Christmas money - help me pick out my new hand plane!!!

[Mike Dowell]

Well, well... Looks like jolly ole' St. Nick hath left behind for me the gift of a brand new hand plane(in the form of money). Right now, the only plane I have worthy of mention, is the LV Apron Plane (http://www.leevalley.com/US/Wood/page.aspx?p=46791&cat=1,41182,48942). I absolutely love it, and I use it all the time. There are times when I wish I would have gotten a full size block plane, and perhaps one day I will. But, for my next plane, I want to get one that I'll use as much, if not more than the Apron Plane.

I was seriously considering the LV Low Angle Smooth Plane (http://www.leevalley.com/US/Wood/page.aspx?p=45864&cat=1,41182,48944&ap=1). I'm also not opposed to an offering from LN either. I have never seen any of their planes in person, but I know they are the top quality, as is the LV product.

Is there a different plane I should be looking at? Have I missed something? I know very little about planes, so that's why I'm here to make sure I spend my money in the most intelligent way possible.

Also, what's the difference in the different metals used for the irons? I know the basic difference is how hard they are, which loosely translates in to sharpening frequency, but that's all I know.

I'm really not sure why I love hand planes and chisels so much. There's just something very romantic about using them.

Thanks in advance! SO EXCITED!!!!

[Jim Koepke]

Mike,

Everybody loves to spend other people's money. First it would help to know a bit more about your needs before making usable suggestions.

The Low Angle Smooth Plane would be good for fulfilling a wide array of options. It would be good for smoothing and shooting needs. My preference for smoothing is a bevel down plane with a chip breaker.

For a bevel up plane with wide versatility the Low Angle Jack is hard to beat. Good for shooting end grain and miters. Mine has also served for smoothing boards and panels as well as like a jointer. Mine happens to be an LN #62. The Veritas LA Jack is also a very good plane, some prefer it to the LN.

Here is a post of mine about hand planes from a few years back:

http://www.sawmillcreek.org/showthread.php?148076-Getting-Started-With-Hand-Planes

There is an addendum at the end about chip breaker settings.

As far as the different metals used in the plane irons goes, I have been impressed by the PMv-11 available on the LV planes. It holds an edge very well and so far is easier to sharpen than A1 or A2. A1 & A2 seem to be more likely to get little chips in the process of dulling. This can leave little tracks on the work. My O1 blades from Hock are very nice blades. The wear pattern is my only befuddlement. The edge doesn't show much sign of wear in use until an attempt is made to take a very thin shaving. It is strange that they will act sharp for a long time but then they need a bit more work to bring them back to a good edge. The trick is to hone them before they get so dull as to require grinding. A1 & A2 is a harder metal to hone.

[Mike Dowell]

Mike,

First it would help to know a bit more about your needs before making usable suggestions.

OK, I figured that would be a good idea - and helpful. I don't intend, at this point, to be flattening large boards. I am potentially looking at investing in a MiniMax 12" jointer/planer for my business. If I have a big board to flatten, it's going on the jointer and planer. What I use my apron plane for are things like trimming end grain such as dowels, or imperfect glue-ups whilst performing repair work on customer furniture. I'm a very 'general purpose' plane user.


My preference for smoothing is a bevel down plane with a chip breaker.
Would you mind saying why? I know very little about planes, and I started reading your article -which is amazing by the way-, but at this point, my knowledge tells me that bevel down planes are more trouble to tune, and requires more experience to set up properly, leaving low angle bevel up planes as a sort of 'set it and forget it, grab and go' type of deal. That might be way off, and if it is, put me in my place.:D

With little knowledge, I just 'sort of figured' that LV low angle smooth plane would be a good all-purpose plane. I had a guy working for me a while back. He was in his 70's and a retired english cabinet maker. He had a stanley 4 1/2? It was a very traditional plane, and he used it all day long it seemed. He mainly repaired furniture in my shop, and it just seemed like every job he was reaching for that plane. Don't really know what the heck that has to do with this thread, but I figured I'd throw it in there. I actually have a plane like that. It's a Stanley 4 1/4? It was the "shop class" plane I was told. I tried tuning it up watching Youtube and such, and I got it making shavings, but never really understood it's inner workings. Plus, it wasn't a really nice one - not a bed rock, or bailey(can't remember which is the good one).

[Rob Luter]

A LN #4 is hard to beat for all around utility, although good quality Stanleys can be had for cheap and brought to perfect working order with a little work and a Hock blade.

My suggestion would be a Veritas #62 1/2 Low Angle Jack or a Lie-Nielsen #62 Low Angle Jack. Both are excellent tools. I chose the Veritas version and have found it to be extremely versatile. The mouth adjustment screw is very handy, and the screws for lateral blade locking are a very nice feature. I bought all three blades that are available and use it as a shooting plane with the 25 degree blade, a smoother with the 38 degree blade, and a high pitch smoother on difficult grain with the 50 degree blade. The Lie-Nielsen leans towards a more traditional design, and different cutting angle can be ground on their blades as well. Either would be a fine choice.

[Jim Koepke]

Would you mind saying why?

In my experience with the woods used in my shop a bevel down plane with a close set chip breaker seems to do a slightly better job at final smoothing. Beyond that, my preference is to buy and refurbish old used planes. Not many old bevel up planes in my price range.


With little knowledge, I just 'sort of figured' that LV low angle smooth plane would be a good all-purpose plane.

Yes it would. My preference for an "all-purpose plane" would tend toward a jack plane, a #5 size. (Remember, this is only MY preference, no reason to be anyone else's.) It is more suited to all around work. Since you will have a power planer the extra length of a jack plane will likely not be as necessary to your work.


I had a guy working for me a while back. He was in his 70's and a retired english cabinet maker. He had a stanley 4 1/2? It was a very traditional plane, and he used it all day long it seemed.

Some folks do find a favored plane and use it for everything, Paul Sellers promotes that theory with a #4. Some feel the only plane they need is a #7 jointer. To each their own.


I actually have a plane like that. It's a Stanley 4 1/4? It was the "shop class" plane I was told.

My guess would be it is a #5-1/4 which was used a lot in high school shop classes. My two "shop class planes" were chewed up and spit out by years of abusive kids with hormones coursing through their systems. Mine were so much trouble to get working that one of them is used as a scrub plane and the other sits in pieces in a box.

With all you have said the Low Angle Bevel Up Smoother might be your best choice.

jtk

[David M Peters]

I'll throw out a curveball! If you already have a #4-ish plane and it's in working order then perhaps you're good (for now of course) on bench planes; how about you get a router plane? They are versatile little guys and will surprise you with how often they come in handy.

Have fun with your gift money :)

[Mike Dowell]

@David Peters - wow, that is definitely a curve ball, and one of significance. I do find router planes interesting, but the truth is that my Stanley really isn't in good working order, and I've nor the time or patience to get it that way. Plus, it's kind of a piece of junk. I'm certain there are folks here that have the skill and experience to clean it up and use it, but not me. That's why I bought a Powermatic Cabinet Saw, and not a less expensive brand/model. I Was paying for the features so that I didn't have to make up for them with skill level. I digress.

OK, I'm sort of torn here. I'm going to mention only LV products since LN has all the same/equivalents, it's just easier to mention what I know.

My 3 horses in the running as of right now:

LV Low Angle Smooth
LV #4
LV 62 1/2 Jack

And, actually one more... what's wrong with getting an already restored stanley (http://www.ebay.com/itm/Superbly-Restored-Vintage-Stanley-Bailey-No-4-Smoothing-Plane-/222355044151?hash=item33c564b737:g:gmAAAOSwnHZYXTe D)?


