What is your Shooting Board technique?

[Frederick Skelly]

Do you back the plane up and "take a run at it" to use the plane's momentum? Or something else?

The long story.
Last summer, a buddy of mine shipped me a Tom Bussey-prepared #606C Bedrock he'd bought a couple years ago and wasn't using. I didn't need another #6 but I just couldnt argue with a tool that had been machined flat and square by Tablesaw Tom. So I got it to use as a nice shooter. Problem is, I just couldn't find a way to hold it COMFORTABLY, during shooting. I couldn't find a good way to attach a hotdog and I wasnt willing to drill/tap mounting holes. So I horsed around and finally came up with a prototyope of a handle that works pretty well. That's a story for another thread.

But in the process of looking at "hotdog plans", I read Derek Cohen's comparison of the LV, Stanley and LN Shooting Planes and was struck by his comments on "momentum". My interpretation - and Derek please correct me if I misunderstood you - is that one reason the LN works so well is that it's the heaviest of the 3 tested, which lets one use momentum to your advantage in shooting. That led me to think that my previous technique wasn't right. I used to move the blade right up against the board to be "shot" and push it slowly through the cut. On hardwoods, that was sometimes tough. So this morning I tried making a "running start" at it - backing the plane up several inches to get it moving before it contacts the wood. And after a few tries I found it worked pretty well for me.

So I'm curious what you folks do? Have I got this completely wrong? Are there better techniques for using a bevel DOWN plane to shoot?

Thanks,
Fred

[Nicholas Lawrence]

I use my No. 7 mostly. The main thing is finding a good grip. I put my thumb on the adjusting knob, and my palm and fingers sort of go around the frog and blade assembly. With a light cut and sharp blade it seems to work pretty well.

[Derek Cohen]

Fred, you should not need to "run at" the work piece with your plane. That invites the plane to rock in the runway and lose precision.

The conditions for "pushing through" from a standing start are a sharp blade (I think that yours is likely not sharp enough), and taking a fine shaving (determine how thin by the hardness of the wood). Sharp blade and light shavings.

The grip on a Stanley bench plane will never be comfortable on its own. Some have used a hotdog handle for better success. You should look into this as it can transform the way you hold and control the #606. Alf designed and built this one: http://cornishworkshop.blogspot.com.au/2011/01/peters-principle.html

Regards from Perth

Derek

[John Crawford]

I also rely on the sharp blade + light cutting. I use my #8 because it is the only plane I own that is actually square; probably this is "too large" but I do think the momentum helps.

For a simple solution to holding it, try out wearing a work glove on the hand that grips the plane. I also can't find any comfortable way to shoot w/ an unmodified Bailey plane. But, putting on a leather glove works well enough to keep it from being painful.

[Frederick Skelly]

Fred, you should not need to "run at" the work piece with your plane. That invites the plane to rock in the runway and lose precision.

The conditions for "pushing through" from a standing start are a sharp blade (I think that yours is likely not sharp enough), and taking a fine shaving (determine how thin by the hardness of the wood). Sharp blade and light shavings.

The grip on a Stanley bench plane will never be comfortable on its own. Some have used a hotdog handle for better success. You should look into this as it can transform the way you hold and control the #606. Alf designed and built this one: http://cornishworkshop.blogspot.com.au/2011/01/peters-principle.html

Regards from Perth

Derek


Thank you Derek - for both the lesson and the link. First, I'll resharpen that blade. Then, I'll make a hotdog his way and see if it feels better than the handle I did. Many thanks Sir!

Fred

[Frederick Skelly]

I also rely on the sharp blade + light cutting. I use my #8 because it is the only plane I own that is actually square; probably this is "too large" but I do think the momentum helps.

For a simple solution to holding it, try out wearing a work glove on the hand that grips the plane. I also can't find any comfortable way to shoot w/ an unmodified Bailey plane. But, putting on a leather glove works well enough to keep it from being painful.

