New LV Combo Plane

[Chet R Parks]

The new LV combo plane is now available on the last day of free shipping in case you missed it and are interested.

[Jim Koepke]

The new LV combo plane is now available on the last day of free shipping in case you missed it and are interested.

Though I would love to give one a try, it is unlikely I could justify buying one. I therefore hope someone who has received one will post a review and explain the use of all those brass knobs.

jtk

[Patrick Chase]

Though I would love to give one a try, it is unlikely I could justify buying one. I therefore hope someone who has received one will post a review and explain the use of all those brass knobs.

jtk

I ordered one and had it sent UPS Red, so...

6 rod-clamp (2 ea x (2 skates + fence))
2 fence adjust-lock screws (1 ea side)
1 fence adjust screw
2 depth stop adjust screw (1/fence)
2 depth stop lock screw (1/fence)
1 blade depth adjust
1 blade tension
1 wide-blade bias on secondary skate
1 narrow-blade bias on primary skate

The "blade bias" screws keep the blade registered against the lateral registration surface in the primary skate. There are 2 for narrow/wide blades. It's a big hard to explain.

[Jim Koepke]

The "blade bias" screws keep the blade registered against the lateral registration surface in the primary skate. There are 2 for narrow/wide blades. It's a big hard to explain.

This sounds like the blade tension (lever cap) could be set to allow for blade adjustment in use with the blade bias bolts keeping the blade from slipping laterally. This is a feature that would assist greatly when cutting stopped features.

What is the diameter of the rods holding the fence? I am curious if the Stanley cam stops will work on the Veritas Combination Plane.

jtk

[Simon MacGowen]

What did they say about a video is worth...?

https://youtu.be/0rhNv3O9nw0
(https://youtu.be/0rhNv3O9nw0)
This is a different animal from the 45, not just in the # of knobs it has.
Simon

[steven c newman]

Different sized rods......different spacings. Points on the spurs simply fold over, even in Pine.

[Patrick Chase]

Different sized rods......different spacings. Points on the spurs simply fold over, even in Pine.

Right, the rods are completely different.

I haven't yet had the spur problem, though I bought an extra set just in case after reading that thread. I also am very careful about spur depth. They aren't slitting blades and they don't work as such.

[Noah Magnuson]

Different sized rods......different spacings. Points on the spurs simply fold over, even in Pine.
I think "simply fold over" is a bit of an exaggeration especially from someone who doesn't own one. I merely got a burr on the tip when it was brand new and very thin/pointy at the tip which never happened again once I filed it off and got to the slightly meatier part of the tip.

[Derek Cohen]

Different sized rods......different spacings. Points on the spurs simply fold over, even in Pine.

Do the nickers come with a point? If so, I recommend that they are rounded at the tip. I freehanded this on a worn 600 diamond stone, and then polished on green compund. A rounded tip will last many times that of a pointed tip.

Regards from Perth

Derek

[Noah Magnuson]

yeah, that is what I basically did and haven't had any issue since.

[Hasin Haroon]

Jim, I would eventually like to post a 'review' but at the rate of shop time I've been getting recently, it'll be too late. I will say though that the number of brass knobs, though daunting to look at, are very intuitive to use - anyone with any experience using a fenced plane of any sort would be able to figure out how to use the plane within a couple minutes.

[Simon MacGowen]

Different sized rods......different spacings. Points on the spurs simply fold over, even in Pine.

Different prices, too! :D

Simon

[steven c newman]

Spurs would need to be reground to a better profile...and not like a Stanley slitting cutter's profile

The narrower Stanley cutters are to narrow to work with the cutter holder bolt.....won't reach.

NOS Stanley cutters will be almost too long, depth adjuster is almost out of threads on "normal" Stanley cutters. NOS ones are about an 1/8" longer than the normal Stanley cutters.

Veritas irons will fit the Stanley 45, but they are so short, you are near the end of a 45's depth adjuster, when the cutters are new....sharpen them a few times....you MIGHT be able to push them along from above the notch....

The above came from a 6 part review, done with both the veritas and the Stanley planes, side by side. I could list the site where to find it....PM me instead.

[Patrick Chase]

Spurs would need to be reground to a better profile...and not like a Stanley slitting cutter's profile

It's probably worth noting that many other planes with nickers come with similarly sharp profiles to the LV combo. That includes the LN rabbet and skew block planes and at least some Stanleys as you say. I think the assumption is that anybody who buys a plane like this will grind/hone "to taste'. That being the case it makes sense to start with a sharp point, as it's much easier to round a pointy profile than to sharpen a blunt one.

The only previous examples that I've seen that don't have pointy nickers are the LV rabbets (bench and otherwise) and the LV and LN skew block planes. Those use wheel cutters, though I suspect there wasn't room to incorporate that mechanism in a skate.



The narrower Stanley cutters are to narrow to work with the cutter holder bolt.....won't reach.

The only Stanley cutters that don't work are the #10 (1/8" plough) and the #32 (narrowest fluting cutter). There are two issues: Those cutters have a hole instead of a slot for depth adjust, so the LV depth adjust mechanism is incompatible. Also and as you say, the tensioning bolt falls "outside" of them.



NOS Stanley cutters will be almost too long, depth adjuster is almost out of threads on "normal" Stanley cutters. NOS ones are about an 1/8" longer than the normal Stanley cutters.

What do you mean by "NOS" here"? The as-factory-ground cutters for my 55 have about 1/8" of clearance with the LV depth adjust mechanism. Did Stanley subsequently change the design?

Also if this is a real issue then I suspect there's a workaround. The Veritas adjuster is made out of 2 parts - the brass knob and the steel nut with the adjustment flange. It looks to me as though you could remove the brass knob and reverse the nut (so that the threaded part is mostly below the flange instead of mostly above) and thereby add about 1/2" of adjustment range. The ergonomics wouldn't be great (no knob = not much leverage).

You could also turn your own nut with a longer threaded section below the flange, obviously (or LV could offer one... hint hint).

I don't have any non-fitting irons so I'm not inclined to try to separate my nut and knob. They appear to be Loctite-ed together.



Veritas irons will fit the Stanley 45, but they are so short, you are near the end of a 45's depth adjuster, when the cutters are new....sharpen them a few times....you MIGHT be able to push them along from above the notch....

Errm, how exactly are you sharpening? My LV irons extend 3/8" beyond the bottom of the main skate in my Stanley with the adjuster bottomed out. I don't know about you, but I don't remove 1/8" of steel per sharpening.



The above came from a 6 part review, done with both the veritas and the Stanley planes, side by side. I could list the site where to find it....PM me instead.

Sounds like somebody had a serious axe to grind and didn't let facts get in the way.