Of the smooth planes, I tend toward the bevel up, because as I said earlier, they just seem easier to operate, or, if I dare, a bit more "idiot proof". That's based *almost* on nothing, so please tell me if I'm completely missing the boat here. I do see that Paul Sellers exclusively recommends bevel up planes. I just get so lost on how to set the chip breaker, and why it needs to be set a certain way, etc. Paul says on his blog that he likes to teach "technique to deal with different tasks rather than switching out irons". Now on to the second question. Why a Jack plane over a Smooth plane? Seems like the difference is 5" of sole.

OK, I forgot that I actually have a third question which is relevant. When using a shooting board, what keeps the blade from digging into the shooting board?

[Mike Henderson]

This is a bit off topic, but if you want a "full sized" block plane, get a used Stanley low angle block plane and put a new LV PM-V11 blade in it. I like the Stanley 65 knuckle joint block planes but that's just me. There are other "full sized" Stanley low angle block planes that are equally good.

Mike

[Regarding your shooting board question, in the planes used with a shooting board, the blade does not go fully across the body of the plane. So the first time you use the shooting board, you will take a small cut into the board. But after that, the space on the side of the blade will run against the shooting board and keep the blade from cutting into the board.

There are planes where the blade goes completely across the sole (or body) and you can't use those on a shooting board. An example is the Stanley 10 (if I remember my planes correctly).]

[Mike Dowell]

[Regarding your shooting board question, in the planes used with a shooting board, the blade does not go fully across the body of the plane. So the first time you use the shooting board, you will take a small cut into the board. But after that, the space on the side of the blade will run against the shooting board and keep the blade from cutting into the board.
There are planes where the blade goes completely across the sole (or body) and you can't use those on a shooting board. An example is the Stanley 10 (if I remember my planes correctly).]

ok, now I understand - fully. So when you make a shooting board, really, you have to shoot it a couple times first as part of the setup. right? Also, I did not know irons were interchangeable. That is to say, I figured the Veritas iron was specifically for their planes.

[Mike Henderson]

ok, now I understand - fully. So when you make a shooting board, really, you have to shoot it a couple times first as part of the setup. right? Also, I did not know irons were interchangeable. That is to say, I figured the Veritas iron was specifically for their planes.
A lot of people make replacement irons for the Stanley planes. The Veritas plane(s) may use a unique iron and you may have to purchase those irons from Lee Valley. But Stanley - lots of choices.

Mike

[Jim Koepke]

[edit]
OK, I'm sort of torn here. I'm going to mention only LV products since LN has all the same/equivalents, it's just easier to mention what I know.

My 3 horses in the running as of right now:

LV Low Angle Smooth
LV #4
LV 62 1/2 Jack

And, actually one more... what's wrong with getting an already restored stanley (http://www.ebay.com/itm/Superbly-Restored-Vintage-Stanley-Bailey-No-4-Smoothing-Plane-/222355044151?hash=item33c564b737:g:gmAAAOSwnHZYXTe D)?


Of the smooth planes, I tend toward the bevel up, because as I said earlier, they just seem easier to operate, or, if I dare, a bit more "idiot proof". That's based *almost* on nothing, so please tell me if I'm completely missing the boat here. I do see that Paul Sellers exclusively recommends bevel up planes. I just get so lost on how to set the chip breaker, and why it needs to be set a certain way, etc. Paul says on his blog that he likes to teach "technique to deal with different tasks rather than switching out irons". Now on to the second question. Why a Jack plane over a Smooth plane? Seems like the difference is 5" of sole.

OK, I forgot that I actually have a third question which is relevant. When using a shooting board, what keeps the blade from digging into the shooting board?

Though the plane you link is a nice looking plane and likely a great user it seems a bit high priced. Besides, you will still have the same problem of setting the chip breaker the first time you need to sharpen the blade. For some it is second nature, for others it is as confounding as understanding women. The simplicity of the LV bevel up planes is a few less moving parts to cause confusion.

The 5" of extra sole tend to keep the plane from following the "hills and valleys" of the surface of a board or panel to be smoothed. For cleaning up any roughness left by a powered planer the short sole might be a little easier for such tasks.

Mike Henderson gave an excellent answer to your shooting board question, no need for my comments.

jtk

[Roy Lindberry]

Of the smooth planes, I tend toward the bevel up, because as I said earlier, they just seem easier to operate, or, if I dare, a bit more "idiot proof". That's based *almost* on nothing, so please tell me if I'm completely missing the boat here. I do see that Paul Sellers exclusively recommends bevel up planes. I just get so lost on how to set the chip breaker, and why it needs to be set a certain way, etc. Paul says on his blog that he likes to teach "technique to deal with different tasks rather than switching out irons". Now on to the second question. Why a Jack plane over a Smooth plane? Seems like the difference is 5" of sole.


Overall, they are a bit easier to use, though lateral adjustment takes practice on the bevel up jack (at least the LN), since there is no mechanical adjuster.

Additionally, if you are looking for a "smoothing" plane (used to leave smooth, finish read surfaces), then realize that a bevel up iron takes more work to get enough camber to keep from leaving tracks on the wood. That is the reason I prefer bevel down for smoothing, bevel up for shooting.

[Derek Cohen]

Mike, I believe that the Veritas Low Angle Smoother (LAS) is exactly what you want. It is indeed a "point-and-shoot" plane - extremely easy to set up, and has predictable and excellent results. Using a BD plane with a chipbreaker, such as a Stanley #4, does require more effort. At the end of the day, both planes are capable of superb performance.

The LAS is best set up with a 38- or 50 degree bevel for smoothing difficult grain. With a 25 degree bevel it works well on a shooting board. I would recommend only purchasing the blades with a 25 degree bevel from Lee Valley, and then adding a secondary bevel of your choice with a honing guide. This is the easiest way to prepare a BU plane blade, and the most efficient way if you plan to camber blades for a smoother. The 25 degree blade for shooting is not cambered. Lastly, get the PM-V11 blades if you can afford them. They are worth it in the long run - better edge holding and a finer edge.

I think that you will get more use out of this plane than a router plane, which can come later.

Enjoy your new purchase.

Regards from Perth

Derek

[James Pallas]

I would suggest the LVLA Jack. Great shooting board plane. If you are getting a good jointer/planer chances are you could use it as a smoother also. Good on end grain work. Great as a short jointer. Get all three blades and maybe even a toothed blade in PMV11 (they are worth it). Since you won't need it as a jack plane no need for a really heavy camber on any blades. If you haven't guessed yet, I have one and couldn't be happier with it. The only other plane I would suggest in its place would be the LV rabbet Jack. No shooting plane, but Derek C. figured out how to make it work as such.
Jim

[Mike Dowell]

Can you hit long grain with a standard angle plane?

I'm really having a difficult time with this decision because in one hand, I know the standard angle planes are very "versatile". On the other hand, the LA planes are versatile as well, but I don't like the idea of having to purchase multiple irons. Especially given the fact that I don't even know why one angle performs well on certain tasks, and other angles are needed for other tasks.

[Nicholas Lawrence]

Can you hit long grain with a standard angle plane?


Yes, I use a Stanley No. 7 as my shooting plane. The low angle planes, or the dedicated shooters with skewed blades will do it better I gather, but a sharp bevel down plane will handle end grain.

I do not own any of the bevel up/low angle planes (except a block plane), so I do not consider myself to be any kind of authority on them. With a simpler design, I could certainly see how the learning curve could be easier on the low angle/bevel up models. On the other hand, Stanley sold bucketloads of the bevel down design, and common sense tells you they would not have been doing that if the simpler bevel up designs were as effective for the people buying them.