Thank you John. I'll try that glove. Was wondering about that but hadnt tried it.
Fred


Edit: Just tried it with a leather glove. Man does THAT help. Thanks again John.

[Jim Koepke]

Do you back the plane up and "take a run at it" to use the plane's momentum? Or something else?

[snip]

But in the process of looking at "hotdog plans", I read Derek Cohen's comparison of the LV, Stanley and LN Shooting Planes and was struck by his comments on "momentum". My interpretation - and Derek please correct me if I misunderstood you - is that one reason the LN works so well is that it's the heaviest of the 3 tested, which lets one use momentum to your advantage in shooting. That led me to think that my previous technique wasn't right. I used to move the blade right up against the board to be "shot" and push it slowly through the cut. On hardwoods, that was sometimes tough. So this morning I tried making a "running start" at it - backing the plane up several inches to get it moving before it contacts the wood. And after a few tries I found it worked pretty well for me.

So I'm curious what you folks do? Have I got this completely wrong? Are there better techniques for using a bevel DOWN plane to shoot?

Thanks,
Fred

My technique is to start with the plane back as far as possible with the toe still registered on the work piece. Then my upper body works together to propel the plane through the work as quickly as possible. Repeat as needed.

Here is my version of a hot dog on a #6.

http://www.sawmillcreek.org/showthread.php?130114-Shooting-Board-Plane

My first attempt worked well, but it caused concern that it could crack or break out the plane's cheek.

The front of the final design is cut to seat against the back of the frog. This was made from a piece of scrap and is occasionally still used. After the posting of this I purchased an LN #62 low angle BU jack. Now the only time a bevel down plane is used for shooting is when something is wider than the LN #62 can handle.

jtk

[Frederick Skelly]

Thanks Jim! I never fail to be amazed at the depth of knowledge and peoples' ingenuity around here. So many really good ideas for doing this that I hadn't considered, like your simple vertical handle and others. Sometimes, I just don't see the forest for the trees. Geez.

And then to top it all off, I find one post buried in your thread that points out the LV BU Jack has essentially a built in hotdog. I tried that just now. I'll be darned if it isn't a perfectly comfortable grip. So comfortable - even without a hotdog - that I think I'm going to set aside my 606 for a bit and try the BUJ for shooting. (That 606 is still a darn nice tool!)

Thanks to all of you!

Fred

[Kees Heiden]

For momentum you also need speed. M=mass x speed. So a heavier plane can be pushed slower through the wood then a lighter one without loosing too much speed during the cut. A bit of run on speed helps with a lighter plane but you loose control. You can also start the cut with the cutting edge close to the wood but give it a bumpstart with some extra force and then hopefully sail through the cut on monentum and minimal extra pushing power. A sharp edge and light cut are essential of course. In the end it is a balance act between mass, speed, resistance of the cut and your control over the plane.

[glenn bradley]

Plenty of good info here. I use the mass of the plane to assist in the cut.

As to the hot dog . . . could you do something like this between tote and sidewall?

I drilled a series of holes with a brad point to get the bulk of the slot. Tapped a hole for a grub screw which tightens from the no-show side. No drilling of the plane body required.

348815348816348817348818

I know you don't have as much room but, I'd give it a whirl.

[Adam Stevens2]

I just got myself the LV shooting plane, so I'm figuring out the best way to use it. I made a shooting board just for it that is a little larger than my old one. the weight of the plane certainly helps with keeping it in the cut. it works 1000 times better than my old setup, which primarily used a sharp, but much lighter smoother.

[Rob Luter]

I use a Veritas Low Angle Jack plane with the 25 degree blade. It does a great job on end grain and pushes through the cut with relative ease.