With all of that said, the LV is a different design with different tradeoffs. Some will like it, others may not. Personally I like having blade bias screws and a blade tension mechanism that doesn't bind all the time. The Stanley "cone" tensioner design allows their planes to support very narrow irons, but it brings problems of its own...

[steven c newman]

I did not do the review....two others got together to compare both a Stanley 45 and the Veritas Combo plane. They reshaped the profile on the nickers, AFTER they had found then bent over at the tips..by a pine board.

Afraid the cutters on MY Stanley 45 are about.....90 years old, and have been sharpened quite a few times BEFORE I even got them.

The two "testers" compared the way the cutters fit into BOTH planes. They almost ran out of threads on the veritas plane, trying to install a simple cutter from a #45's set. Again, they used a type 17 and a type 6 #45 and their cutters. YMMV

The bolt referred to? Is the ones that thread into the sides of the cutter, either on the sliding stock or the main stock. Might want to slip back and check on that as well....or did you miss that little detail...since it is what Veritas calls that bolt.

Not sure where YOU bought those two cutters at....you might want a refund for getting the wrong ones. IF you want, I can go and look at the ones I have ( I just used the #11 this week..) There IS one cutter by Stanley, that has no notch, as it is shorter than the normal cutters. The pin will push on the end of that. And, I just went and checked the 1/8" cutter and the #11 3/16" cutters. The 1/8" cutter was too narrow to make a notch for the pin.

Even nhplaneparts has no idea WHY there are cutters with holes, instead of slots....

[Patrick Chase]

Afraid the cutters on MY Stanley 45 are about.....90 years old, and have been sharpened quite a few times BEFORE I even got them.


In that case that would improve the fit since the Stanley irons are LONGER. My set is 107 years old. The straight irons had been ground to h*ll, and I had to reverse the bevel on one of them, which knocked another 3/16" or so off. Those cutters all fit fine. The concern with Stanley irons is that when in factory-ground condition they are towards the UPPER length limit of the LV plane. I purposely checked a bunch of irons that had not been previously sharpened (which is basically the definition of "NOS"), and they all fit.



The two "testers" compared the way the cutters fit into BOTH planes. They almost ran out of threads on the veritas plane, trying to install a simple cutter from a #45's set. Again, they used a type 17 and a type 6 #45 and their cutters. YMMV

"Almost" only counts in horse shoes and hand grenades. They fit, period. I'm sure LV were fully aware of the length of factory-ground Stanley irons when they designed the adjuster the way they did, and that's why the as-factory-ground Stanley iron are right up at but not over the limit.



The bolt referred to? Is the ones that thread into the sides of the cutter, either on the sliding stock or the main stock. Might want to slip back and check on that as well....or did you miss that little detail...since it is what Veritas calls that bolt.

The Stanley doesn't even *have* that bolt. So the complaint here is that an added useful feature doesn't work with a small number of 3rd party blades? Wow, that's some drawback.

The drawback that I cited (tensioner screw too far from registration face with the #10 and #32) is actually far more serious btw.

EDIT: It may be that Stanley widened the shafts of those two irons later in the production run. Can you please measure the width your #10 (1/8" plough iron) just below the slot/hole/whatever? Also is yours constant width from edge to slot/hole, or does it get wider like the narrower Veritas irons.



Not sure where YOU bought those two cutters at....you might want a refund for getting the wrong ones. IF you want, I can go and look at the ones I have ( I just used the #11 this week..)

I said #10 and #32, not #11. The #11 has a slot and fits fine in the LV plane. If you have a basic 45 cutter set then you don't even have the #32, but I was being thorough for the benefit of others. Please read carefully before you reply.



There IS one cutter by Stanley, that has no notch, as it is shorter than the normal cutters. The pin will push on the end of that. And, I just went and checked the 1/8" cutter and the #11 3/16" cutters. The 1/8" cutter was too narrow to make a notch for the pin.

Even nhplaneparts has no idea WHY there are cutters with holes, instead of slots....

The TWO (not one) Stanley cutters in question are so narrow (both have 1/8" shanks) that there wouldn't be enough metal on one side of a slot to resist retraction force when the blade is under tension. Using a hole instead of a slot provides support on both sides and fixes the issue. I suspect that's also why the 45 and 55 use a pin instead of a tab for adjustment in the first place.

EDIT: Added question about later-production 10 and 32 irons. See "EDIT" above.

[Jim Koepke]

Even nhplaneparts has no idea WHY there are cutters with holes, instead of slots....

My recollection is this was how the type 5 and maybe type 6 cutters were made. A few of my #45 cutters are this way. It is easier to install a cutter into the plane with a notch than it is a drilled hole. Stanley designers were likely quick to figure out this little upgrade.

After reading the review on LumberJocks, it seems there are a few features on the Veritas to improve on a 130 year old design.

One significant point made in the review seems to be aimed at those who do not want the experience of finding and rehabilitating an old tool. The Veritas is the one combination plane to offer peace of mind into their buying experience. Many folks are like me and love to tinker with things. Many more like to open a box without worries and put their new purchase to work.

The #45 is for those who enjoy the smell of rust and like to tinker. The VCP is for those who do not even want to be bothered with sharpening a blade when the plane arrives.

The Veritas Combination Plane is simply a modern day version of a good old tool. It benefits from modern manufacturing technology and improvements.

jtk

[Derek Cohen]

The author, who does not own the Veritas, ended up preferring it to the Stanley and stating that he would like one. His comments were almost completely in favour of the Veritas ... and I think he was surprised, since he went in skeptical.

I would, however, hardly view his review as full - he did not use most if the blades. I, on the other hand, have not only used all, but have extensive time on both planes. I am in a position to make first hand comments.
Regards from Perth

Derek

[Patrick Chase]

Steven, I'm going to be brief - I suggest that you re-read that review. The author, who does not own the Veritas, ended up preferring it to the Stanley and stating that he would like one. His comments were almost completely in favour of the Veritas ... and I think he was surprised, since he went in skeptical.

I would, however, hardly view his review as full - he did not use most if the blades. I, on the other hand, have not only used all, but have extensive time on both planes. I am in a position to make first hand comments. You have probably not even seen the Veritas in the flesh, nevermind handled one. That is a recipe for prejudice.

Regards from Perth

Derek

Hey Derek, please feel free to correct anything I got wrong above. I've only had the LV plane for a few days and may have missed something.

Also it appears that the #10 and #32 irons changed in design from a hole to a slot somewhere between 1910 (my examples) and the 1920s (Steven's). The newer irons are may be more compatible with the LV plane.

[Jim Koepke]

The Stanley doesn't even *have* that bolt. So the complaint here is that an added useful feature doesn't work with a small number of 3rd party blades? Wow, that's some drawback.

