Stanley 31 pics / tote question

[Michael J Evans]

Well I needed a jointer for my ongoing bench build and with money being tight and me not wanting to spend 2 weeks and $50 in sandpaper flattening a metal jointer, I went on the hunt for a wooden jointer. To my surprise wooden jointers are not cheap, for a halfway decent looking plane i was seeing $40 plus at least another $30 in shipping :eek:. Quickly adding up to the price of a #7. Besides Ebay I tried local antique shops and they were no better wanting at least $50 for basically crap IMO. After about a month of looking I felt all hope was lost, that I was going to have to break down and sell my kids to get a a decent plane. Finally the idea hit me, GET A TRANSITIONAL!!! I immediatly went on the hunt and found the 31 below and for $21 shipped I just couldn't resist. It took me maybe 30 minutes to flatten the bottom and another few hours to de-rust and get the iron flattened and sharp, quickly allowing me to get back to the main feature: Bench build. So all in all I'm pretty dang happy. I didn't have to spend a bunch of money and quickly got back to working on the bench. I only have one caveat, the dam tote doesn't sit flat (pictured below) and if i try to use the plane anymore, I'll probably snap it off. I planed the bottom flat thinking that was the fix and only made it worse.

School me, what do I need to do to get the tote to sit flat and quit wobbling? My only other thought was to plane before the bolt a lot lower than the back offsetting the tilt when the bolt is tightened?

Anyways your thoughts are greatly appreciated, I also threw in some pics below for making you read through my poor writing.

Regards,
Michael

357845357846357847357848357849357850

[Derek Cohen]

I only have one caveat, the dam tote doesn't sit flat (pictured below) and if i try to use the plane anymore, I'll probably snap it off. I planed the bottom flat thinking that was the fix and only made it worse. .....

School me, what do I need to do to get the tote to sit flat and quit wobbling? My only other thought was to plane before the bolt a lot lower than the back offsetting the tilt when the bolt is tightened?

Ensure the base of the handle is flat and square. Ensure the mating surface is also flat.

Reduce (grind) the length of the bolt so it can be tightened down.

Regards from Perth

Derek

[steven c newman]

Plus one other tip: Get a piece of the foam drawer liner used in a tool box, set the tote onto the pad, trace around the base of the tote with a sharp knife. While you can glue it in place to the bottom of the tote, just the pressure of the bolt holding down the tote will do. Tote's front "paw" seems a wee bit too thin, as it is....maybe add a thin layer of matching wood to the underside, and shape to match.

Also: the metal shaft of the bolt can be installed first, sans the brass end. Make sure the shaft is tightened down as tight as you can. Test fit the tote, and then bend the shaft until the fit is perfect to the ironworks. THEN add the brass end AFTER the tote is in place. Does tighten down enough? Remove everything, grind off the first two threads on the brass' end of the shaft. "Cone" the end so the brass will start onto the now shortened shaft. Re-install the shaft, and tighten down tight, Slide the tote onto the shaft, re-install the brass end.

BTDT...
357852357853
Stanley #28 and #29......$5 for the pair at a walk-to auction...

[Michael J Evans]

Ensure the base of the handle is flat and square. Ensure the mating surface is also flat.

Reduce (grind) the length of the bolt so it can be tightened down.

Regards from Perth

Derek

I planed the bottom the the handle flat at first but didn't check for square. The handle will sit perfectly flush without the bolt installed. But as soon as I crank down on the bolt it pulls the heel and down and the toe end shoots for the sky. I'm almost wondering if the hole at the bottom of the handle isn't drilled deep enough, causing the wood to wood to wedge against the little nipple sticking up and tilting it?

[Michael J Evans]

Plus one other tip: Get a piece of the foam drawer liner used in a tool box, set the tote onto the pad, trace around the base of the tote with a sharp knife. While you can glue it in place to the bottom of the tote, just the pressure of the bolt holding down the tote will do. Tote's front "paw" seems a wee bit too thin, as it is....maybe add a thin layer of matching wood to the underside, and shape to match.

Also: the metal shaft of the bolt can be installed first, sans the brass end. Make sure the shaft is tightened down as tight as you can. Test fit the tote, and then bend the shaft until the fit is perfect to the ironworks. THEN add the brass end AFTER the tote is in place. Does tighten down enough? Remove everything, grind off the first two threads on the brass' end of the shaft. "Cone" the end so the brass will start onto the now shortened shaft. Re-install the shaft, and tighten down tight, Slide the tote onto the shaft, re-install the brass end.

