Chip Breaker Screw too Short for Thicker Plane Blade

[Bob Deroeck]

I went to install a thicker blade on my Stanley No. 7, but the machine screw holding the blade to the chip breaker is too short to engage with the threads in the tapped hole of the chip breaker, because of the thicker blade.

Does anyone know the thread size and pitch for this machine screw for a Stanley Bailey No. 7. Any ideas on where I can find a longer machine screw?

Thanks.


Bob DeRoeck

[Jim Koepke]

I can check on this next time I go out to my shop.

Some questions:

Who is the maker of thicker blade?

I have seen some blades that are too thick, imo, to work well in a Stanley plane. Even with the mouth opened it may be too thick to allow the adjustment lever to engage the chip breaker.

Do you have other Stanley planes you could check to see if one of them has a longer screw?

You may already know this, but Stanley used screws that did not use commonly available threads.

I have had a couple of screws from Hock chip breakers that needed filing because they were over long. I am not sure if the threads are the same.

jtk

[don wilwol]

Cap Iron screw : 5/16” 18tpi BSW

[Bob Deroeck]

I found a slightly longer screw on an English-made Stanley No. 5 I own. It is just long enough to work on the No. 7 chipbreaker with the thicker blade.

The thicker blade is 0.120 inches thick. The adjustment lever engages adequately, but I'll need to open the throat with a file to use this blade. The blade has no mark on it, so I don't know the manufacturer. I got it with a bunch of blades it bought as a package deal.

Are there any downsides to opening the throat slightly with a file? If using a thinner blade and I want a narrow throat, can't I just move the frog forward? Or, am I missing something?

Bob

[don wilwol]

You can and should just move the frog forward. The only downside to filing is you can never put that metal back, and it will hurt collector value if there is or will be any.