An early version of a similar feature does appear on the Stanley #55. There is a screw mounted on the main body on the right hand side near the handle. It screws into the adjustable skate to provide stability for a blade when working on a face that is at an angle, other than 90º, to the fences. The fences remain fixed and the blade is adjusted deeper in the work on successive strokes. The screw keeps the blade from moving laterally with the blade locking mechanism slightly loose. This screw is often missing. If my recollection is correct it is a 10-28 thread and has a head like the other three locking screws on the plane. (depth stop lock and the rod keeper screws on the main body)

This feature of the #55 hit me like a flash during my experimentation with stopped cuts using the #45.

jtk

[Patrick Chase]

My recollection is this was how the type 5 and maybe type 6 cutters were made. A few of my #45 cutters are this way. It is easier to install a cutter into the plane with a notch than it is a drilled hole. Stanley designers were likely quick to figure out this little upgrade.

The slots on Stanley irons are just under 1/8" deep, which would leave the #10 (1/8 plough) and #16 with very little metal to support the top of the slot. Do you happen to know how they addressed that in later variants? Did they reverse-taper the shafts of later iterations of those irons to make them wider at the slot?

[Patrick Chase]

An early version of a similar feature does appear on the Stanley #55. There is a screw mounted on the main body on the right hand side near the handle. It screws into the adjustable skate to provide stability for a blade when working on a face that is at an angle, other than 90º, to the fences. The fences remain fixed and the blade is adjusted deeper in the work on successive strokes. The screw keeps the blade from moving laterally with the blade locking mechanism slightly loose. This screw is often missing. If my recollection is correct it is a 10-28 thread and has a head like the other three locking screws on the plane. (depth stop lock and the rod keeper screws on the main body)

This feature of the #55 hit me like a flash during my experimentation with stopped cuts using the #45.

My c. 1910 #55 example doesn't have that, so it must have been added in later types. The only threaded hole going straight into the main skate from the right in the area you cite is the slitter clamp.

That does indeed sound very useful.

[Jim Koepke]

The slots on Stanley irons are just under 1/8" deep, which would leave the #10 (1/8 plough) and #16 with very little metal to support the top of the slot. Do you happen to know how they addressed that in later variants? Did they reverse-taper the shafts of later iterations of those irons to make them wider at the slot?

I would have to go out and look at my sets of blades. I do know the early way was a hole. My recollection is one or more of my wider irons also have holes in them instead of slots.

I was about to look for a type study on the #45. Not sure as to where my book on the subject may have gotten off.

jtk

[Jim Koepke]

My c. 1910 #55 example doesn't have that, so it must have been added in later types. The only threaded hole going straight into the main skate from the right in the area you cite is the slitter clamp.

That does indeed sound very useful.


I think this came along when the fence lock bolt was moved to lock one of the rods instead of the screw or shortly after that. Maybe around the same time as the switch from long spurs to the clover leaf spurs.

367728

The screw storage spot is right behind the slitter clamp.

jtk

[Patrick Chase]

I think this came along when the fence lock bolt was moved to lock one of the rods instead of the screw or shortly after that. Maybe around the same time as the switch from long spurs to the clover leaf spurs.

367728

The screw storage spot is right behind the slitter clamp.

jtk

Thanks! Mine doesn't have that screw behind the slitter clamp and does have the long spurs, so that sounds about right.

[steven c newman]

I am merely stating THEIR results. I am more than happy to be using my combo plane.....even if it is a "young" 92 years old.

[Patrick Chase]

Stepping away from the debate for a sec. I do have a few quibbles with the Veritas Combination plane. On balance it's an excellent tool, but no design is ever perfect (certainly not any that I had a hand in) and this one is no exception.


As noted in my reply to Steven's post, the clamp screw is centered about 3/16" from the right-side blade registration surface, which means that it has marginal engagement with blades that have 1/8" shanks. That includes my samples of the #10 and #32. The Stanley "cone clamp" is better in this respect as it provides engagement all the way across, though it has binding issues that the LV doesn't. On balance I think that both designs make reasonable tradeoffs, and which to choose is a subjective preference.
My sample of the 55 has a 50 deg bed angle, and I find that it's slightly better than the LV in terms of tearout. If I were designing a combo from scratch I think I'd go with a slightly higher-angle bed, though obviously cutter geometry (rounds being round, etc) limits how far you can take that. I don't know if all 55s are 50 deg or if it's something Stanley varied within the production run, but it's certainly beneficial in some circumstances.
As others have noted it would be nice if the shafts were the same diameter as the 45 or 55 so that we could use accessories like the cam stops (note that the cam stop is single-shaft, so we wouldn't need the spacing to be the same). The lighter/thinner rods are beneficial in themselves, though, so this is again a tradeoff.

One the plus side it's beautifully machined, tightly toleranced, and basically ready to use as delivered, unlike older planes. The skates and fence all lock down in parallel with minimal effort. As am example, the 55's fences tend to get "cocked" if you're not careful because the tension screws push them in opposite directions on each of the two shafts, but the Veritas has no such vices.

[Patrick Chase]

So...why are you taking this all out on the "Messenger" is it because the "news" is different than the company line of reality? Nor do I take being called a LIAR lying down.

You're the one posting apparently cherry-picked parts (per Derek) of that review as fact on *this* forum. You also didn't provide sufficient information to find the review in question, for example the author's name. That makes you more than just a "messenger" as far as this discussion goes.

Pointing out that somebody repeated something misleading as fact without verifying it is not the same thing as calling them a liar. People are wrong for non-malicious reasons all the time.

[steven c newman]

Veritas Salesperson: Yes, I have indeed read that review...several times....now, have your employers FIX the nickers....

The reason they did have the cutters, is a LACK of shipping of those cutters....IF they HAD been shipped ( like a normal supplier would) they would have reviewed them all. They had all afternoon to try both planes....couldn't someone at least ship what was ordered?

Whether I have or have NOT "handled" the newest and LATEst toy, is NOT a part of THEIR review. I suggest you take up your sales pitch with them.

Reviewer did like SOME of the features.....and is trying to add them to one of his 17 stanley 45s.....

[Simon MacGowen]

Veritas Salesperson: Yes, I have indeed read that review...several times....now, have your employers FIX the nickers....

..

Shouldn't say that, or it would make you a Stanley Spokesperson....