BTDT...
357852357853
Stanley #28 and #29......$5 for the pair at a walk-to auction...

Thanks steven. Good tip on the drawer liner and I was thinking the toe end of the handle looked a little thin, but never having handled a transitional I wasn't sure. I'm not sure what wood type the handle is, but may just try a piece of oak on the bottom and stain.

Nice score btw. Those are two good looking planes, especially for $5.

[lowell holmes]

Your post just provided my next project. I've been bored. I have a Stanley 26 transitional plane that was given to me by one of my daughters. I've kept it in a display case just as it came to me.

A bit of refinishing is all that is needed. It has the blade, and cap. No parts are missing. I will post a picture when I'm through.

Does anyone use these planes? I will sharpen mine and see how it works.

[steven c newman]

Ben known to use these type of planes, from time to time.
.357883
Stanley #31 (1892 version)

[Michael J Evans]

Does anyone use these planes? I will sharpen mine and see how it works.

Mine seemed to work pretty well last night (minus handle issue). But I only took a few swipes on the edge of Doug fir. I'm about to go test a full width cut on my bench legs.

[lowell holmes]

I'm going to restore my Stanley 26. What finish should I use on the wood body? I might lean towards a an oil finish. I will not be reshaping the wood.

Should I scrape or sand the wood. I lean towards scraping.

Also, how does a person go about dating the plane?

[steven c newman]

You can just use a scraper, I used a plane. Have had quite a few dings to remove on some of the ones I have.

I usually just use a wipe-on, wipe-off coat or two of BLO. Works nicely on that old beech.

Usually, I look right on the chipbreaker for a date. You can also use the logo on the iron, IF it is original.

I would take a straight edge to the sole......wood tends to wear over a century of use, and most of the ones I have rehabbed...there was a "hump" right around the mouth area. Might also check the sides for square.

[Derek Cohen]

I planed the bottom the the handle flat at first but didn't check for square. The handle will sit perfectly flush without the bolt installed. But as soon as I crank down on the bolt it pulls the heel and down and the toe end shoots for the sky. I'm almost wondering if the hole at the bottom of the handle isn't drilled deep enough, causing the wood to wood to wedge against the little nipple sticking up and tilting it?

Michael, that sounds like the underside is not square to the bolt. Since the toe is getting very thin and flexible, I would glue on a section about 1/8" - 3/16" and plane that down to the desired bolt depth (before you cut it) and ensure all is square to the bolt (so the tension exerted is square). This should also stiffen the toe.

Regards from Perth

Derek

[Michael J Evans]

What finish should I use on the wood body?

Also, how does a person go about dating the plane?

I was wondering these exact questions. But then I was also thinking about just trying some of that Kramers antique restorer and some wax. I sort of like the old look, hoping the Kramers stuff could spruce it up a bit. I cleaned up the brass depth knob and afterwards realized I liked the old patina better. Live and learn.

My plane has some patent dates stamped onto the lateral adjuster and a date on the iron itself. Do those patent dates actually have relation to the plane itself, or just was the patent was received?

[Michael J Evans]

Michael, that sounds like the underside is not square to the bolt. Since the toe is getting very thin and flexible, I would glue on a section about 1/8" - 3/16" and plane that down to the desired bolt depth (before you cut it) and ensure all is square to the bolt (so the tension exerted is square). This should also stiffen the toe.

Regards from Perth

Derek

Thanks Derek. I just got done gluing a piece on. Made it extra thick, just because my planing skills arnt very good yet. But hopefully tomorrow I can get this sorted out and back to work. I don't have a spokeshave yet, so for shaping I'm guessing I'm best off with chisel and files?

[steven c newman]

357905
I usually set this up.....

IF you want, I could slip down to the shop for a couple pictures of the totes I have?
357906
Just a few......the 29 is now a parts plane. BRB....

