Fine Tuning a Stanley Bedrock Plane

[Roy Turbett]

I'm in the process of fine tuning a #605 Bedrock plane and will be adding a new thicker Veritas iron and chip breaker. The mouth on the plane is only 4 mm and, even with the frog adjusted to its most rearward position, won't accommodate the thicker iron without closing off the opening in the mouth. Should I just make the mouth opening larger by filing the edge closest to the toe? If so, how much clearance should I be shooting for? I assume it should be similar to the opening on a new Lie-Nielson plane.

[steven c newman]

First question I have..WHY? What was wrong with the OEM iron and chipbreaker? I currently USE two Stanley No. 5s WITH their OEM cutters. A #5 and a #5c. Unless you plan to use it as a large smoother?

[Roy Turbett]

I purchased the Bedrock on Ebay and the PO had damaged the iron and chip breaker beyond repair during his "restoration". That and I had a chance to use a Lie-Neilson plane with a premium blade and liked it.

[Derek Cohen]

I'm in the process of fine tuning a #605 Bedrock plane and will be adding a new thicker Veritas iron and chip breaker. The mouth on the plane is only 4 mm and, even with the frog adjusted to its most rearward position, won't accommodate the thicker iron without closing off the opening in the mouth. Should I just make the mouth opening larger by filing the edge closest to the toe? If so, how much clearance should I be shooting for? I assume it should be similar to the opening on a new Lie-Nielson plane.

Hi Roy

It depends on what you plan to use the #605 to do. I have mine set up as a jack plane with a 12" radius blade using the original blade.

https://s19.postimg.org/o3vpk1hvn/Bedrock_605-9_zpsqw9ptwoe.jpg

There is plenty of open space for thick shavings ...

https://s19.postimg.org/sprtseqk3/Bedrock_605-10_zpsxsatqsdw.jpg

I have tried a PM-V11 in it (should I ever need to have one plane for two tasks), and it can be used with the chipbreaker closed up. However, I choose not to use this plane for smoothing. Sorry, no photo of this.

Regards from Perth

Derek

[Prashun Patel]

I ordered one of these for my Bailey #4. I've switched it between that and my Bailey #5. I haven't had a problem with the mouth.

2" A2 Blade & Veritas® Cap Iron (http://www.leevalley.com/us/wood/page.aspx?cat=1,230,41182&p=66868)

[Robert Hazelwood]

Aim for as small as reasonably possible. You don't need it ultra tight, but I think planes work better with a smaller mouth (especially doing things like planing small parts). Plus, there's no reason to remove more metal than necessary. I would do it in increments, and test after each. When testing, you want the blade camber and shaving depth to match the intended use.

[Roy Turbett]

Thanks for all the replies. The iron I'm having the problem with is the one Prashun mentions and its about .5 mm thicker than the OEM. The mouth opening on Derek's Bedrock plane appears to be larger than the one on mine. I checked the mouth opening on a Sweetheart era No. 5 Bailey that I bought at a yard sale and its about 5 mm which is about 1 mm wider than the Bedrock. It came with three OEM irons that were ground straight, cambered and with a radius.

I'm going to follow Robert's advice and take off the metal in increments until the iron fits with a cambered grind but have one more question. Last night I found an article Roland Johnson wrote for Fine Woodworking on restoring old planes. In it he describes repairing nicks in the throat with a mill bastard file and says to be sure to hold the file perpendicular to the sole. I've seen some other videos that recommend a slight back bevel of up to 15 degrees. Any thoughts on this? Also, any Lie-Nielson owners out there can tell me the width of the throat?

[Phil Mueller]

Hi Roy, this doesn’t really answer your question, but my Stanley 5C has a mouth opening of just shy of .5mm. The replacement veritas iron works well for me without any mouth alteration. I agree going in increments is a good way to go. I think my iron would work even if the mouth was slighly narrower.

[Robert Hazelwood]

I don't think the "wear" angle (the wear being the surface at the front of the mouth) is going to matter much on a metal plane. It's more critical on a wooden plane where it affects the rate the mouth opens as the sole is worn, and feeding of the shavings. All of my LN and Bailey planes seem to be at 90 degrees, and I can confirm they work fine. So I would just file it at 90, or try to match whatever the existing angle is.

The mouth is right at 3/16" wide, total, on my LN 4.

[Rob Luter]

Hi Roy -

I’ll echo Robert’s suggestion to file at 90*. Take your time. Be precise. You will use the plane for many more hours than it will take to perfect the mouth. No problem altering the mouth to accommodate the new blade. It will likely outlast you and then you won’t need to worry about it :D.

[Roy Turbett]

I spent the afternoon in the shop and determined that I didn't have to enlarge the mouth after all. The problem with the thicker blade is that you can't fully retract it because it hits the back of the mouth with the adjustment screw turned to the bottom of the thread and the yoke fully extended. I compensated for this by grinding 1/16" off of the end of my Veritas chip breaker. I ended up with a secondary bevel on the top of the chip breaker that I honed and polished. This let me set the iron at a higher starting point and keep the narrow mouth opening. I put the plane back together and was able to produce shavings .001" thick.

