versatility. I use router planes a lot. Even make them. Inlay, stopped rebates, grooves, dados, hinge mortices ... I swap between a large LV and a small woodie I made. You can turn the blade to an outboard position on the LV router planes as well. I've just never needed to use them this way.

Keep in mind that WM advertise their router plane at $280-320 (USD) and the LV Large is $159 (USD). The LV Medium is $109, and the LV Small is $55. Hell, you could purchase all three LV router planes for the one WM (with one blade)!

Regards from Perth

Derek

I think that the LV planes offer much better value for the money, but let me play devils' advocate a tiny bit:

With the blade moved to either of the end locations the WM provides the functionality of a hinge mortise plane. You could therefore argue that an appropriate comparison would be to the LV Large Router ($159) plus the LV Hinge Mortise plane ($149). For somebody who buys into that comparison it doesn't look so bad.

Of course the real problem both in general and for their target market is the lack of irons. I understand that you can cut grooves into L-N irons and use them, but I suspect that the sort of people would would pay $300 for a router plane aren't going to be into that sort of thing.

[James Waldron]

I would expect WM to introduce an array of blades in the near future. (If I were running their show, I'd announce the plan sooner rather than later, so their market doesn't turn to LV or LN before they can get their offering together.) Call it logic, call it common sense, call it what you will. It has to happen if the WM people aren't a little touched in the head. Silly to have people bemoaning the lack. Even sillier if they don't have such a plan.

[Eric Brown]

To try to answer your questions Derek, this plane is not for everyone. There are some advantages to the longer length providing better support. Being bronze it will not rust (except for the cutter all other metal is stainless). The handles being further apart feels better to me. The castings are chosen to be defect free.

As it can utilize any of the L-V cutters, neither has the advantage there. Yes, the L-V has a better fence. Yes, the L-V and all the Stanley's too can have a base added to make them longer.

As a two man shop you really can't expect them to have as big a selection as the big boys. So far they have only had a preliminary run and have not gone into full production. It takes time and money. I applaud their efforts.

A real question is why anybody really needs a router. You can do the same things with a chisel or plane. The router only makes certain tasks easier.
About the price. Consider your friend Chris Vespers bevel gages. The L-V ones do the same job at a much lower cost. Either can do a fine job. So can a wooden shop made one.

However, sometimes a tool looks beautiful, feels good, and also functions well. The W-M router is in this category.

[Derek Cohen]

Hi Eric

I have no beef with the detail work and construction of this Preston rebuild. They appear to do a great job. I also applaud them for taking the risk of manufacture. It is unlikely that this is going to be made in sufficient numbers to be competitive with either LV or LN. It is also twice the price of the large router planes from these two companies. My criticism is that the design, itself, does not offer much as a working tool. I may have chosen a different model of router plane, however, such as smaller version.

I will disagree with you about the value of a router plane (vs a chisel). Yes, one can use a chisel. But, yes, there are many work-arounds for a large number of tasks. I find a router plane to be an incredibly useful tool.

The comparison of Chris Vesper's sliding bevel with one from LV? I have not used the one from LV. I have used a number of other makes. The Vesper sliding bevel is not just good looking; it is very solid (e.g. a thick and hard steel blade that will resist damage). It is the easiest to adjust, and has the most secure locking mechanism of all I have used to date. Whether one can argue that it offers value-for-money depends on the funds one has available for spending on woodworking tools.

Regards from Perth

Derek

[lowell holmes]

345214

This is my large hand router plane. It has screw holes for a wooden sole, I have attached one. I have the full assortment of irons that I was able to buy online. I think I bought the irons from Lee Valley.

It's been years since I did that.

I have considered making a guide for it to be used when making slots. I've never pursued the idea, but maybe I will resurrect the idea.

[Robert Engel]

A real question is why anybody really needs a router. You can do the same things with a chisel or plane. The router only makes certain tasks easier.
I can give several examples of why a router plane excels - just think of any recessed surface that you want flat and a guaranteed depth, or any slot or groove longer than your chisel.