[steven c newman]

Taken just now..
357907
Stanley No. 31 ( horn lost the tip a while back, need to glue it back on)
357908
Yes, the toes are thin....
357909
Still seems to work..
357910
Stanley No. 28 sitting in front.
357911
Making a shaving. They tend to shoot straight up, and then wrap around my hand..
357912
Soles. The 31's was in a very wet garage, when I got it at a yard sale....toe is still a bit worn on a corner..
357913
The 28 (L) has the APL 19 92 on the iron, the 31 has a Stanley Rule & Level on it's iron.
Size reference?
357914
Front to rear: Stanley #6c T-10, Stanley #28, Stanley #7c, T-9,and the Stanley #31....

[Michael J Evans]

Spent a good couple hours this morning with the chisels, files and sandpaper shaping the new blank I glued on last night. Used a number 4 handle as my shaping guidance and was actually pretty proud of how it was looking.
Finally got it how I wanted it and started drilling the larger bottom hole and the back side blew / cracked out >:(
Decided to hell with it and super glued it back together temporarily. Its just a temporary fix and seems to be working. I plan on making a all new handle (later) and moving it backwards a bit, so I can make it larger / taller for my hand.
If anyone has any reasons for not moving back please speak up, I'm trying to figure out why Stanley made it so dam close and small.

[Jim Koepke]

My plane has some patent dates stamped onto the lateral adjuster and a date on the iron itself. Do those patent dates actually have relation to the plane itself, or just was the patent was received?

Patent dates usually stayed on for ~15 years if my memory is working.

If the patent date came with the plane, as in the date on the iron, it indicates the plane was made that year or later. The '92 patent date wasn't used after a new Stanley logo came out in ~1907. The patent dates on the lateral lever had various combinations. A single patent date was on the lateral lever in 1899.

If there are three patent dates on the lateral lever and a '92 patent on the blade and these are original parts, your plane was likely made between 1893 and 1899.

If there are only two patent dates on the lateral, then the blade is likely a replacement and your plane dates a bit earlier.

jtk

[Michael J Evans]

Patent dates usually stayed on for ~15 years if my memory is working.

If the patent date came with the plane, as in the date on the iron, it indicates the plane was made that year or later. The '92 patent date wasn't used after a new Stanley logo came out in ~1907. The patent dates on the lateral lever had various combinations. A single patent date was on the lateral lever in 1899.

If there are three patent dates on the lateral lever and a '92 patent on the blade and these are original parts, your plane was likely made between 1893 and 1899.

If there are only two patent dates on the lateral, then the blade is likely a replacement and your plane dates a bit earlier.

jtk


There are three patent dates on the lateral adjuster and only one on the iron. The last digit is missing on the iron. But I swear it said 199? It's hard to read so it must be 189?
I was thinking it would be awfully weird to be made in the 1990's. It just reads
STANLEY
PAT. XXXX

Thanks for the insight. I looked a little on the Web but didn't find much.

[Jim Koepke]

There are three patent dates on the lateral adjuster and only one on the iron. The last digit is missing on the iron. But I swear it said 199? It's hard to read so it must be 189?
I was thinking it would be awfully weird to be made in the 1990's. It just reads
STANLEY
PAT. XXXX

Thanks for the insight. I looked a little on the Web but didn't find much.

Actually many folks see the same date and think it is 1992. It is actually AP'L 19,92 smushed all together:

357980

Here is a link to Stanley logos over the years:

http://www.antique-used-tools.com/stantms.htm

I think Mr. Kaune has a couple of errors in this study, but what is life without errors?

jtk

[Dave Zellers]

I have a plane exactly like that but it is stamped 'Bailey No 31' on the front end. Bought it thirty years ago and just cleaned it up a few months ago including flattening the bottom and squaring the sides. It works amazingly well and I just built my first shooting board with it in mind. I've always been mostly a power tool guy but wow using that plane is fun!

[Michael J Evans]

Actually many folks see the same date and think it is 1992. It is actually AP'L 19,92 smushed all together:

357980

Here is a link to Stanley logos over the years:

http://www.antique-used-tools.com/stantms.htm

I think Mr. Kaune has a couple of errors in this study, but what is life without errors?

jtk

That's exactly it. Thanks again Jim. I'm gonna bookmark that site for future reference.

