The Trio of planes

[Mark Singer]

There have already been several posts on the Veritas bevel up planes....the Jack , Jointer and Smoother. Ryan and I were working on hanging doors yesterday and I really appreciate how good these planes are.

For a pair of doors in one opening that are out swinging it is helpful to bevel the inside edge where the doors meet. I set the Jointer fence for a slight angle ....checking it with a square....in a few passes...done ..it does a great job!

The pair ended up with a slight "belly" as the meet on the long edge. I identified the problem using a straight edge ....made a pencil line....switched to the Jack to have more control...ended with a couple of passes using the jointer....lined them up....Perfect!

I have a couple of power planes...the Rockwell Porta Plane...(Porter Cable) this is the door hangers classic tool...I have used this for over 25 years!..I didn't even reach once for it..I also have a great little Hitachi power plane...I used it on the first door and then switched to the jointer. A lot better control and no plane marks.

My latest addition is the Smoother BUS and even without sharpening...amazing results...

Sharing the same blades is a big plus...

We tryed to measure the thinness of shaving yesterday.... ,001 " ! and that is a full width shaving!
I really did no tune up on these planes. Very little sharpening and still terrific results

The often asked question of "which planes should I get?" ....Until something better comes along....this will be my answer

[Gene Collison]

Mark,

I would have to agree with you 100%. Awesome kit!

Gene

[Dan Larson]

The handplane industry has not exactly been a hotbed of innovation in recent decades. However, I think Lee Valley is an exception in this area. Because they are so versatile, these bevel up bench planes seem to be just the ticket for a beginner like me. Hopefully Santa Claus will stop by LV on my behalf in a few months.:D

[Bob Noles]

Mark,

You are starting to make me question why I have chased after a collection of old Stanley's for the past year. I wonder if it is time to auction what I have and go after LV instead. They sure look and sound good and just think of the restoration time I could save. :rolleyes:

[Roy Wall]

Mark,

Did you just "wedge" a strip of wood against the side of the plane & the fence to create the desired angle.......??

Or is there some sort of adjustment feature on the fence???

How do these planes compare to the LN 164 and the LN 62 ??

[Mark Singer]

Mark,

Did you just "wedge" a strip of wood against the side of the plane & the fence to create the desired angle.......??

Or is there some sort of adjustment feature on the fence???

How do these planes compare to the LN 164 and the LN 62 ??

There is an adjustment screw and 2 brass thumb screws so you can set it at a chosen angle. I have the LN 164 and I think the Veritas perform better...

[Charles Stanford]

I assume these new planes replaced others that you have and I was wondering if your old ones are for sale.

[Mark Singer]

I assume these new planes replaced others that you have and I was wondering if your old ones are for sale.

I am in Sonoma now tasting wine and eating....I am planning resturant #6 right now so I guess you can call it research....the kind I enjoy:rolleyes: I just sold a couple of Primus one here on SMC....I will see what I have to sell when I get back home...there may be a couple more.

[Joe Unni]

Mark,

If you had to pick just one of these, which would it be? Or better stated - which would you recommend?

-joe

[Steve Evans]

I just received the BU smoother. It's a very nice plane. I have a 4 1/2, so it's pretty comparable sizewise to that. So far I prefer it over the 4 1/2, but that might just be new toy-it-is. The versatility/intercompatability of blades, of this trio might just have me selling off some other planes if they're not getting used.

[Greg Sloop]

"How do these planes compare to the LN 164 and the LN 62 ??"
<o:p> </o:p>
I have used the 164 and actually owned the LN62.

The 164 is nice, and works well. I think, however, even given my limited time with the 164, I would without reservation prefer the <st1:City><st1:place>LV</st1:place></st1:City> heavy smoother. It's heavier, which I prefer, and I much prefer the mouth adjust and the lack of the adjuster attachment on the iron that exists on the LN 164.

As for the LN62...
I had this plane and really liked it. However when the <st1:City><st1:place>LV</st1:place></st1:City> 62.5 came out I was so very impressed with it that I switched. I put the LN, along with 3 addl irons, up on ebay and sold it at a loss. I then bought the <st1:City><st1:place>LV</st1:place></st1:City> 62.5.

Here's the reasoning I used. (Generally pluses for the <st1:City><st1:place>LV</st1:place></st1:City> stuff)

1) The sole in front of the mouth is longer for the Jack and Jointer - not sure about smoother. This gives you more registration before the iron meets the wood. It is very nice for short or shorter pieces.

2) The adjuster/lateral adjust is *very* nice. Very smooth, almost no play/back-lash. The LN is good, but not as nice. (I don't find the lateral adjust, or lack of it on LN planes to be an issue though.)

3) The "cap iron"/hold-down mechanism (or whatever you want to call it on a bevel-up plane is a better design on the <st1:City><st1:place>LV.</st1:place></st1:City> My LN62 was prissy about this. There was only a very small sweet spot where the hold down wasn't too tight and you could easily adjust iron projection or too loose where it would chatter. Further, it seemed to loosen itself up. You'd start at the sweet spot and find a few minutes later it was getting way too loose. I suppose lock-tite would have fixed it, but it's one of those things you never get to, ya know?