Simon

[Graham Haydon]

Slightly off topic but I'm selling a Record 045 multi plane on behalf of someone else. I'm taking the opportunity to try it out before moving it on. The first set up I used was the sash profile cutter. I could set it and stick a sash profile. However it was a fiddle and the process made me realise that it would be much easier to use a moulding plane and sash fillister. I would go as far as to say I'd rather buy a shaper to stick larger mouldings than work with a multi plane. I look forward to trying the other cutters, they are very similar to the Veritas offering, and see how they work out. At this moment my opinion is multi planes aren't much fun. Not sure I'll ever use the Veritas, I'm sure it's as good as a multi plane could be, but maybe you can't polish a turd. Steampunk boat anchor perhaps? Look forward to people who have purchased the Veritas sharing their experiences.

[Jim Koepke]

Slightly off topic but I'm selling a Record 045 multi plane on behalf of someone else. I'm taking the opportunity to try it out before moving it on. The first set up I used was the sash profile cutter. I could set it and stick a sash profile. However it was a fiddle and the process made me realise that it would be much easier to use a moulding plane and sash fillister. I would go as far as to say I'd rather buy a shaper to stick larger mouldings than work with a multi plane. I look forward to trying the other cutters, they are very similar to the Veritas offering, and see how they work out. At this moment my opinion is multi planes aren't much fun. Not sure I'll ever use the Veritas, I'm sure it's as good as a multi plane could be, but maybe you can't polish a turd. Steampunk boat anchor perhaps? Look forward to people who have purchased the Veritas sharing their experiences.

Your post reminds me of someone who tried riding a bicycle and gave up after their first fall.

My first attempts at using a multi-bladed plow plane and later a Stanley #45 were also somewhat frustrating at times. There are many little nuances to, as you say, "fiddle" before it all falls into place.

The curve of learning taught me a lot about using other planes as well. Now when different moldings are seen in public, private homes, on TV or in movies my mind sometimes wanders off into how it could be made with the tools in my shop. With just a few different planes and/or blades it is possible to make a wide selection of molding without the expense, the space needed or the noise of a shaper.

jtk

[steven c newman]

Anyone else read those Blogs? You might even find one of mine, about the Cherry project on the same page.....

[Mike Brady]

I read the blog and thought he made valid observations.

[Patrick Chase]

Anyone else read those Blogs? You might even find one of mine, about the Cherry project on the same page.....

I finally read the 6-part blog/review about the LV combo on the "jock site", but that can't possibly be the one you described earlier in the thread. The conclusions are completely different, other than the part about nickers failing in pine. Which one were you describing?

[Simon MacGowen]

I finally read the 6-part blog/review about the LV combo on the "jock site", but that can't possibly be the one you described earlier in the thread. The conclusions are completely different, other than the part about nickers failing in pine. Which one were you describing?

BTW I've never been kicked off of a WW forum in my life.

Is it against the posting rules that you can't give the blog link here? Why are people so cryptic about this review? Don't know what 6-part blog you people are referring to.

I always look at magazine reviews on any tools with caution as they tend to go along with whatever the tool manufacturers pitch (any tool makers that they do business with). Impartiality only exists to a certain extent no matter who the reviewer is, and that is human nature. I prefer Steven's Devil's advocate approach when it comes to new tools as we can always learn a thing or two from a perspective taken from a different angle.

It is a joke when someone posts a review based on one single session of use of a tool, positive or negative. This is not to say the reviewer is a joke, but that anyone who thinks the review means anything is joking themselves. If we keep our minds open, we can come to a better judgment regardless of what the reviewers or the tool makers tell us.

My position remains unchanged: I prefer a new, improved Combo Plane over any Stanley's, but I won't order anything till I get a chance to try it out. The Woodworking Shows will have its new show schedule out soon, according to their notice. I will attend the one that Veritas brings its new plane along. That will be how I decide to buy or wait till Lie-Nielsen releases its.

Simon

[steven c newman]

I get the feeling, that there WILL be a review coming to this site...very soon. Not allowed to say who will be posting it ( not me, need the money for rent, LOL) Merely have to wait until he gets his review finished.

"Tom, Bert, and William" ....A Scientist with a closed mind is handicapped towards failure...

I have been more than happy with my #45 over the past year or two of use. Before that, it was plough planes with bodies made of Beech, back in the 1860s....contrary to popular rumours , I was NOT around when they made that one.....nor did Abe Lincoln teach me how to drive.....

[Jim Koepke]

Is it against the posting rules that you can't give the blog link here?

There are Terms Of Service prohibitiing the posting of links to other woodworking forums.

My understanding is it may be okay mentioning the review in question is on the LumberJocks (dot com) forum and is in the blog section written by a person going by MOS or Mosquito.

If the above is a violation of the TOS, would a moderator please indicate as such, thank you.

jtk

[Simon MacGowen]

Thanks Jim. Will do a peek there and read for myself what all the fuss is about, even though I am no big fan of reviews per se.

As for the posting limitations, I learned from a fellow who has written articles for (non-woodworking) magazine that he once included a picture showing the magazine he was writing for as well as the covers of a couple other magazines (in the background), the editor asked him to retake the shot. He wasn't happy about the request but went along. He decided that that was the last time he wrote for that publication. He has done something similar a few times with other magazines before but no other editors advised him to stop. Different house rules at different places.

Simon

[Graham Haydon]

Jim, your response reminds me of a man that thinks listening to a one man band is better than listening to a good group or an orchestra :D. I will admit my post had a hint of provocation, thanks for furthering the discussion. Yes, I think a multi plane can be used, it could also be considered useful. If I were to advise a purchaser about an effective plough, rebate and moulding set up it would be a buy a plough, a rebate plane and moulding planes as required. No need to hurry on the moulding planes, it's not likely someone would need a huge amount of moulders.
Budget approach, #78 for rebate work, #44 ploughing, rehab a moulding plane as and when needed. Of course there are names that could be dropped that make excellent products, similar to those options I've described. You could also use a multi plane, they can be used.

[Simon MacGowen]

Jim, your response reminds me of a man that thinks listening to a one man band is better than listening to a good group or an orchestra :D. I will admit my post had a hint of provocation, thanks for furthering the discussion. Snipe.

Interestingly, your one man band analogy reminds me of a recent blog by a publisher about a customer letter/email he received regarding prices/softcover edition. There, 99.99% of the people, except one, sided with the publisher, with some belittling the customer, such as (to the effect) if you have never run a business, you are not qualified to tell the publisher how to run his business. Conveniently, these people forgot that many successful businesses failed or were less successful than they should be because they failed to listen to their customers. The overwhelmingly supportive responses were nothing surprising because only those who registered can comment there. If you are not one of his fans, chances are you won't register for his blog. The publisher appeared to take the high road by not rejecting the customer in the same abusive tone his fans did, but he knew by publishing the letter, his supporters would do the dirty job for him. Even unreasonable customers (the writer wasn't if you asked me) offering a suggestion should not be treated like that in any business.

In the business world, group think (potentially present in any group or orchestras setting, to use the same analogy) is something good leaders work hard to avoid or subdue.