Have you ever used/experimented with a properly tuned plane? A few minutes of using one could go a long way towards helping you make an informed decision. The Lie Nielsen road show is a good place to try out all the options. I do not have any low angle/bevel down planes, and Bel Air is kind of a hike from where I am. Perhaps there is a member around Baltimore who could let you handle a couple of planes to see what might work for you?

[William Fretwell]

Low angle planes behave differently with the type of wood. I would not buy a low angle smoother. A traditional style smoother is far better for awkward woods. A traditional jack plane is also very useful. I don't mind the low angle jointer but the low angle jack is a mixed bag.
Sharpening low angle plane blades can be a royal pain they are so thick. The A2 steel becomes not quite sharp fairly quickly but far from clear cut when it needs sharpening.
If Paul Sellers hasn't bought them all find a Bailey or Stanley jack & smoother from yesteryear. Their ease of sharpening & use will be less frustrating. As Paul Sellers points out 200 years ago at the height of quality work they had none of this low angle stuff.

[Derek Cohen]

Hi Mike

A standard angle (45 degrees) is the most common angle used to plane face (long) grain. For most woods - namely all those that are straight-grained - this is all one needs to use for a final finish. It is only when one planes grain that is interlocked (has reversals) that one must do something more to avoid tearout. Basically you then have two choices: either use a closed up chipbreaker (this could be done on a Stanley #4), or use a high cutting angle (this could be a 38 - 50 degree bevel on a BU plane, or a BD plane with a high angle frog).

The reason I supported the LAS is that I do not anticipate that you will be dimensioning yet with a handplane. You already have a block plane for trimming. Now you want a smoother for finishing. The rest is done on machines. For this reason you do not need a LA Jack. The LAS will do a good job shooting as well as smoothing. You will need two blades for the plane: one at 25 degrees (for shooting end grain) and another at (say) 38 degrees (for smoothing).

Regards from Perth

Derek

[Derek Cohen]

Low angle planes behave differently with the type of wood. I would not buy a low angle smoother. A traditional style smoother is far better for awkward woods. A traditional jack plane is also very useful. I don't mind the low angle jointer but the low angle jack is a mixed bag.
Sharpening low angle plane blades can be a royal pain they are so thick. The A2 steel becomes not quite sharp fairly quickly but far from clear cut when it needs sharpening.
If Paul Sellers hasn't bought them all find a Bailey or Stanley jack & smoother from yesteryear. Their ease of sharpening & use will be less frustrating. As Paul Sellers points out 200 years ago at the height of quality work they had none of this low angle stuff.

Sorry William, but this is not correct.

First of all, all planes behave the same way - they plane wood. The BU (or low angle) and BD planes simply orient the blades differently. Until a few years ago, before the chipbreaker re-emerged as a method to control tearout, a high cutting angle was the way to go. The BU plane was able to achieve this by altering its bevel angle. For example, add a 50 degree bevel to the 12 degree bed on a LA Smoother, and you achieve a 62 degree cutting angle, which is similar to the 60 degrees of a wooden HNT Gordon (bevel down) smoother. Both these planes can produce superior results controlling tearout on interlocked grain. I have a little experience here.

Paul Sellers owns and uses BU planes. Veritas actually. The only reason he does not use them in his school or videos is that he wants to push cheaply obtainable tools, and not new or relatively expensive ones.

Further, the LA planes that were built 100 years ago were made from fragile grey iron. I have a Stanley #62, which works very well, but I have to be careful not to stress the thin iron at the mouth. Many of these planes crack here. By contrast, the planes built by Veritas and LN are built in ductile iron, which is very durable. Had this been available 100 or 200 years ago, then I imagine the story today would have been very different.

For reference, I work very interlocked timbers. Today my first choice is a BD plane. However I used BU planes for many years and they were my first choice then along with high angled woodies. I still use them today as they continue to work very well. Working is working.

Regards from Perth

Derek

[Mike Dowell]

Well, as I said before, I don't plan on dimensioning lumber by hand. I use my Apron plane exclusively for trimming, but many times it just feels small, heck, it is small. So, I just want something to bevel box lids, sure up proud dovetail pins, sure up intentionally proud wood joints, etc.. Basically a flush trimming tool. I have shot veneer with my Apron plane which worked amazingly. I've never shot the short end of a board, or miter, or anything like that.

[Jim Koepke]

[edited]
So, I just want something to bevel box lids, sure up proud dovetail pins, sure up intentionally proud wood joints, etc.. Basically a flush trimming tool.

Almost any plane will work to bevel box lids. When it comes to trimming proud dovetail pins and flush trimming joints a low angle bevel up plane will have an advantage.

Before acquiring a Low Angle Bevel Up Jack my bevel down planes were used for shooting end grain. Because of a messed up right shoulder this was difficult. Pushing a low angle bevel up plane through the work was less wear and tear on my shoulder and left a better surface. Trimming proud joinery is mostly cutting and smoothing end grain.

jtk

[Nicholas Lawrence]

Well, as I said before, I don't plan on dimensioning lumber by hand. I use my Apron plane exclusively for trimming, but many times it just feels small, heck, it is small. So, I just want something to bevel box lids, sure up proud dovetail pins, sure up intentionally proud wood joints, etc.. Basically a flush trimming tool. I have shot veneer with my Apron plane which worked amazingly. I've never shot the short end of a board, or miter, or anything like that.

If you are just looking for a bigger version of your low angle block plane, the low angle smoother is probably the logical choice. Looking back at your original post, it looks like part of your question was O1 compared to A2 or PMV 11. If you use oilstones to sharpen, you should ask someone who uses them whether they can sharpen A2, which is harder than the O1 I believe. I think most waterstones (mine are Norton) can do it, but it is definitely slower sharpening my A2 irons over my other stuff.

I do not own any PMV 11, but I understand it is superior to either O1 (holds an edge longer) or A2 (easier to sharpen). People on this board that I respect have indicated PMV 11 is worth the extra $10 or whatever the difference is. If I were buying a Veritas plane, I would probably buy the PMV 11 iron. As far as I know if you use the PMV 11, it does not matter what type of stones you use to sharpen, but people who have used it are better positioned to tell you that.

If you are hung up on the choice of bevel angles, my advice would be not to worry about it. Buy the plane, use it, and if what it comes with does not work you can change the bevel, buy more irons, etc. I think that is basically what Derek is saying as well.

I would not pay $175 for a restored Stanley No. 4.

[Jim Koepke]

If I were buying a Veritas plane, I would probably buy the PMV 11 iron.

When Lee Valley released its Cast Round Spokeshave based on the Preston design, my wallet was endangered. It did not matter to me the blade was PM-V11.

Since it arrived the blade has impressed me with its edge retention abilities.

If a need came for me to replace a blade, my first choice would be a blade made of PM-V11 if it were available.

jtk

[Prashun Patel]

Mike-
Unfortunately this is a personal decision based on ergonomics and convenience.

There are too many factors to consider. However, all of the planes mentioned below have excellent resale value, so at the worst, you're really just renting them for a while if you do not like them. So, don't get too bogged down.

I own an LN#4 and it is currently my favorite plane. It just works for better than I could make the Bevel up smoother work (owned and sold). I do own the LVLA jack which I have come to appreciate. It is good for shooting and pretty versatile. Bevel up planes are nice because they're simple and tool-less to take apart for sharpening; the downside is that without a chip breaker you have to rely on varying the angle to handle tear out. With a BD plane, a single blade may suffice for all woods you encounter, but each time you have to undo the lever cap with a screw driver, and reset the chip breaker. It's enough of a pain at the beginning that it MIGHT discourage you from sharpening as frequently as you should.