[Derek Cohen]

In 2011, I wrote an article comparing three shooting planes, the LN #9, LN #51, and the Veritas LA Jack. At the time I was demonstrating the use of these planes at a Lie Nielsen Handtool Event in Perth. Two conclusions arose from this experience:

1. The Veritas LA Jack was capable of out planing the LN #9 (which was a dedicated shooting plane) if the Veritas was gripped in a specific manner ...

"The correct way (in my opinion) of holding the LAJ (and shooting planes generally), is to exert downforce at a central point while simultaneously exerting low lateral sideforce. One must not attempt to simply push the plane against the sidewall to the shooting board. This will unbalance the plane and cause it to cant over.



http://www.inthewoodshop.com/Furniture/ShootingPlanesCompared_html_309f013.jpg


Downforce is applied by the thumb directly into the dimpled fingerhole. Sideforce is applied by the four fingertips pushing from under the levercap."

2. The superior performance of the LN #51 was partly due to its extra mass, but also a consequence of its riding in a track in the #52 shooting board. This reduced any potential error in handling to a minimum.

Article: http://www.inthewoodshop.com/Furniture/ShootingPlanesCompared.html

As a result of this, I went on to advocate a side fence for shooting boards. Below is the Veritas LA Jack complete with a hotdog handle (which I designed in 2007) ...

http://www.inthewoodshop.com/ShopMadeTools/RunningFencefortheShootingBoard_html_27c06340.jpg

Article: http://www.inthewoodshop.com/ShopMadeTools/RunningFencefortheShootingBoard.html

Plans for hotdog handle (MkII, 2008): http://www.inthewoodshop.com/ShopMadeTools/Building%20the%20Hotdog%20Mk%20II%20for%20the%20LV %20LA%20Jack%20pics.html

Hope this helps.

Regards from Perth

Derek

[Prashun Patel]

Fred-
I say this respecting that this may be an extravagance for some:

I have the Veritas Shooting plane, and it has literally changed the way I work. I struggled with making conventional planes ergonimcally work for a while. I had reasonable success with results as do most people, but it was just wasn't comfortable. More mass - like with a #7 - meant tired fingers.

The nice thing about a shooting plane is its mass, it's handle, and it's skew blade. All of these things contribute to making the shooting cuts smooth and easy. It is more like using a mandolin to slice ham. I find this shooting plane easier to use proper technique with than conventional planes: push down and forward, not left, into the piece.

Another nice feature is that you can remove, sharpen, and reseat the blade precisely in the same place, so there is no dialing in required between sharpenings. The bevel up configuration also means no cap screw or iron to mess with, which improves convenience.

How easy is the shooting plane to use? My 11 year old son shoots with it to produce perfect cross cuts on virtually everything he does now.

Anyway, food for thought...

[Patrick Chase]

Do you back the plane up and "take a run at it" to use the plane's momentum? Or something else?

I basically agree with Derek's reply. The key is to move through the cut with control and "authority". You want a certain amount of speed to help smooth out variations, but you also have to keep the plane under continuous control (no lunging or jerking) to avoid pivoting in the board's track etc.

The biggest benefit to the dedicated shooting planes is skew rather than mass IMO. Your 606 has a straight blade, so the entire blade enters the wood at almost exactly the same time. It can be difficult to make a controlled cut under those circumstances. This is so even if you use a ramped board, as ramps can only add a couple degrees,which doesn't make much difference. Dedicated shooters have 15-20 deg of blade skew, which makes a very noticeable difference.

[Patrick Chase]

The nice thing about a shooting plane is its mass, it's handle, and it's skew blade.

If I were ordering by importance I would list it as: skew, handle, mass.

Skew reduces the peak cutting force by a large factor, while the difference in mass is 10% or less once you include the mass of your forearm (which moves at the same speed as the plane and contributes to its momentum).

[Jim Koepke]

If I were ordering by importance I would list it as: skew, handle, mass.

Skew reduces the peak cutting force by a large factor, while the difference in mass is 10% or less once you include the mass of your forearm (which moves at the same speed as the plane and contributes to its momentum).