So which music is better -- from Eric Clapton playing solo and unplugged, or from a heavy metal band? It really depends on the listener's music background and taste. Both types of musicians exist amicably.

Simon

[Patrick Chase]

Jim, your response reminds me of a man that thinks listening to a one man band is better than listening to a good group or an orchestra :D. I will admit my post had a hint of provocation, thanks for furthering the discussion. Yes, I think a multi plane can be used, it could also be considered useful. If I were to advise a purchaser about an effective plough, rebate and moulding set up it would be a buy a plough, a rebate plane and moulding planes as required. No need to hurry on the moulding planes, it's not likely someone would need a huge amount of moulders.

I think we can all agree that dedicated planes are preferable when practicable. For example I have dedicated rebate and plow planes because I do that sort of work more often than any of the other functions of the combo, and there's no question that those dedicated planes do their jobs more conveniently (and better in the case of the rebate).

With that said, if you want to experiment with a profile (i.e. not even sure that it's what you want) or stick a short run, the IMO combo planes can make sense. It's a lot easier to approximate a profile with existing cutters or even to fabricate a dedicated cutter than it is to make/buy a moulding plane. At the same time it works faster and better than a scratch stock (though admittedly it's much easier to make custom profiles for the latter)

[Patrick Chase]

So which music is better -- from Eric Clapton playing solo and unplugged, or from a heavy metal band? It really depends on the listener's music background and taste. Both types of musicians exist amicably.


I'll take the one that goes to 11 (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KOO5S4vxi0o).

[Graham Haydon]

Simon, if there is a comparison between your feeling towards a blog post and my discussion with Jim I hope I have not been dismissive of him. As I said, there was a hint of provocation to further the discussion. My main reason for adding my thoughts were to raise discussion about effective multi planes really are. My experience with them when compared with other forms is not so good. I think it more productive to have a dedicated tool.

Patrick, in addition to the scratch stock for different profiles I once picked up a craftsman made moulding plane. An open sided plane (if my memory serves similar to early french moulding planes?) made from mahogany with quite a thin, shop made iron. It would take a touch longer to make one than grinding a cutter for a multi plane, but If I needed to cut a profile and had to do it on a very low budget way that would be my preference.

Jim, no offence meant. I learned to ride a bike fine and decide that multi planes are not something I much care for, bit like a bike with oval wheels......;)

[Pat Barry]

I'll take the one that goes to 11 (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KOO5S4vxi0o).

I love it when I agree with Patrick!

[Hilton Ralphs]

Over at the jock-strap site, there's a Blog by a chap called Mosquito and then there's a separate Review by a chap called galooticus.

Just so that the chaos calms down to a normal panic.

[Jim Koepke]

Jim, no offence meant. I learned to ride a bike fine and decide that multi planes are not something I much care for, bit like a bike with oval wheels......

Graham, no offense was taken.

There are many things in the wide world of woodworking on which participants will not view in the same light. Though my accumulation of wooden molding planes is growing, it is doubtful it will grow to the point of being able to retire my use of multi-planes.

Some will look at a multi-plane and see nothing but frustration or a "boat anchor." Others will see a tool with capabilities to be brought forth in their hands to create a symphony of shapes and decorative detail.

It will never be as easy to cut an ogee with a multi-plane as it is to do with a well made molding plane. The multi-plane will be able to make various sizes of an ogee profile to the dedicated plane's single size. If done simply with hollows and rounds it still takes many different planes for the different size profiles.

jtk

[Graham Haydon]

Good to heat, Jim. Difficult to know how things come over sometimes.

[James Pallas]

When I first started using a 45 I found it to be intimidating. After using it for a while that went away. I used it a lot for rabbets, beads and dados. I have a 78 but use the 45 more. A while back I purchased an LV Jack rabbet that I really like for rabbet work. Sharp irons and good work practices solve most of the issues with a 45. It does not work as well as a skew rabbet as I can tell with what little experience I've had with them. I don't own a skew so I don't worry about it. Like all straight rabbet planes you will get some spelching without good work practices. The new LV plane will most likely do more and set up easier. I would like to own one and may do so if the cards fall correctly. That doesn't mean I would ditch the 45, after all we are old friends now.
Jim

[Patrick Chase]

When I first started using a 45 I found it to be intimidating. After using it for a while that went away. I used it a lot for rabbets, beads and dados. I have a 78 but use the 45 more. A while back I purchased an LV Jack rabbet that I really like for rabbet work. Sharp irons and good work practices solve most of the issues with a 45. It does not work as well as a skew rabbet as I can tell with what little experience I've had with them. I don't own a skew so I don't worry about it. Like all straight rabbet planes you will get some spelching without good work practices. The new LV plane will most likely do more and set up easier. I would like to own one and may do so if the cards fall correctly. That doesn't mean I would ditch the 45, after all we are old friends now.
Jim

The skew rabbets and the somewhat similar skew block are very very good at what they do. I wouldn't want to give mine up. The #46 (basically a skewed combo plane) can probably give them a run for their money though.

[James Pallas]

The skew rabbets and the somewhat similar skew block are very very good at what they do. I wouldn't want to give mine up. The #46 (basically a skewed combo plane) can probably give them a run for their money though.
Doesnt have enough knobs on it.
Jim

[Hilton Ralphs]

There's an informative write-up on the Veritas Combination Plane in their latest newsletter (http://www.leevalley.com/us/newsletters/Woodworking/2559/Article1.htm).

The article explains the rationale behind the design and the blade interchangeability with Stanley 45s. Bottom line, if a nine year old girl can use it without instruction then so can some of us.

[James Pallas]

The skew rabbets and the somewhat similar skew block are very very good at what they do. I wouldn't want to give mine up. The #46 (basically a skewed combo plane) can probably give them a run for their money though.
Nice edit Patrick:)

[John Sanford]

Derek,

While you can certainly comment on it, my question is will you be writing up an extensive review / how-to-use it? I certainly would appreciate such an undertaking on your part.

[Simon MacGowen]

There's an informative write-up on the Veritas Combination Plane in their latest newsletter (http://www.leevalley.com/us/newsletters/Woodworking/2559/Article1.htm).

The article explains the rationale behind the design and the blade interchangeability with Stanley 45s. Bottom line, if a nine year old girl can use it without instruction then so can some of us.

Just read the newsletter.

They should have taken a photo of the girl in action, obtained her parents' permission and made her the poster girl of the new plane on social media and their promotion material!

Simon

[Derek Cohen]

Derek,

While you can certainly comment on it, my question is will you be writing up an extensive review / how-to-use it? I certainly would appreciate such an undertaking on your part.