Of course, nobody has asked the question: how are you sharpening? A nice set of Sigma's might be a wise spend...

Aw heck. Get the bevel up Jack. You won't regret that one. Use it to smooth and shoot for now.

[James Pallas]

One other thought comes to mind. The LV low angle block plane with the optional grips. It makes the plane into a mini smoother with a front knob and a rear tote. From your last post that may work for you.
Jim

[lowell holmes]

I have the same spoke shave. It is indeed an impressive tool.

[Dan Barr]

Lee Valley Jack Rabbet. It is my next "must have." Jack and smoother are both great. But, with the fence, nickers, etc., the Jack Rabbet takes the top spot for me. I've already got enough smoothers for 3 shops. My Stanley no. 5 dang near doubles as a smoother anyway. The Jack Rabbet is just too useful to pass up.

Dan

[William Fretwell]

Sorry William, but this is not correct.

First of all, all planes behave the same way - they plane wood. The BU (or low angle) and BD planes simply orient the blades differently. Until a few years ago, before the chipbreaker re-emerged as a method to control tearout, a high cutting angle was the way to go. The BU plane was able to achieve this by altering its bevel angle. For example, add a 50 degree bevel to the 12 degree bed on a LA Smoother, and you achieve a 62 degree cutting angle, which is similar to the 60 degrees of a wooden HNT Gordon (bevel down) smoother. Both these planes can produce superior results controlling tearout on interlocked grain. I have a little experience here.

Paul Sellers owns and uses BU planes. Veritas actually. The only reason he does not use them in his school or videos is that he wants to push cheaply obtainable tools, and not new or relatively expensive ones.

Further, the LA planes that were built 100 years ago were made from fragile grey iron. I have a Stanley #62, which works very well, but I have to be careful not to stress the thin iron at the mouth. Many of these planes crack here. By contrast, the planes built by Veritas and LN are built in ductile iron, which is very durable. Had this been available 100 or 200 years ago, then I imagine the story today would have been very different.

For reference, I work very interlocked timbers. Today my first choice is a BD plane. However I used BU planes for many years and they were my first choice then along with high angled woodies. I still use them today as they continue to work very well. Working is working.

Regards from Perth

Derek

Working is working and teat out is not working! Low angle planes can do so much damage to awkward grain you can destroy your wood. Bevel down planes reduce this frustration, as do high angle planes. Lots of people don't have all three.
Your current plane preference agrees with this!

All planes plane wood but they do not behave the same!

Yes I've seen Paul Sellers with a LV low angle plane comparing it to older planes and on his lovely straight grain oak board can find no difference between any plane he uses. Sadly lots of my wood is not ideal so in the real world it does make a difference.
No comment on sharpening those thick blades? Try changing the angle a few degrees! Micro bevel no longer so 'micro'? Lots and lots of work.

[Derek Cohen]

Working is working and teat out is not working! Low angle planes can do so much damage to awkward grain you can destroy your wood. Bevel down planes reduce this frustration, as do high angle planes. Lots of people don't have all three.
Your current plane preference agrees with this!

All planes plane wood but they do not behave the same!

Yes I've seen Paul Sellers with a LV low angle plane comparing it to older planes and on his lovely straight grain oak board can find no difference between any plane he uses. Sadly lots of my wood is not ideal so in the real world it does make a difference.
No comment on sharpening those thick blades? Try changing the angle a few degrees! Micro bevel no longer so 'micro'? Lots and lots of work.

With respect William, I believe that you are quoting Paul Sellers, and not speaking from experience. I have seen his blog post when he compared his LA Jack with a Stanley #4, obtaining tearout on oak with the LAJ and "cleaning it up" with the #4. All is not what it seems. Paul came in for some criticism in that blog. He claimed he also used a higher bevel angle, but I (and many others here) know that this is not possible. Someone is telling porkies (http://onlineslangdictionary.com/meaning-definition-of/porkies).

Paul Sellers likes to hone his blades at around 30 degrees. He uses a rounded bevel, and is not seeking to go beyond 30 degrees with his method. Now a 30 degree bevel on the LAJ will create a 42 degree cutting angle. This is lower than the #4, which is 45 degrees. The difference does not seem much to me, but the 30 degree bevel could have been lower. A difference of 5 degrees can be significant. This is not comparing apples with apples.

Anyway, it should not make any difference what plane you use if both are cutting at 45 degrees and the chipbreaker is not used (Paul Sellers does not use the chipbreaker to control tearout. He uses rather benign wood and then takes fine shavings). The wood cannot tell what type of plane is in use.

As for the BU plane being the lesser performer (sans chipbreaker), all one has to do is increase the bevel angle on the BU plane, and (at a high enough angle, say 60 degrees included angle) it will plane anything - and well beyond - a non-chipbreakered Stanley. And I say this from experience as all the wood I work is highly interlocked.

Sharpening? I freehand sharpen blades, and this is one of the reasons I prefer a BD plane (but this is sheer laziness on my part). BU planes respond better to a honing guide since the secondary bevel needs to be accurate. I do not change bevel angles on a blade, however; I only use 50 degrees for smoothing or jointing, and 25 degrees for shooting or cross-grain traversing. That is 2 blades. Now if one is a honing guide user, my objection to a BU plane goes away. I might add that I use a LN or Eclipse guide for the 50 degrees. It is pretty easy to slide in the blade, use a stop for projection, and hone away. All one requires is a micro secondary bevel (I've written scads on this over a decade of using BU planes). The 25 degree bevel is freehand sharpened, so this one is easy-peasy.

Regards from Perth

Derek

[Pat Barry]

Well, as I said before, I don't plan on dimensioning lumber by hand. I use my Apron plane exclusively for trimming, but many times it just feels small, heck, it is small. So, I just want something to bevel box lids, sure up proud dovetail pins, sure up intentionally proud wood joints, etc.. Basically a flush trimming tool. I have shot veneer with my Apron plane which worked amazingly. I've never shot the short end of a board, or miter, or anything like that.
Some of the tasks that you want to use your new tool for are difficult and require super sharp edges to be most effective. These types of work are best done with low angle tools and skewed blades kick the effectiveness on these difficult situations up a notch. I think you are looking for a smaller tool as well. If it were me, for the stated work, I would go with something like the LV SBUS or maybe the LV Edge Trimmer with skewed blade.

[Nicholas Lawrence]

When Lee Valley released its Cast Round Spokeshave based on the Preston design, my wallet was endangered. It did not matter to me the blade was PM-V11.

Since it arrived the blade has impressed me with its edge retention abilities.

If a need came for me to replace a blade, my first choice would be a blade made of PM-V11 if it were available.

jtk

Jim, what do you use to sharpen the PMV 11? Have you sharpened it enough to have insight into how it compares to A2 or O1?

[Prashun Patel]

Nicholas- I have a PM-V11 and an A2 blade for my jack plane. It does seem to last longer than A2, but honestly, I never had a complaint with A2 duration. It was a solution to a problem that (for me) didn't exist. I have not tried PMv11 in chisels. I'm curious about that - especially on mortise chisels. I do not notice PMV11 to be harder to sharpen than A2.

[Derek Cohen]

Jim, what do you use to sharpen the PMV 11? Have you sharpened it enough to have insight into how it compares to A2 or O1?

Nicholas, you have asked this same question in two separate threads now. I was on the team that assessed a whole bunch of steels for Lee Valley (I must be the only guy with blades for BU planes in O1, A2, CPM-3V, M2, and PM-V11). It narrowed down to a few, and PM-V11 stood out from the rest. PM-V11 really does hold an edge significantly longer than A2. I'd rate this conservatively as 50% longer. And it takes an edge similar to O1. It holds an edge many times longer than O1.