4) Initially, I didn't realize that <st1:City><st1:place>LV</st1:place></st1:City> intended to make all their new bevel-up planes use the same irons All the new <st1:City><st1:place>LV</st1:place></st1:City> bevel up planes share irons. (<st1:City><st1:place>LV</st1:place></st1:City> 62.5, heavy smoother, and jointer.) I now have all of them, with six total irons. This allows me to have iron angles from 25 to 53 degrees for every plane without having to buy at least three irons for each plane. At $30+ a whack, that can save you at least 30-60 a plane - vs- LN. (I'll probably end up with a couple more irons than I would otherwise, but still it's going to save me in excess of a $100 anyway.)

5) The mouth adjust stop on the <st1:City><st1:place>LV.</st1:place></st1:City> There's a little screw that prevents the adjustable mouth from bashing into your iron. Especially with the LN - that eccentric mouth adjust ring was really sticky on my 62. It was super easy to push too hard on it, and send the mouth winging into the iron.

On the flip side...that "stop" _can_ be a pain when the mouth is way open. In this case, shavings will often have their tip catch the stop screw head and curl up and really stick there. They can be a pain to clear. However, since I don't often use them with a rank cut and the mouth _wide_ open, it doesn't happen to me often.

A few minuses.
Looks. Truly, the <st1:City><st1:place>LV</st1:place></st1:City> stuff looks more utilitarian than the LN stuff. Not as much brass, not as aesthetically appealing. But Holtey looks a lot better than LN too. Doesn't mean I'm going to get a Holtey though. (Though, Holtey probably performs better than LN. LN, IMHO doesn't outperform the <st1:City><st1:place>LV.</st1:place></st1:City>)
Verdict: I'm more than willing to lose a little glitz for *very* significantly less cost and significantly *better* performance. (The jointer price is a big difference!)

Totes: Though I find the totes to be perfectly fine on the <st1:City><st1:place>LV</st1:place></st1:City> stuff, some seem to dislike them.
Verdict: See if you like them. Most find them acceptable.

--
As an aside, I just got the jointer a week or two ago, and I really like it, including, *gasp,* the jointer fence.

"Everyone" says you gotta' learn to joint freehand. (Ok, just the same goofs who claim you gotta' learn to sharpen freehand too...) Anyway. I doubt I'm ever going to do so. The jointer fence is quite handy and works well.

One downside. I'll have to go get some non-permanent lock-tite. The angle adjust screw on mine is too loose and it easily moves around. If I want it to stay adjusted between times when I use it, I need it not to move easily.

Also, if you do this, make sure you pur the fence on the same each time so the square-ness is the same. (I loosely tighten the thumb screws and then pull the fence back so it's positioned the same each time. Otherwise it can it a bit out of square if it's not fitted the same. The adjust screw isn't resting on a machined surface, but on the "japanning.")

As far as the jointer's performance. It's very, very good. I've got an older <st1:City><st1:place>Stanley</st1:place></st1:City> 7C and there is no comparison. I got the <st1:City><st1:place>Stanley</st1:place></st1:City> before I knew about the <st1:City><st1:place>LV</st1:place></st1:City> jointer. I thought about upgrading the iron and chip-breaker, but that with the purchase cost makes it not that much cheaper than the LV. Adding in time to fettle etc, it really was no contest. In current condition, it performs poorly in comparison, IMHO - especially in tough grain or dense woods with a heavier cut - lots of chatter.

Anyway. Given all this, and using each plane in turn, it makes me appreciate even more the versatility of the 62.5. It truly is an awesome plane that can fill a lot of shoes - even a "go to" smoother. IMHO, I'll use the jack to do something like 80-90% of all my work, with the jointer and smoother coming out just to do the special work.

Anyway long first post, but hope it's useful.

Cheers,
Greg
<o:p> </o:p>

[Steve Evans]

Greg

I'll be the first to welcome you to the Creek, and thank you for such a detailed and thorough analysis of the LV family of BU planes.

Steve

[Joe Blankshain]

Greg,
First, welcome to the creek! All of the members appreciate a point that is well explained and a logical conclusion or position taken. Your first post makes me feel alittle embaressed, in that your analysis is thorough and concise. Thanks

[Mike Wenzloff]

Hi Greg, welcome to this forum...

Mike

[Dan Larson]

Hey Greg, welcome! Thanks for your thoughtful response. Yes, very useful to me!

Dan

[Gene Collison]

Greg,

First, welcome to SMC.
I second your detailed description of the LV trio. I followed almost the identical path as you describe it. I have ebayed my 62, 164 and even my 4 1/2 york pitch all within the last couple months because of the great performance of the LV BU series. I still have my 2 LN #4's which I will probably keep because I still feel that they are great #4's and everyone should have a number 4 or two. Besides they will always be worth what they are worth now so why not enjoy them. Thanks for the review.:D ;)

Gene