[Robert Hazelwood]

I kind of like the Transitional design, and think they tend to get a bad rap. One weird aspect to the design is that they made the frog adjustable, but only have the frog support the upper 2/3 of the blade. The lower third of the blade is unsupported unless the frog is pulled back so that it is co-planar with the wooden part of the blade bed. So they may often have poor blade bedding and that leads to chatter. I would make sure the frog is pulled back so that it is co-planar with the wooden bed, or slightly behind the wooden bed, then bed the blade to the wooden sole like you would with any normal wooden plane. (i.e. mark the bevel side of the blade with oil/graphite mixture and check for contact between the blade and wooden bed right at the base of the blade bevel- if there's no contact there, carefully pare away other contact points and/or adjust the frog, then recheck until there is good contact all the way across). At this point the frog should not be adjusted again. With solid bedding it should plane chatter-free, but the mouth may be pretty large. This can be fixed by adding a mouth patch.

For tote-shaping tools, I use rasps and files and scrapers. A hardware store rasp is good for removing more material but leaves a pretty gnarly surface, so leave some material for cleaning up the rasp marks. A file will fine tune the shape and remove rasp marks, and then 150 grit sandpaper should clean up the file marks fairly quickly. Then you can sand up to whatever grit pleases you.

[Michael J Evans]

Robert.
I found that my plane had the frog moved forward and the iron unsupported. I never tried to use it like that, just seen it and thought it didn't look right. Loosened the two wood screws and moved it back as best I could to get the bed and iron co-planer.

The mouth looks pretty large now, but I've never had a jointer or handled one, so I'm comparing to my #4. I guess the real test will be when I take full width cuts. I was planning on trying that the other day, but sleep got the best of me that night and I've spent the last few days chopping mortises.

I do need to get myself a rasp,scaper,spokeshave, well pretty much everything, but for right now I just add as I go. Yesterday I just shaped the add on with a aggressive double cut file, fine file and a chisel. Took awhile but got me where I needed to be.

I realised, I won't be able to move the handle back because of the bolt location, but I may try to shape it differently to change the ergonomics slightly. Guess I'll have to cut the blank out with my jig saw. Trying to figure out if I'll be able to drill the bolt hole accurately enough with just a hand drill or brace. I have a feeling the brace and auger would be more accurate, but both of my 1/4" bits are shot, so I may be stuck with cordless and twist bit.

[Robert Hazelwood]

If you notice any chatter marks, I would just double check that the blade is supported right down at the bottom, at the base of the bevel. It doesn't really need to touch the wooden bed anywhere else. I wouldn't be surprised if the frog surface and wooden bed surface are at slightly different angles, so that even if you flush them the business end of the blade could still be floating. I just mention this because I had to adjust it on my Sargent jack plane. But I'd see if it cuts fine first and if it does then no worries.

As for the mouth, you can leave it as is and it will work fine so long as you can set your chipbreaker properly, at least in terms of preventing tear out. I think planes are nicer to use with a mouth that isn't too wide, though. It can be annoying on the beginning and end of cuts and cause some snipe if you aren't careful. I've found that a really wide mouth can have feeding problems too, where curly shavings get sucked back into the mouth and you have to pull them out constantly. You don't need or really want a super tight mouth on a jointer, but 1/32" or a bit less is nice.

[Michael J Evans]

I wouldn't be surprised if the frog surface and wooden bed surface are at slightly different angles, so that even if you flush them the business end of the blade could still be floating.


Hmm wouldn't of even thought to check the end of the iron and make sure it was supported. Thanks for the tip, if I notice any issues I'll check that first.

[Phil Mueller]

Hi Michael,
Did the add on piece solve the issue with the toe rising when bolted down? I got here a bit late, but was going to suggest you bolt down the tote, and then scribe the bottom of the tote to where it seats into the metal. Just thinking that maybe when you planed the bottom flat it might not have been at the correct angle to seat properly.

Also, when drilling a through hole, you can clamp a sacrificial piece where the drill will exit...that will help minimize blow out. But, frankly, I've been known to do exactly as you did...other than you knowing it's there, it won't effect anything.

[Michael J Evans]

Hi Michael,
Did the add on piece solve the issue with the toe rising when bolted down? .

It did fix it but not 100%, there is still a very slight gap, but ithe is tiny and no longer wobbles. I'm willing to live with it until I can make a new handle.
I was wondering originally if scribing the base would work like on saw horses, but the toe portion was already so thin and per the suggestion of others I just did the add on.