By now many, many woodworkers have used PM-V11 and compared it with A2 and O1. They will back this up.

I would not recommend sharpening PM-V11 with oilstones. I also would not recommend honing A2 with oilstones either. Oilstones are OK for O1 steel. For the abrasion-resistant steels, use more modern media. I have used Shapton and Sigma waterstones very successfully.

Regards from Perth

Derek

[William Fretwell]

With respect William, I believe that you are quoting Paul Sellers, and not speaking from experience. He claimed he also used a higher bevel angle, but I (and many others here) know that this is not possible. Someone is telling porkies (http://onlineslangdictionary.com/meaning-definition-of/porkies).

Paul Sellers likes to hone his blades at around 30 degrees. He uses a rounded bevel, and is not seeking to go beyond 30 degrees with his method. Now a 30 degree bevel on the LAJ will create a 42 degree cutting angle. This is lower than the #4, which is 45 degrees. The difference does not seem much to me, but the 30 degree bevel could have been lower. A difference of 5 degrees can be significant. This is not comparing apples with apples.

Anyway, it should not make any difference what plane you use if both are cutting at 45 degrees and the chipbreaker is not used (Paul Sellers does not use the chipbreaker to control tearout. He uses rather benign wood and then takes fine shavings). The wood cannot tell what type of plane is in use.

As for the BU plane being the lesser performer (sans chipbreaker), all one has to do is increase the bevel angle on the BU plane, and (at a high enough angle, say 60 degrees included angle) it will plane anything - and well beyond - a non-chipbreakered Stanley. And I say this from experience as all the wood I work is highly interlocked.

Sharpening? I freehand sharpen blades, and this is one of the reasons I prefer a BD plane (but this is sheer laziness on my part). BU planes respond better to a honing guide since the secondary bevel needs to be accurate. I do not change bevel angles on a blade, however; I only use 50 degrees for smoothing or jointing, and 25 degrees for shooting or cross-grain traversing. That is 2 blades. Now if one is a honing guide user, my objection to a BU plane goes away. I might add that I use a LN or Eclipse guide for the 50 degrees. It is pretty easy to slide in the blade, use a stop for projection, and hone away. All one requires is a micro secondary bevel (I've written scads on this over a decade of using BU planes). The 25 degree bevel is freehand sharpened, so this one is easy-peasy.

Regards from Perth

Derek

No Derek I speak from experience. I have 2 blades for each LV plane. I can't imagine Paul Sellers getting the old Stanley's working without the chip breaker, mine will not.
You can sharpen the micro bevel by hand a few times 'easy peasy' but when you have to restore the main angle it is a major amount of work. You end up needing lots of sharpening equipment, including the guide; but that's what LV sells...........more stuff.

I am no expert on Paul Sellers video's I have watched a few. His castle workshop is 'living the dream'. His aim is to make woodwork seem simple and inexpensive to encourage people to get started. If enough people start some will continue.

I am something of an expert on LV. I lived near their first store in Ottawa and have been a customer for 30 years. I have watched their morals decline and their proliferation of complication to do everything with more explode. Despite this, 2% of what they sell are gems, some are Veritas (eg:large shoulder plane (and free retrofit brass knobs!)). Their re-invention at times horrendous others are good. They do try & fix their errors I will give them that and service is good. I had a new screw down for my jointer in a day after the original seized, (the jointer guide is a throw away item). I have some early catalogues, how they have changed!

I do freehand sharpen my Bailey/Stanley planes. The push reach technique inevitably creates a convex edge.

I have not bought a third blade for my LV planes, my enthusiasm for sharpening them holds me back. Their choice of 3 types of steel in several angles is classic. Don't like sharpening this one? Try this.....or this.

Your interlocked grain clearly responds well to your plane, my black walnut does not; it is all about the wood. Here in Ontario I use cherry, black walnut, oak, maple, ash and pine. I have several tons of poplar also. We don't have the exotic hardwoods in Australia. Recently at my local saw mill I watched 3 ft wide 18 ft long cherry boards being cut! (A very rare sight!). The tree owner was having a woodgasm. If it was not for cherry, furniture building here would be rather sad.

[Derek Cohen]

Nicholas- I have a PM-V11 and an A2 blade for my jack plane. It does seem to last longer than A2, but honestly, I never had a complaint with A2 duration. It was a solution to a problem that (for me) didn't exist. I have not tried PMv11 in chisels. I'm curious about that - especially on mortise chisels. I do not notice PMV11 to be harder to sharpen than A2.

Hi Prushan

I have compared PM-V11 against other steels in bench chisels. PM-V11 was just shaded by White Steel, but left O1 and A2 for dead.

http://www.inthewoodshop.com/ToolReviews/FourChiselSteelsCompared.html

I also compared the Veritas mortice chisels in A2 and PM-V11 pre-production. I "know" that the PM steel should outlast A2 steel, but frankly both were so good in the tests I ran forever (I literally chopped metres of mortices, and the chisels kept going), and I could not determine how much better PM was than A2. For all practical purposes, the Veritas mortice chisels in A2 steel should satisfy anyone.

Regards from Perth

Derek

[Nicholas Lawrence]

Nicholas, you have asked this same question in two separate threads now.

It really is not the same question. It looks like Kees used some lapping film I have never heard of. The fact that lapping film worked for him does not necessarily mean that is what Jim has found to work for him. Not everyone in the world does things exactly the same way after all. And since neither question was directed to you, I don't know why you should be upset.

I do appreciate your observations as well, and hopefully they will be helpful to the original poster.

[Nicholas Lawrence]

Nicholas- I have a PM-V11 and an A2 blade for my jack plane. It does seem to last longer than A2, but honestly, I never had a complaint with A2 duration. It was a solution to a problem that (for me) didn't exist. I have not tried PMv11 in chisels. I'm curious about that - especially on mortise chisels. I do not notice PMV11 to be harder to sharpen than A2.

Thanks. It is an interesting topic, and I am curious about it as well. I have a number of antique mortise chisels and plane blades that I like a lot, and it would interesting to see the composition of the older steels. I imagine it probably varied from manufacturer to manufacturer and from country to country. I have never sat down and tried to do a controlled experiment comparing one of my old plane blades to a modern one or anything like that, I just subjectively feel like they hold up quite well. Maybe my perception is skewed by nostalgia or something though.

[Jim Koepke]

[edited]
what Jim has found to work for him.

Almost all of my blades are sharpened on waterstones when it is warm enough in my shop. On colder days the oilstones are used. My PM-V11 blade has not yet been used on oilstones to my recollection.

If things get bad on a cold day with an A2 blade or the PM-V11 blade there is always my abrasive sheets on my Mk II Power sharpening system to save the day.

jtk

[lowell holmes]

[QUOTE=Jim Koepke;2638926]Almost all of my blades are sharpened on waterstones when it is warm enough in my shop. On colder days the oilstones are used.

- or the kitchen table.:)
Don't tell me you haven't done that yet.

It is 75 degrees in Galveston County Texas this week. Tomorrow we are supposed to awaken to a blizzard. It is supposed to be below 40 degrees.

[Jim Koepke]

Don't tell me you haven't done that yet.

Okay, I won't tell about not doing one of the things that would likely get SWMBO to strangle me in my sleep.

jtk

[Mike Dowell]

This is what I hate about myself; one of my most undesirable character traits - over-thinking. I started this thread 3 days ago, have fallen asleep each of these nights pondering my choice, and have spent hours on youtube looking at reviews, read through old threads of similar content, etc... And I STILL HAVEN'T DECIDED ON WHICH PLANE TO GET!!!!