Hi John

I do plan a write up, or more of a walk-through with set-up and user tips. Just a little short of time at the moment. Hopefully in a month or two.

Regards from Perth

Derek

[Stewie Simpson]

Slightly off topic but I'm selling a Record 045 multi plane on behalf of someone else. I'm taking the opportunity to try it out before moving it on. The first set up I used was the sash profile cutter. I could set it and stick a sash profile. However it was a fiddle and the process made me realise that it would be much easier to use a moulding plane and sash fillister. I would go as far as to say I'd rather buy a shaper to stick larger mouldings than work with a multi plane. I look forward to trying the other cutters, they are very similar to the Veritas offering, and see how they work out. At this moment my opinion is multi planes aren't much fun. Not sure I'll ever use the Veritas, I'm sure it's as good as a multi plane could be, but maybe you can't polish a turd. Steampunk boat anchor perhaps? Look forward to people who have purchased the Veritas sharing their experiences.

Graham; have a look at the higher bed angles traditionally used on wooden rebate and moulding planes and ask yourself why Veritas chose to repeat Stanley's mistake of bedding their combo plane at 45 degrees. There's valid reasons why Basswood is the chosen wood species to demonstrate this planes versatility at tool shows in the USA and Canada.

[Patrick Chase]

Graham; have a look at the higher bed angles traditionally used on wooden rebate and moulding planes and ask yourself why Veritas chose to repeat Stanley's mistake of bedding their combo plane at 45 degrees. There's valid reasons why Basswood is the chosen wood species to demonstrate this planes versatility at tool shows in the USA and Canada.

One of their design objectives was to be compatible with Stanley 45/55 irons. If they'd messed (too much) with the bed angle they would have compromised profile accuracy.

With that said my #55 has a 50 degree bed, so even Stanley apparently felt that the benefit of a slightly increased bed angle was worth the accuracy tradeoff. I would prefer that Veritas had done the same.

[Dominik Dudkiewicz]

If one already has the veritas skew rebate planes, small plow with wide blade kit and dedicated dado planes plus shoulder planes, do you think one would be better off buying both dedicated tongue and groove planes from LN at less cost than this combo? Or is there some other benefit to this plane that one would miss or would make it a better choice over the no.48 and 49?
Cheers Dom

[Simon MacGowen]

If one already has the veritas skew rebate planes, small plow with wide blade kit and dedicated dado planes plus shoulder planes, do you think one would be better off buying both dedicated tongue and groove planes from LN at less cost than this combo? Or is there some other benefit to this plane that one would miss or would make it a better choice over the no.48 and 49?
Cheers Dom

Doesn't the small plow with the T&G cutters already do what the LN T&G planes do?

I am considering the new Combo Plane because it can do fluting and reeding.

Simon

[Patrick Chase]

If one already has the veritas skew rebate planes, small plow with wide blade kit and dedicated dado planes plus shoulder planes, do you think one would be better off buying both dedicated tongue and groove planes from LN at less cost than this combo? Or is there some other benefit to this plane that one would miss or would make it a better choice over the no.48 and 49?
Cheers Dom

As somebody already pointed out, the small plough is perfectly capable of cutting T&G joints.

If you've found the plough inadequate for some reason then you might also consider the Stanley #46. The fact that it's skewed means that it would add some capabilities instead of just duplicating the functionality of a plane that you already have.

[Stewie Simpson]

One of their design objectives was to be compatible with Stanley 45/55 irons. If they'd messed (too much) with the bed angle they would have compromised profile accuracy.

With that said my #55 has a 50 degree bed, so even Stanley apparently felt that the benefit of a slightly increased bed angle was worth the accuracy tradeoff. I would prefer that Veritas had done the same.

An even higher bed angle of 55 degrees will better suit hardwoods.

[Dominik Dudkiewicz]

Yes, the small plow does use the tongue and groove blades and whilst I haven't tried them myself (hard to get a hold of here) I'd read that using the small plow for t&g is a little finicky / annoying / time consuming to set up vs the dedicated planes.

Being a recently addicted plane junky and excited to see this newly released plane I was curious to see if there was any justifiable reason to consider buying one (for me).

The only gap in functionality and desire I have is tongue and groove, but then I could buy both dedicated LN planes for the price of this combination plane (without blades). If there is no benefit over a small plow for t&g then it seems like the LN are the answer. Or buy the LV t&g blades and deal with the reported niggles / see for myself. I don't really want to get into second hand stanley planes as to be honest I don't want to spend the time looking for one and take the risks buying sight unseen online.

Cheers, Dom

[Simon MacGowen]

Yes, the small plow does use the tongue and groove blades and whilst I haven't tried them myself (hard to get a hold of here) I'd read that using the small plow for t&g is a little finicky / annoying / time consuming to set up vs the dedicated planes.

Being a recently addicted plane junky and excited to see this newly released plane I was curious to see if there was any justifiable reason to consider buying one (for me).

The only gap in functionality and desire I have is tongue and groove, but then I could buy both dedicated LN planes for the price of this combination plane (without blades). If there is no benefit over a small plow for t&g then it seems like the LN are the answer. Or buy the LV t&g blades and deal with the reported niggles / see for myself. I don't really want to get into second hand stanley planes as to be honest I don't want to spend the time looking for one and take the risks buying sight unseen online.

Cheers, Dom

It is true that the dedicated LN T&G planes will be faster to set up, but I have had zero issues with using the small plow to cut different T&Gs...lots of them since I owned it. I think the small plow also has more choices on the sizes of the T&Gs than the dedicated planes (right?).

If your key concern is with the T&Gs, my advice is not to buy the new Combo Plane or the LN planes, but to get yourself familiar with setting up the small plow for T&G cuts. It is better to make use of what you already have. And from the look of it, I don't think the new Combo Plane will be easier to set up than the small plow to cut T&Gs.

May be you can find some videos on it (the Lee Valley website?). After a few uses, the plow is pretty simple to change between the tongue and the groove cutters.

[Simon MacGowen]

An even higher bed angle of 55 degrees will better suit hardwoods.

Don't know about the new Combo plane, but I have used the small plow (45 degree bed) a lot and have not encountered any visible problems with the bed angle for all my hardwood projects (I have not used the plow on any softwood projects). What's the concern here? Tear-outs? Would a back-bevel help?

Simon

[Derek Cohen]

The only gap in functionality and desire I have is tongue and groove, but then I could buy both dedicated LN planes for the price of this combination plane (without blades). If there is no benefit over a small plow for t&g then it seems like the LN are the answer.

With the Small Plow, one needs to exchange the depth stop for the chip ejector as part of the set up process. With the Combo Plane, this is unnecessary. Just drop the blades in and go.