My thoughts are different on this. To me the important difference is the bedding angle. The Veritas shooting plane has a bed angle of 12º compared to a Bedrock #606 bedded at 45º. With a bevel up LA jack the effective work angle is is 37º with a flat single bevel at 25º. With the blade skewed 20º on the Veritas shooting plane the effective angle becomes 35º with the same 25º single bevel. The 2º difference is a good advantage unless the user decides to incorporate a secondary bevel. With a few degrees added, the advantage of the skew being easier to push through the work would be negated. It would still provide some slicing action which may be of some benefit.

Part of my technique is not trying to do all the shooting in one pass. The blade is adjusted to produce a minimal shaving instead of a lot of dust. This minimizes any impact shock of the blade's entering the work.

When my LN #62 was bought, primarily as a shooting plane, the other options were not available. Perhaps the Veritas Shooting Plane would have been my choice at the time. However due to an old injury to my right shoulder it now is more likely for me to be shooting left handed than right handed.

For some miter work it is advantageous to be able to shoot from either side.

jtk

[Patrick Chase]

My thoughts are different on this. To me the important difference is the bedding angle. The Veritas shooting plane has a bed angle of 12º compared to a Bedrock #606 bedded at 45º. With a bevel up LA jack the effective work angle is is 37º with a flat single bevel at 25º. With the blade skewed 20º on the Veritas shooting plane the effective angle becomes 35º with the same 25º single bevel. The 2º difference is a good advantage unless the user decides to incorporate a secondary bevel. With a few degrees added, the advantage of the skew being easier to push through the work would be negated. It would still provide some slicing action which may be of some benefit.

I used to believe that, until I tried a #51 (skewed shooter with 45 deg BD iron). The low cutting angle of the Veritas certainly reduces average forces a bit, but skew dramatically reduces much more severe "jerk" at start of cut. For me that peak force is way more of a concern.

[Derek Cohen]

I suspect that the articles I linked to may contain this information, or there may be others I could link to. I have written so much about this. Anyway ..

I own both the LN#51 and the Veritas Shooting Plane. The extra mass of the LN does give it a slight advantage over the Veritas' lower cutting angle when their blades are freshly sharpened. However, the LN does not hold an edge long enough for this advantage to remain, and the Veritas quickly overtakes it, and keeps working at a very high level. (The dulling of the LN blade is not due to its steel - I have tried O1, A2, PM-V11, and laminated Japanese - but due to the higher cutting angle.

A ramped shooting board trumps a flat shooting board with a plane that uses a square blade. The ramp imparts an angled cut (not a true skew cut) on entry, and this is enough to reduce the jariing feel at impact. Similarly, a skewed blade does this as well, but additionally offers a true slicing cut. Skew or ramping both facilitate easier pushing through by lowering the force required.

Trying to choose one factor that is responsible for improved shooting is a fools errant, simply because you cannot purchase a plane on that basis. Higher mass, low cutting angle and skewed blade are all desirable features in a shooting plane.

Using a shooting board that captures the plane is possibly the single biggest upgrade one can make. This is especially important with #51-type planes with the rear handle, but it improves all shooting with all planes. An uncaptured plane is vulnerable to being pushed away from the sidewall/workpiece, resulting in imprecise results.


Regards from Perth


Derek

[Frederick Skelly]

Great information here. Thanks guys!
Fred

[Stewie Simpson]

In my case I couldn't see sense in the rear location of the tote handle, and the high cost, on both the LN and LV dedicated shooting planes. So I made my own shooting planes, that suited my needs.

http://i1009.photobucket.com/albums/af219/swagman001/Left%20hand%20shooting%20plane/_DSC0263_zpstdxge12f.jpg (http://s1009.photobucket.com/user/swagman001/media/Left%20hand%20shooting%20plane/_DSC0263_zpstdxge12f.jpg.html)

[Pat Barry]