I just can't decide LV BU smoother, or LV #4. I feel like from this thread I have all the arguments necessary to make a judgment, but I can't. Here's a question I have not asked: What are the actual limitations of the BU plane? And, why exactly do those limitations not exist on the #4?

I realize for the BU that the 25 degree iron is for end grain and shooting, where the 38 degree is for smoothing difficult grain. I can just buy the BU with the 38 degree iron and be good(I think), but what's the fault in getting the #4 if it will do all of the above with no iron change? Something to do with chip breaker setup?

Admittedly, I feel sort of bad about dragging what *should* be a very simple argument, but as I said, I'm a major thinker, and also an anal-retentive pain in my own *$$.

[Kevin Hampshire]

Mike, If you intend to shoot with your LV BU plane, I think you'll want a LAS and not the BUS. The sides of the BUS aren't really machined for use as a shooting plane.

[James Pallas]

Mike, IMO to have a tool and limit its capability is not good use. To me it would be like having only a 1/4 bit for a drill. It will do a lot but the potential is much more. I use BU planes almost exclusively now. If I was using BD planes I would most likely have different frogs for them.
Jim

[Mike Dowell]

Alright, I'm going to just go ahead with the LA. Seems like the vast majority recommendation here is for that piece, and I certainly respect the opinions here more than anywhere else.

Question: There are three blades - 25d, 38d, and 50d. What are the tasks for each one? It comes with the 25d, but can I get away with just the 38d as an addon?

[Derek Cohen]

Mike, since you are primarily interested in building boxes, the LAS is the largest plane you can use. Actually, the SBUS would be a better size for planing edges, but it would not shoot as well as the LAS. And, yes, you will want to shoot ends once you learn how this will increase the accuracy and the ease of your dimensioning.

With regards blades, my recommendation is to only get 25 degree bevels. Add the bevel angle of your choice. You will have greater flexibility this way, but importantly sharpening will be easier.

I assume that that you will be using a honing guide (which one do you use?). Honing guides work on the principle that a secondary bevel reduces the amount of steel that needs to be honed. In other words, there is less steel to remove by adding a 38 degree secondary bevel to a 25 degree primary bevel, than honing the full face of a 38 degree bevel. I know that Lee Valley sell a range of blades - it seems tempting that this is a shortcut. It is not. Just get blades with a 25 degree bevel. As mentioned earlier, I only use 2 blades: shooting at 25 degrees and planing at 50 degrees.

25 degrees for end grain
38 degrees for mild-moderate straight face grain
50 degrees for interlocked face grain

For more details on honing BU blades, an article I wrote several years ago: http://www.inthewoodshop.com/WoodworkTechniques/TheSecretToCamberinBUPlaneBlades.html

Regards from Perth

Derek

[Mike Dowell]

Mike, since you are primarily interested in building boxes, the LAS is the largest plane you can use. Actually, the SBUS would be a better size for planing edges, but it would not shoot as well as the LAS. And, yes, you will want to shoot ends once you learn how this will increase the accuracy and the ease of your dimensioning.

With regards blades, my recommendation is to only get 25 degree bevels. Add the bevel angle of your choice. You will have greater flexibility this way, but importantly sharpening will be easier.

I assume that that you will be using a honing guide (which one do you use?). Honing guides work on the principle that a secondary bevel reduces the amount of steel that needs to be honed. In other words, there is less steel to remove by adding a 38 degree secondary bevel to a 25 degree primary bevel, than honing the full face of a 38 degree bevel. I know that Lee Valley sell a range of blades - it seems tempting that this is a shortcut. It is not. Just get blades with a 25 degree bevel. As mentioned earlier, I only use 2 blades: shooting at 25 degrees and planing at 50 degrees.

25 degrees for end grain
38 degrees for mild-moderate straight face grain
50 degrees for interlocked face grain

For more details on honing BU blades, an article I wrote several years ago: http://www.inthewoodshop.com/WoodworkTechniques/TheSecretToCamberinBUPlaneBlades.html

Regards from Perth

Derek


I use a LV MK II honing guide. So are you saying to get the BU plane, and one extra 25 degree blade, then take that blade and bevel it to 50 degrees?

[Derek Cohen]

I use a LV MK II honing guide. So are you saying to get the BU plane, and one extra 25 degree blade, then take that blade and bevel it to 50 degrees?

Yes.

To be clear, add a 50 degree secondary micro bevel to the second blade. And the plane of choice is the LAS.

Regards from Perth

Derek

[John Schtrumpf]

Just to remove any ambiguity for you:

LAS = Veritas® Low-Angle Smooth Plane

That plane has machined sides, so it can be used for shooting.

[Mike Dowell]

Just to remove any ambiguity for you:

LAS = Veritas® Low-Angle Smooth Plane

That plane has machined sides, so it can be used for shooting.I appreciate the ambiguity removal. I did in fact know what he meant by LAS, but admittedly, I do get very easily lost in the acronyms once they start flying. LAS, BU, SBUS(still haven't figured this one out), LV, LN - wow... we really make a lot of shortcuts!

[Brian Holcombe]

Mike,

Apologies that I'm late to the party. If you have not purchased a plane I recommend a #4 with a cap iron, either LV or LN. It will be an incredibly useful tool both in your personal life (well....your hobby that is, it won't help your relationship) and in your business. Smoothing with a properly set cap iron goes a lot faster than sanding! If you plan to have a Minimax 12 J/P (get a 16!) for the rough work then you will likely be gluing up and smoothing, or just smoothing.

[Nicholas Lawrence]

Mike,

Apologies that I'm late to the party. If you have not purchased a plane I recommend a #4 with a cap iron, either LV or LN. It will be an incredibly useful tool both in your personal life (well....your hobby that is, it won't help your relationship) and in your business. Smoothing with a properly set cap iron goes a lot faster than sanding! If you plan to have a Minimax 12 J/P (get a 16!) for the rough work then you will likely be gluing up and smoothing, or just smoothing.

I love this place. Four pages, lord only knows how many days, and we are back to the BU/BD issue that came up on day one. And the OP has two very experienced members pointing in opposite directions! I happen to agree with Brian about BU versus BD, but all of these "what should I buy" threads illustrate how tool preferences depend so much on the individual. Some people hate the combination planes. I like mine. Some people use wooden planes for firewood, I just spent a morning using my wooden jack and can't think of anything it can't do as well or better than my Stanley. Lots of people love the Lie Nielsen and Lee Valley tools, I can't stomach the thought of spending that much on a chisel regardless of what kind of unobtanium it is made of. At $75-$100 each, they ought to sharpen themselves and make coffee to boot! But we each have our preferences, and that is what makes life interesting (or exasperating depending on your point of view).

Mike Dowell, I don't think you can go all that wrong with either recommendation. Both LV and LN hold their resale value well from what I can tell, and if you keep it waxed or oiled, don't start sandpapering the sole or doing something else to screw it up, you should be able to resell either and get a good part of your money back if you decide you want to go the other direction. Do whatever experiments you want with the blade, at worst somebody can regrind it or buy a brand new one for $30.

[lowell holmes]

I took classes from Paul while he was at Waco, Texas. I find his methods tend to work.

I have adjusted bevel angle on plane irons to minimize tear out.

It is not magic, but it can be affective under some conditions.

[Mike Dowell]

I love this place. Four pages, lord only knows how many days, and we are back to the BU/BD issue that came up on day one. And the OP has two very experienced members pointing in opposite directions! I happen to agree with Brian about BU versus BD, but all of these "what should I buy" threads illustrate how tool preferences depend so much on the individual. Some people hate the combination planes. I like mine. Some people use wooden planes for firewood, I just spent a morning using my wooden jack and can't think of anything it can't do as well or better than my Stanley. Lots of people love the Lie Nielsen and Lee Valley tools, I can't stomach the thought of spending that much on a chisel regardless of what kind of unobtanium it is made of. At $75-$100 each, they ought to sharpen themselves and make coffee to boot! But we each have our preferences, and that is what makes life interesting (or exasperating depending on your point of view).