The Stanley/LN T&G planes are a one-shot deal, hence two versions in 1/2" and 3/4" (I have the 1/2" LN). Veritas offer three sizes, and the adjustable fence allows them to be positioned more flexibly.


An even higher bed angle of 55 degrees will better suit hardwoods.

I thought of this and included it in my recommendations to Lee Valley. I can think of a few reasons why it was not taken up (other than the fact that I was looking at a preproduction plane, and not one that was still evolving!). The most obvious one being that 45 degrees has been a workable solution over the past 100+ years for North American timbers. The second reason being that the profile of the beading blades would need to change, and there was a desire to ensure compatibility with Stanley blades.

The complex grains of Australian timbers are a problem for combination planes (all of them) since they work on a skate (no mouth). This is the reason why I looked for a solution (http://www.inthewoodshop.com/ToolReviews/VeritasSmallPlowasaBeadingPlane.html) and came up with the idea of back bevelling the blades. This is a definite improvement, but it can be defeated by West Australian hardwoods (some of which are seriously interlocked). The more realistic solution is to choose straight-grained wood.

Regards from Perth

Derek

[Pat Barry]

An even higher bed angle of 55 degrees will better suit hardwoods.
Dumb question from someone who has not used any plane of this sort ---> Why would a higher bed angle work better? If 45 degree bed angle works fine for Stanley handplanes, why not for a combo plane?

[Patrick Chase]

Dumb question from someone who has not used any plane of this sort ---> Why would a higher bed angle work better? If 45 degree bed angle works fine for Stanley handplanes, why not for a combo plane?

In three words: No cap iron.

Also, no mouth. Increased cutting angle is basically the only possible tearout mitigation for these planes.

[Simon MacGowen]

In three words: No cap iron.

Also, no mouth. Increased cutting angle is basically the only possible tearout mitigation for these planes.

The trade-off is that a high-angle cutter is harder to push, which could, not always, result in less control of the cut or the tool. Whenever possible, I prefer a 45 degree bench plane as a workhorse for large surfaces and in case of needs, I go with a low angle plane (with a high angle blade).

Apart from the measures Derek mentioned, a sharp cutter would also make a difference in most cases. Never tried it but wonder wetting (mineral spirits) the surface may tame the tear-outs. For the average woodworkers, I do not see the 45 degree bed angle being a concern.

Simon

[Jim Koepke]

If one already has the veritas skew rebate planes, small plow with wide blade kit and dedicated dado planes plus shoulder planes, do you think one would be better off buying both dedicated tongue and groove planes from LN at less cost than this combo? Or is there some other benefit to this plane that one would miss or would make it a better choice over the no.48 and 49?
Cheers Dom

Howdy Dominik and welcome to the Creek. In your next post you mention in regards to blades, (hard to get a hold of here), which makes me wonder, where is here?

My tongue and groove work has been done with a Stanley #45. If my work used more T&G then a dedicated plane might be in order. The Veritas Combination Plane can do a lot more than T&G. The Combo Plane also has a fine adjustment on the fence to help with set up accuracy. In many situation with T&G it is helpful to run a bead along side of the joint. This helps to cover any imperfections and makes the joint more decorative. The dedicated T&G planes do not have this ability.

jtk

[Stewie Simpson]

For the average woodworkers, I do not see the 45 degree bed angle being a concern.

Simon; the best of luck with that advise.

The historic name for the 45º bed angle is common pitch. A bit higher (50º, called "York pitch") is used in some bench planes for hardwood and is usual for rabbet or grooving planes. Middle pitch (55º) and half pitch or cabinet pitch (60º) are frequent in molding planes for soft and hardwood respectively. http://homepages.sover.net/~nichael/nlc-wood/chapters/caop.html

[Patrick Chase]

Simon; the best of luck with that advise.

The historic name for the 45º bed angle is common pitch. A bit higher (50º, called "York pitch") is used in some bench planes for hardwood and is usual for rabbet or grooving planes. Middle pitch (55º) and half pitch or cabinet pitch (60º) are frequent in molding planes for soft and hardwood respectively. http://homepages.sover.net/~nichael/nlc-wood/chapters/caop.html

I think that Derek made a key point here, which is that if push comes to shove and you absolutely must use a 45-degree combination plane on difficult grain then you can always back-bevel your iron to increase cutting angle. I've already done that a couple times with my #55, and with fairly complex profiles. Admittedly it adds work in honing, but a common-pitch combo plane isn't a tearout death sentence by any stretch of the imagination.

[steven c newman]

Not everyone has access to those fancy woods from down under.....most of us have to get by on Maple, Oak, and Walnut ( Oh my)......Been ploughing grooves today in Birdseye Maple....found that a candle rubbed on to the skates helps a lot when pushing the plane along....even on a Stanley 45...

[Jim Koepke]

Not everyone has access to those fancy woods from down under.....most of us have to get by on Maple, Oak, and Walnut ( Oh my)......Been ploughing grooves today in Birdseye Maple....found that a candle rubbed on to the skates helps a lot when pushing the plane along....even on a Stanley 45...

Even in soft woods like firs and hardwoods like alder it helps to rub a candle not only on the skates but also on the fence.

jtk

[Dominik Dudkiewicz]

Thanks guys. I guess the best course of action is to get at least one size of tongue and groove blade and play with my small plow to see if I'm happy with the results. In reality I probably won't do a heap of T&G so a longer setup time isn't a huge problem (I just prefer to have tools without compromise so long as costs are within reason) provided the end-result isn't compromised. I can see the benfit of the variable offset the plow provides vs the dedicated planes that centre on 1/2" and 3/4" respectively. I guess this aspect may still come in useful even if I later end up with dedicated planes.

Jim, I live in Australia and our Veritas distributor doesn't seem to stock the various blades for the plow plane(s). Ordering from Lee Valley or the UK is an alternative but then you have to buy a fair bit to justify the shipping cost - which then leads me to consider just spending a bit more again and getting dedicated planes instead.

For me, there certainly doesn't seem to be a case for this new combination plane.

Thanks again for the opinions and advice.

Cheers, Dom

[Jim Koepke]

Jim, I live in Australia and our Veritas distributor doesn't seem to stock the various blades for the plow plane(s).

Will the local distributor special order blades? You might have to wait a while for them, but it might be a good alternative to having shipping that costs more than the item you want.

jtk

[Dominik Dudkiewicz]

Will the local distributor special order blades? You might have to wait a while for them, but it might be a good alternative to having shipping that costs more than the item you want.

jtk

I found a local source today and ordered the 3/16 and 1/4" T&G blades so I will give them a go with the small plow.