I made my shooting board with a ramp also, but the ramp goes up rather than downward (Derek's image earlier shows the ramp going downward). With the down ramp, there is a tendency for the cutting force of the plane to lift the workpiece up off the ramp. This means the user has to provide more force downward on the workpiece to keep the workpiece in place. With the ramp going upward less force is required to hold down the workpiece down since the planing force tends to be of assistance in keeping the work piece in contact with the ramp. All of this is simple physics. All in all though, the effective ramp angle is small and its affect on planing force is mostly inconsequential. A skewed blade would be a much better solution. Of course, the skew angle needs to be such as to pull the work down. If it goes the other way you will need additional clamping to hold the workpiece in place. The biggest benefit though is that the slicing action of the skewed blade makes a significant reduction in cutting force.

[Stewie Simpson]

The following photo shows what I mean with the questionable location of the handle. The user is being forced to extend his fingers well past the grip of the handle to insure constant side pressure is being applied to the end grain being worked.


https://www.lie-nielsen.com/static-file-transform/2083/thumbnail%2Cw_500%2Ch_500%2Cm_a.jpg
https://www.lie-nielsen.com/product/no.-51-shoot-board-plane-


In both cases, the rear handles location, required the need for an outside guide track to be used.

http://www.leevalley.com/US/images/item/Woodworking/Planes/05p5451s1.jpg
http://www.leevalley.com/US/wood/Page.aspx?p=70926&cat=1,230,41182,48945

[Prashun Patel]

I have used my veritas without a track on longer panels and it worked fine. It works easier with a track. Granted my panel was thin.

[Patrick Chase]

In my case I couldn't see sense in the rear location of the tote handle, and the high cost, on both the LN and LV dedicated shooting planes. So I made my own shooting planes, that suited my needs.

Those are single-piece woodie abutment planes with skewed irons, right? Very nice.

[Patrick Chase]

The following photo shows what I mean with the questionable location of the handle. The user is being forced to extend his fingers well past the grip of the handle to insure constant side pressure is being applied to the end grain being worked.


https://www.lie-nielsen.com/static-file-transform/2083/thumbnail%2Cw_500%2Ch_500%2Cm_a.jpg

I think you're over-interpreting that picture. It looks to me like the user is merely in the habit of extending his index finger, as many of us are. I don't think he's actually using it to press on the plane body, but it's admittedly hard to tell from that angle.

I have the veritas plane and can use it to shoot single-handed without an outside track. I do that all the time on my jointing board (basically a very long, "open backed" shooting fixture for jointing long edges)

[Andy Nichols]

Have very limited use of my hands these days, had to find a usable and comfortable shooting plane so I tried many miter plane versions and the two main dedicated shooting planes, LV &LN....

For me the LN 51 was the clear winner, there are no issues with the handle location and it's the easiest plane to control I've ever used. Should have purchased one years ago, would have saved me a lot of pain--literally.

Regards,
Andy

-- mos maiorum

[Stewie Simpson]

Those are single-piece woodie abutment planes with skewed irons, right? Very nice.

Patrick; that's correct.

Stewie;

[Phil Stone]

Does everybody bevel the trailing edge of the 'shoot'? I'm curious if anybody gets away *without* doing that.

[Derek Cohen]

Does everybody bevel the trailing edge of the 'shoot'? I'm curious if anybody gets away *without* doing that.

Really the only time you will get away without a slight bevel - that is, if you wish to avoid spelching - is if the edge tapers naturally (creates its own bevel). One other situation is when you plan to plane away the spelched section. For example, smooth plane the face.

The ideal is to have a perfect backup board to prevent spelching. In practice this is planed away, and one needs to chamfer the far edge.

Regards from Perth

Derek

[Jim Koepke]

Does everybody bevel the trailing edge of the 'shoot'? I'm curious if anybody gets away *without* doing that.

Not sure about everybody, but do it myself. Usually just to the point where the piece will be finished.

jtk