Mike Dowell, I don't think you can go all that wrong with either recommendation. Both LV and LN hold their resale value well from what I can tell, and if you keep it waxed or oiled, don't start sandpapering the sole or doing something else to screw it up, you should be able to resell either and get a good part of your money back if you decide you want to go the other direction. Do whatever experiments you want with the blade, at worst somebody can regrind it or buy a brand new one for $30.Well DANG! My problem(I have many, but I'm referring strictly to the plane-related) is that I don't have much plane experience. I love the hell out of my apron plane, and that of course, is a low angle, so I'm pretty sure I'm going to just go with that since it's so familiar.

[Brian Holcombe]

The only way to gain experience is to first get in a little too deep ;) The path is rewarding.

[Phil Mueller]

Since moving into the foray of planes, I've been all over the place...part of the fun. My first real plane purchase was a LN #4. Being a novice, I couldn't really get it to where I "loved" it. Bought a LN 62...and it quickly became my go to plane for everything. Sold the LN #4 for about 90% of what I paid...cheep "rent" in my mind. Picked up a vintage Stanley #5 and now it's become my go to. Found a few woodies at a garage sale, resoled them and still haven't gotten comfortable with them yet. Will likely try one of those Japanese things Brian uses at some point.

My point is, this will likely not be your last purchase and you may very well move from one thing to the next over time as you continue to work with planes. I've enjoyed the journey. As Brian pointed out, it can be deep hole...but nothing you should lose sleep over. Go on...go to the website, click the box, enter your cc, and hit confirm. Then have some fun with it for awhile.

[Derek Cohen]

Mike, let me make this easier for you ...

Get the LAS. It is the right plane for you at the stage of your handplane use. The LAS is a point-and-shoot plane that will have a lot in common with the block plane you like so much. The low centre of gravity increases control, which is important on small parts, such as boxes. The LAS excells on a shooting board.

The LN #4 is an excellent smoother .... my personal preference is for a #3, which I have and enjoy using ... but it will come with a learning curve. This involves setting the chipbreaker to master tearout. The #4 has a higher centre of gravity, and is better on larger boards. It is not in the same class as the LAS on a shooting board.

The dilemma you experience is that you want to get the purchase of this plane right first time. One day you may want a #4, but my reading of the situation is that you will find the LAS more satisfying right now.

Regads from Perth

Derek

[Pat Barry]

Derek, Wouldn't the SBUS fit his needs better? Its smaller, lighter, same low angle. It would do everything he asked for.

[Derek Cohen]

Hi Pat

The SBUS is a nice plane - very similar to the LAS (but smaller, Mike, close to a #2 size), and a bit more like a larger block plane. I don't see it as a large enough step up from a block plane. The SBUS can be used on a shooting board, but it does not carry the mass, the authority there that the LAS does. I do see shooting as important for someone who makes boxes, and one of the reasons for pushing the LAS. One might then question 'why not the LAJ' (Low Angle Jack, Mike)? The LAJ is terrific on the shooting board - in a class of its own - but would be too large for boxes. It is more of a dimensioning plane and Mike does his dimensioning with machines. Consequently, a smoother-size is the better choice.

Regards from Perth

Derek

[Prashun Patel]

The las does not share the same blade size as the la jack or la jointer so if sharing the blades between the planes you might buy in the future, know that. The bevel up smoother (not the small one) does have the same blade as the jack and jointer.

[John Schtrumpf]

The las does not share the same blade size as the la jack or la jointer so if sharing the blades between the planes you might buy in the future, know that. The bevel up smoother (not the small one) does have the same blade as the jack and jointer.

The Bevel-Up Smoother doesn't have the machined sides, so not a good shooting plane.

[William Fretwell]

Mike just remember if you go classic #4 or 4&1/2 your one blade sharpening system can be done by hand easily. With the thick bevel up you will need a guide ($150) and a second blade ($50) so that's $200 of your budget! There are cheaper guides but mostly for the bevel down. I like the #4 & 1/2 as the extra width means if you round the corners for smoothing big flat surfaces you still have a decent width.
Mastering an old plane is great training you won't regret. You will come back to it all the time.

[Pat Barry]

Mike just remember if you go classic #4 or 4&1/2 your one blade sharpening system can be done by hand easily. With the thick bevel up you will need a guide ($150) and a second blade ($50) so that's $200 of your budget! .
I don't agree with either of these points. For example, I find that the wider bevel makes it easier to register the blade for working the bevel by hand and therefore less dependent on the honing guide. A second blade might be a good investment anyway but its certainly not needed. Perhaps you can elaborate on why you say that you need both the honing guide and the second blade.

[Nicholas Lawrence]

I don't agree with either of these points. For example, I find that the wider bevel makes it easier to register the blade for working the bevel by hand and therefore less dependent on the honing guide. A second blade might be a good investment anyway but its certainly not needed. Perhaps you can elaborate on why you say that you need both the honing guide and the second blade.

I don't know if this is the answer, but I have been contemplating on the BU/BD thing. I find it hard to believe that the BU planes were not more popular 100 years ago simply because the casting/metallurgy technology was not up to today's standards (this is the explanation I have read in a couple of places). The old guys were smart enough to come up with a design that would be durable with the metal they had. That makes me think there is another explanation for why BD was the vastly more common design.

Thinking along those lines, I understand the BU design can be successful with a wide variety of woods, if you hone to the right angle. But honing to 30 as opposed to 25 degrees or 35 degrees by hand is not that easy. And if you are off five or ten degrees with a BU design, it sounds like it might make a difference in the quality of the surface (I have not run some double blind study to confirm this, I don't own any, so this is just thinking out loud). On the other hand, with the BD designs, the exact angle you hone to does not matter as much, as long as the bevel is low enoug that it is the blade is the first contact with the surface, and not the back of the bevel. The cutting angle will be 45 degrees or whatever the frog is, regardless of what exactly the bevel is honed at.

25 degrees as opposed to 35 degrees might make a difference in how long the edge lasts with a BD design, but it does not make that much of a difference as to whether the plane works.

So this is a long way of saying, maybe a honing guide is more important with BU because the exact angle of the bevel is more important.

By the way, I have a honing guide I use sometimes, and it is the $10 one you can still get from Lie Nielsen. You certainly do not need to spend $150 to consistently hone to a precise angle.

[Mike Dowell]

***** HORSE IS DEAD*****

Just ordered the LV LAS. Thank you all for your patience!

[Pat Barry]

I don't know if this is the answer, but I have been contemplating on the BU/BD thing. I find it hard to believe that the BU planes were not more popular 100 years ago simply because the casting/metallurgy technology was not up to today's standards (this is the explanation I have read in a couple of places). The old guys were smart enough to come up with a design that would be durable with the metal they had. That makes me think there is another explanation for why BD was the vastly more common design.

Thinking along those lines, I understand the BU design can be successful with a wide variety of woods, if you hone to the right angle. But honing to 30 as opposed to 25 degrees or 35 degrees by hand is not that easy. And if you are off five or ten degrees with a BU design, it sounds like it might make a difference in the quality of the surface (I have not run some double blind study to confirm this, I don't own any, so this is just thinking out loud). On the other hand, with the BD designs, the exact angle you hone to does not matter as much, as long as the bevel is low enoug that it is the blade is the first contact with the surface, and not the back of the bevel. The cutting angle will be 45 degrees or whatever the frog is, regardless of what exactly the bevel is honed at.