[lowell holmes]

Robert,

The reason we need a router plane is that we need one of each tool.:)

[Patrick Chase]

I can give several examples of why a router plane excels - just think of any recessed surface that you want flat and a guaranteed depth, or any slot or groove longer than your chisel.

That second bit is why they make dado planes and cranked-neck paring chisels.

Eric is right in principle: Anything we do with a router plane *can* be done with some other tool[s]. With that said, if we applied that sort of logic rigorously we wouldn't have a lot of tools that most people consider essential. After all, you can joint with a #4. People use router planes for the same reason they use jointers: It's a lot faster and easier than the alternatives.

[Simon MacGowen]

I can give several examples of why a router plane excels - just think of any recessed surface that you want flat and a guaranteed depth, or any slot or groove longer than your chisel.

In theory, we only need the smallest chisel (1/16"?) and that can handle anything that 1/8" to 1" chisels and beyond can do. But at what cost? We only need an apron plane and that could do the job of a jointer plane, too. Again at what cost? Heck, ancient people didn't even have chisels and handplanes, let alone router planes! They used stones. I, for one, wouldn't be woodworking if all we had were stone tools.

Simon

[Eric Brown]

Yes, we could do much with very few tools but having specialty tools makes the job easier. Now look at router planes again from a historical viewpoint. The earliest routers were wooden with simple adjustment (wedges). Unless you nailed a board on they had no fences. Why? Probably because they had no need. To put it another way, their designs and methods didn't require it. The earliest metal routers, if they had a fence, it was small. Why? Probably to sell to a perceived need and small to reduce cost. Now look at the LV large. Lots of bells and whistles. Are they really needed? If you have the standard 1/2" straight cutter and wish to cut a 1/4" rabbet you can't without some sort of modification to the optional fence. Now look at the shape of the router (or Stanley types). Do you see any straight edges you could trust to follow and keep square to a external guide? No. Obviously they are designed more for freehand use. Now look at the Preston rectangular router and you see it has four sides that could be used against a guide. No fence necessary. Like the Stanley types the Prestons did have small fences available.

Another advantage of the Preston types is the ability to straddle a wider gap. One example is a guitar neck I was working on. I needed to make the tuner section flat and parallel. I flattened the top side first with a hand plane and then turned it over and laid it on the bench. I put a runner on each side for the Preston type plane (this one is a Tyzack). The Stanley types just don't have enough support for this kind of operation, especially if you try to skew the cutter. The extra support also comes in handy when working long tendons. Again, many different tools can be used for this. This type of router makes it easy.

345348

[Glen Canaday]

Bronze is *very* pretty in a tool, most definitely. But what does it have over a Stanley?

What advantages?

[Derek Cohen]

The earliest routers were wooden with simple adjustment (wedges). Unless you nailed a board on they had no fences. Why? Probably because they had no need. To put it another way, their designs and methods didn't require it. The earliest metal routers, if they had a fence, it was small. Why? Probably to sell to a perceived need and small to reduce cost. Now look at the LV large. Lots of bells and whistles. Are they really needed?

Eric, the OWT type router plane to which you referred were almost inevitably user-made. They were created to meet a basic need, using blades that could be borrowed from another plane, typically a plough plane. I would not use these designs as a reference for best router plane design. As with all tools, there was a process of evolution.

I would not consider that the designs of the large LN and LV router planes to be a sales gimmick. They definitely meet the needs of dedicated users.

Here's one example of the importance of the fence on a router plane ..

Ploughing a groove on a straight stretcher is simple - just use a plough plane ...

http://www.inthewoodshop.com/Furniture/LingerieChest4_html_m474a1768.jpg

But what if the stretcher is curved?

You could chisel it out. I have done that. You could use a scratch stock. I have done that.

It is much easier to use a router plane with a fence ...



http://www.inthewoodshop.com/Furniture/LingerieChest4_html_7aea5f97.jpg

I use the router plane quite often this way for this purpose (since I like furniture that has subtle curves).

Regards from Perth

Derek