[Derek Cohen]

Hi Dominik

I do not recall how well the Small Plow will work without the chip deflector ... (and should this plane now be called simply, The Plow, now that there is no Large Plow, since it called the Combination Plane?)

http://www.inthewoodshop.com/ToolReviews/AccessoryBladesfortheVeritasSmallPlow_html_m78e7fd 3f.jpg

Link to review and pictorial: http://www.inthewoodshop.com/ToolReviews/AccessoryBladesfortheVeritasSmallPlow.html

Regards from Perth

Derek

[Mike Brady]

Getting back to the OT, for a moment, Derek, can you show us your preferred profile for the cutting edge of the combination plow knicker? I have made a pair from some scraper stock and would like to try more of a finger nail shape. I have a Lie-Nielsen cutting gauge that they sell for cutting stringing. I use it as a marking gauge sometimes. It came with a spear point cutter profile that would wander off-line sometimes. I made one in the fingernail shape that solved that problem and stays very sharp. It is also much easier to sharpen freehand that that arrow shape with the intersecting bevels, which I find impossible to hold while sharpening. The fingernail is much easier to hone and strop by hand since it is a continuous bevel.

[Patrick Chase]

Getting back to the OT, for a moment, Derek, can you show us your preferred profile for the cutting edge of the combination plow knicker? I have made a pair from some scraper stock and would like to try more of a finger nail shape. I have a Lie-Nielsen cutting gauge that they sell for cutting stringing. I use it as a marking gauge sometimes. It came with a spear point cutter profile that would wander off-line sometimes. I made one in the fingernail shape that solved that problem and stays very sharp. It is also much easier to sharpen freehand that that arrow shape with the intersecting bevels, which I find impossible to hold while sharpening. The fingernail is much easier to hone and strop by hand since it is a continuous bevel.

I put a ~2 mm diameter radius on the tips of my spear-point cutters, bevelled at ~20 deg or so (freehand). You can run a surprisingly low bevel provided you don't over-engaged these cutters. I don't bother grinding the whole thing back to a thumbnail, as you don't need a profile that blunt to avoid failure.

Be very careful of burning if you use any sort of power sharpener. These nickers are very thin and have extremely low thermal mass. I burned the first one I tried to reshape that way on my belt grinder (thankfully a "test nicker" that I'd created for the purpose from blue-hard 1095, so I only lost my own time).

[steven c newman]

On the Stanley nickers/spurs, I usually only hone the flat back of them. Fingertip into the hole for the bolt. Swirl the cutter around a bit, and check for a burr......

Hmmm....wonder why my Stanley #45 does not need a "chip deflector" when using the Match cutters?

[Derek Cohen]

Getting back to the OT, for a moment, Derek, can you show us your preferred profile for the cutting edge of the combination plow knicker? I have made a pair from some scraper stock and would like to try more of a finger nail shape. I have a Lie-Nielsen cutting gauge that they sell for cutting stringing. I use it as a marking gauge sometimes. It came with a spear point cutter profile that would wander off-line sometimes. I made one in the fingernail shape that solved that problem and stays very sharp. It is also much easier to sharpen freehand that that arrow shape with the intersecting bevels, which I find impossible to hold while sharpening. The fingernail is much easier to hone and strop by hand since it is a continuous bevel.

Mike, this is what I did to mine ...

https://s19.postimg.org/71emv8asj/Nicker1.jpg

These were freehanded on diamond stones, and then polished on green compound. I retained the existing bevel angle.

Note that this removed about 2mm from the length, and to compensate for this, I filed the slot 2mm longer.

Regards from Perth

Derek

[Patrick Chase]

Derek, do you use the nickers with that much extension or is that just to show how much clearance you added by filing the slot?

The nicker is ~10 mm wide (3/8"), so that looks to my eye to be about 1.5 mm (60 mils) of extension. The nicker only needs to penetrate as deep as the shaving you are taking, so the most I ever use is about a quarter of that. The as-shipped nicker extends about 3/32", so you can grind a fairly significant radius (though admittedly not as much of a radius as you did there) without needing to file the slot.

I've been wondering all along if the people who are damaging the tips on those nickers are using more extension than needed, so I'm curious about how folks set them. I'm having good luck with a fairly tight radius, such that I didn't need to expand the slot, but I also don't extend them by much more than my cut depth.

EDIT: On a related note, does anybody know how far the newer non-adjustable Stanley 45/55 nickers adjust when new? I have the older-style adjustable nicker on my Stanley and also use that pretty sparingly, but was curious to know what you get stuck with when the newer ones are rotated such that one of the points is engaged?

[Mike Brady]

Thanks Derek, and Patrick. Just what i needed.

[Jim Koepke]

should this plane now be called simply, The Plow

Since it is a small plow compared to others, it seems right to keep 'small' in the name. Besides, nimble plow would be lost on too many prospective buyers.

Maybe it would be easier if they just gave it a number. :eek:

VSPP works for me.


wonder why my Stanley #45 does not need a "chip deflector" when using the Match cutters?

The Stanley blade depth stops do some deflection. The Stanley #45 is well known for building up a jam of shavings in use. Without the depth stop on a a match or sash cutter the shavings can catch on the underside of the blade and be a problem.

My recollection is there was a shavings diverter that never caught on.

368608

The dowel in the auxiliary depth stop holder is used to perfect one's technique. If the plane is wobbling side to side, it becomes rather obvious. A woman on Youtube demonstrated this many years ago.

jtk

[Derek Cohen]

Derek, do you use the nickers with that much extension or is that just to show how much clearance you added by filing the slot?


Patrick, the nicker was extended for the photo. In use, it would be extended just enough to score a line. Possible 1mm?

Regards from Perth

Derek

[Dominik Dudkiewicz]

Hi Dominik

I do not recall how well the Small Plow will work without the chip deflector ... (and should this plane now be called simply, The Plow, now that there is no Large Plow, since it called the Combination Plane?)

http://www.inthewoodshop.com/ToolReviews/AccessoryBladesfortheVeritasSmallPlow_html_m78e7fd 3f.jpg

Link to review and pictorial: http://www.inthewoodshop.com/ToolReviews/AccessoryBladesfortheVeritasSmallPlow.html

Regards from Perth

Derek

Hi Derek, I assumed the tongue and groove blades came with a chip breaker. Otherwise, where does one get one?

[Derek Cohen]

Hi Dominik

First try the plane without one. It is a chip deflector, not chip breaker. At worst, the mouth will load up. Then you would need to contact Lee Valley for one.

Regards from Perth

Derek

[Jim Koepke]

Hi Dominik

First try the plane without one. It is a chip deflector, not chip breaker. At worst, the mouth will load up. Then you would need to contact Lee Valley for one.

Regards from Perth

Derek

When I was using the Veritas Small Plow Plane the chip deflectors were included in the box with the blades.

jtk