25 degrees as opposed to 35 degrees might make a difference in how long the edge lasts with a BD design, but it does not make that much of a difference as to whether the plane works.

So this is a long way of saying, maybe a honing guide is more important with BU because the exact angle of the bevel is more important.

By the way, I have a honing guide I use sometimes, and it is the $10 one you can still get from Lie Nielsen. You certainly do not need to spend $150 to consistently hone to a precise angle.
Thanks for explaining further. I've found that the wider bevel makes it easier to register the bevel onto the stones by feel. I tend to just use this method to rehone the bevel, not to create an exact bevel from scratch. If the bevel needs to be reestablished then grinding the bevel on the the grinder would be the first step and I would take care to set that angle to meet the primary angle I'm aiming for, then use the hand technique to hone the edge on the stones.

[Patrick Chase]

I appreciate the ambiguity removal. I did in fact know what he meant by LAS, but admittedly, I do get very easily lost in the acronyms once they start flying. ..., SBUS (still haven't figured this one out)

Oh, that's easy (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SBus). Not sure why people are throwing it about in a discussion about planes, though :-).

(seriously, and as I think you figured out, it's Small Bevel Up Smooth (http://www.leevalley.com/US/wood/page.aspx?cat=1,230,41182&p=67691) plane)

[Pat Barry]

***** HORSE IS DEAD*****

Just ordered the LV LAS. Thank you all for your patience!
It's fun spending your money!

[Jim Koepke]

***** HORSE IS DEAD*****

Just ordered the LV LAS. Thank you all for your patience!

You are sure to be happy with this plane.

Let us know how you do with it when it arrives.

jtk

[Chris Hachet]

My vote would be for a LV bevel up Jack. Use it for awhile and you will know what you want next. I have 25 or so planes and use most of them regularly, LV Low Angle Jack will be one of my next planes...And get the PMV. 11, you will not regret it.

[William Fretwell]

I don't agree with either of these points. For example, I find that the wider bevel makes it easier to register the blade for working the bevel by hand and therefore less dependent on the honing guide. A second blade might be a good investment anyway but its certainly not needed. Perhaps you can elaborate on why you say that you need both the honing guide and the second blade.
Pat,
This was mostly answered for you already but here is my answer:
The hand reach & push technique will put a lovely convex edge on a blade or chisel (watch Barr Quarton's video). A big flat bevel is not required and actually fights against the movement of your arms. It is of little matter however as the front and back of the bevel will round over eventually.
What will happen is the leading edge angle will change several degrees. If this new angle is what you can work with fine but if you wish to keep the BU designed angle then you need a guide and lots of time!
The second blade gives you a whole new angle for different woods; i.e. for woods that the first angle tears out and destroys! Its really that simple!

[Patrick Chase]

***** HORSE IS DEAD*****

Just ordered the LV LAS. Thank you all for your patience!

I think that's the right choice for your requirements.

it's reasonably compact (same blade width and overall size as a #4), can be adapted to a wide range of uses with multiple blades at different bevels, and is pretty much hone-and-forget. You could get higher smoothing performance with a bevel-down 4, but it's more work to keep it in optimal tune and you'd lose some flexibility.

Only 74 more to go. Don't forget to build your "fettling shrine".

[Mike Dowell]

I think that's the right choice for your requirements.

it's reasonably compact (same blade width and overall size as a #4), can be adapted to a wide range of uses with multiple blades at different bevels, and is pretty much hone-and-forget. You could get higher smoothing performance with a bevel-down 4, but it's more work to keep it in optimal tune and you'd lose some flexibility.

Only 74 more to go. Don't forget to build your "fettling shrine".Funny thing, I already have a few others. I have the LV Apron plane which I am completely in love with. After that, I've got a Stanley 5 1/4, of which I Refer to as my "wood shop class plane", and I apparently have a wooden jack plane which is usable. I think I'll try to tune up the wood shop class plane next, and really take my time with it, trying to make it nice. I'm sure I'll be all over this place with questions. Also, I'd like to fix up my jack plane and be able to use it.

[John Schtrumpf]

Pat,
This was mostly answered for you already but here is my answer:
The hand reach & push technique will put a lovely convex edge on a blade or chisel (watch Barr Quarton's video). A big flat bevel is not required and actually fights against the movement of your arms. It is of little matter however as the front and back of the bevel will round over eventually...
Ah, but I use more of a Japanese technique like Kiyoto Tanaka. Which is better suited for thick blades to maintain the existing flat bevel. The blade is cocked 60 or more degrees (approaching sideways), this gives a much longer surface to resist rocking.

[Derek Cohen]

The thread is morphing into sharpening blades for BU planes. Here are a few comments from my experience with these planes over a decade of use.

Before the re-emergance of the chipbreaker as a means of controlling tearout, I was an absolute devotee to planes with high cutting angles. Some were high bed woodies, and some were BU metal planes. In my local West Australian woods, a cutting angle of at least 60 degrees was essential to prevent tearout.

Honing blades for high bed woodies was not an issue. They used 30 degree bevels, which is the same as used in Bailey planes today. However, BU planes were another story. A BU plane needs a roughly 50 degree bevel to achieve the desired cutting angle.

There is a simple solution for all issues today, but a decade ago it seemed that honing BU plane blades was an exercise in frustration. For one, the thick blades made it an impractically huge amount of work to camber for smoothing. The solution is to think outside the box and make the blade think it is thinner by only using a 25 degree bevel. Trying to camber a 50 degree bevel is twice the work. I published this article nearly a decade ago, and it made clambering a BU blade a simple affair: http://www.inthewoodshop.com/WoodworkTechniques/TheSecretToCamberinBUPlaneBlades.html

However, that did not change the fact that a honing guide was needed for sharpening. I get so single-minded when building a piece. Sharpening is an intrusion and, when necessary, freehand is the way to go .. grab the blade, swipe it on the media, re-insert, and back to the project. A honing guide requires a little extra time to set up the blade in a guide, and more care is needed the higher the bevel angle ... for example, a 50 degree bevel angle requires pulling the blade backwards and never pushing it forwards. The high angle makes the bevel vulnerable to digging in if pushed forwards.

One of the methods I came up with was the "hybrid" grind: hollow grind halfway into the thickness of the blade, in other words, again trying to fool the blade that it was thinner, and freehand on this thinner section. This effort is written up here: http://www.inthewoodshop.com/WoodworkTechniques/HybridProfileforFreehandSharpeningBUPlaneBlades.ht ml

The problem with that method is that holding and freehanding a blade at 50 degrees is tricky. The blade will be guided by the hollow, so it remains accurate, however it is cumbersome to hold at this angle. This makes it an impractical method after a while.

So what is the final solution to honing BU blades? The answer is that one needs to accept that a honing guide is an essential part of the sharpening method. Only hone a secondary microbevel on a 25 degree primary bevel. I have used just about all of the honing guides. The Veritas Mk II is the best all rounder, however an Eclipse type is the quickest to use in this situation, especially if you have just one bevel angle to create (in my case, a secondary of 50 degrees). I now use the LN guide plus a simple stop for blade projection. The original Eclipse is actually quicker to drop a blade into, but the LN hold the blade more securely.

While my first preference is now for BD planes, I continue to use BU planes since they are utterly reliable and easy to use. Why change? Only because I can squeeze a wider range from a BD plane, and the chipbreaker is slightly better at controlling tearout than a high cutting angle.

Regards from Perth

Derek

[Tim Cooper Louisiana]

I had my money on the LV BUS, but that you would purchase it tomorrow. Hopefully, I'll still win the pool. Grats!