Photo #1 shows the bottom side of the chip breaker.
Photo #2 shows the top side of the chip breaker. Notice the secondary bevel.
Photo #3 shows the shaving I was able to get.
Photo #4 shows the mouth opening.

370682370683370684 370685

[steven c newman]

So...the plane was a #604c.....long way from a Jack plane....still, would make a nice smoother.

[Roy Turbett]

So...the plane was a #604c.....long way from a Jack plane....still, would make a nice smoother.

Actually, I also have a #605 and just took photos of the #604. But its the same issue with both planes and has to do with the Bedrock frog and sole being on an incline. When you advance the frog forward to narrow the throat, the depth of cut on the iron gets deeper because the frog is going downhill rather than parallel to the sole. So, unlike a Bailey plane where the frog and iron move parallel to the sole, you have to turn the adjuster nut to raise the iron in order to maintain the same depth of cut. The problem is that the nut reaches the end of the threads before the thicker iron can be fully retracted. If you move the frog to the rear to raise the iron, it hits the back of the throat and the iron doesn't seat flush on the frog. Reducing the distance from the front of the chip breaker to yoke slot compensates for the additional thickness of the iron because it changes the starting position of the yoke and the adjuster nut doesn't bottom out before the iron is fully retracted. In theory, you could achieve the same result by changing the angle that the yoke is presented to the adjuster nut but I wouldn't because the yoke is fragile cast iron and will probably break.

[Pat Barry]

I spent the afternoon in the shop and determined that I didn't have to enlarge the mouth after all. The problem with the thicker blade is that you can't fully retract it because it hits the back of the mouth with the adjustment screw turned to the bottom of the thread and the yoke fully extended. I compensated for this by grinding 1/16" off of the end of my Veritas chip breaker. I ended up with a secondary bevel on the top of the chip breaker that I honed and polished. This let me set the iron at a higher starting point and keep the narrow mouth opening. I put the plane back together and was able to produce shavings .001" thick.

Photo #1 shows the bottom side of the chip breaker.
Photo #2 shows the top side of the chip breaker. Notice the secondary bevel.
Photo #3 shows the shaving I was able to get.
Photo #4 shows the mouth opening.

370682370683370684 370685
Did you have to change the angle of the chip breaker leading edge? Did this affect your ability to place the edge of the chip breaker in close proximity to the blade edge?

[Derek Cohen]

I ... determined that I didn't have to enlarge the mouth after all. ... I compensated for this by grinding 1/16" off of the end of my Veritas chip breaker. I ended up with a secondary bevel on the top of the chip breaker that I honed and polished. This let me set the iron at a higher starting point and keep the narrow mouth opening. I put the plane back together and was able to produce shavings .001" thick.

Hi Roy

How close can you get the chipbreaker behind the bevel before the plane stalls?

The reason I ask is because, for several years now, setting the chipbreaker close to the edge of the chipbreaker has become the premiere method of controlling tearout. A closed mouth is not as successful. However, as you have discovered, a close set chipbreaker and a tight mouth do not go together. The answer is to open the mouth, since the size of the mouth becomes irrelevant when this method is used.

Can you pull the frog further back with the PM blade and chipbreaker in place? If not, and the #4 was mine, I would open the mouth as long as the mouth could still be closed up (should I wish to use it that way) by sliding the frog forward. This is assuming that you, like myself, used the chipbreaker for tearout control.

Regards from Perth

Derek

[Roy Turbett]

Hi Roy

How close can you get the chipbreaker behind the bevel before the plane stalls?

The reason I ask is because, for several years now, setting the chipbreaker close to the edge of the chipbreaker has become the premiere method of controlling tearout. A closed mouth is not as successful. However, as you have discovered, a close set chipbreaker and a tight mouth do not go together. The answer is to open the mouth, since the size of the mouth becomes irrelevant when this method is used.

Can you pull the frog further back with the PM blade and chipbreaker in place? If not, and the #4 was mine, I would open the mouth as long as the mouth could still be closed up (should I wish to use it that way) by sliding the frog forward. This is assuming that you, like myself, used the chipbreaker for tearout control.

Regards from Perth

Derek

Derek,

I'm not sure exactly what you're asking but the bottom line is that you can adjust the plane exactly the same as you can with an OEM blade and chip breaker. Reducing the distance between the front of the chip breaker and the yoke adjuster slot on the chip breaker simply changes the starting position of the adjuster knob so it won't bottom out when trying to retract the blade. This adjustment is only needed for Bedrock style planes.

In the photos above I have the chip breaker set about 1/16" from the bevel on the iron. The frog is about 1/16" from the rear of the throat and can be moved back to open the mouth if you so choose.

I hope this helps and thanks for your comments.

Roy

[steven c newman]

What I have on my Stanley No. 4..
370749
With a shaving or two....OEM iron, Stanley clipped corner box logo.
As for a cambered iron in a Stanley No. 5c
370750
Needs a bit of a gap, to allow the thicker shavings to pass through...
370751
Barely...

[Jim Koepke]

the yoke is fragile cast iron and will probably break.

No probably about it, it is a (cast) iron clad guarantee. DAMHIKT!

jtk