Matthew Hutchinson477
11-22-2017, 10:03 AM
After reluctance to spend the big bucks on a No. 7 jointer plane (I made myself a rule that it had to be under $100), my irrational stubbornness paid off this time. A seller that I established a relationship with (highly recommended tactic, by the way) gave me a deal on a nearly-mint Type 19 for $75. Yes, I'll take it. A week later on craigslist I found another No. 7 for $60 and I bought it as well. I did say my price-related stubbornness was irrational. Anyway, I figured I'd do a direct comparison to get to the bottom of this whole "older SW-era planes are infinitely better" argument that I see on the internet. As I was getting into this hobby I saw a lot of talk about certain types being superior and I can imagine a lot of beginners get caught up in seeking specific types thinking they are better. So, time to put some idears to the test!
372047 372048
Differences
Apart from just aesthetic differences:
-Keyhole on the 14 vs Kidney-style hole 19. The keyhole is easier to put on and take off but the Kidney-style is probably less prone to sliding. I do notice that with the keyhole-style if the screw is not tightened enough the lever cap will move slightly if you adjust the iron backward. Overall, not a big deal, though. If the iron's final adjustment is forward as it should be the lever cap will be forward all the way against the lever cap screw.
-Tote and Knob. The finish on the Type 19 is hideous. It's thick, conceals the color and figure of the wood, and even has a couple drips. It was clearly not done by a patient professional. The tote on the 19 is also not shaped as well in my opinion. It's thicker and kind of clunky. The 14's tote is thinner with smoother curves, and it is noticeably more comfortable to me. Again, not a big deal, though, because the tote would be cleaned up and reshaped without much trouble.
-Frog and Mating Surface. This is the big one. I'll let the pictures do most of the talking.
Type 14:
372037372038
Type 19:
372039372040
The 14's frog has a lot more contact area both with the iron and with the plane body. I think this is what high-brau collectors would fuss about the most. Personally, I'm skeptical that it makes a tremendous difference. If the 19 has enough solid contact to not chatter or anything then it's good enough. The one thing I will say is this--see that little notch at the front of the frog? And the little hump at the very front of the frog mating surface on the plane body? On the 14 that notch and hump fit together and limit the lateral movement of the frog. On the 19 there is no contact between the frog's notch and the plane body's hump, so the frog can shift laterally by quite a bit. This makes the 19 more of a pain to adjust initially. Even with that, most of us don't touch the frog adjustment after we set it so it's a minor inconvenience.
-Casting. The 19 has a noticeably thicker casting. Both planes have solidly flat soles. I didn't lap the 14's sole at all because it doesn't need it, and the 19's sole turned out to have slight high spots at the toe, heel, and right in front of the mouth so it probably didn't need to be lapped. Using 100 grit on glass I got it to the point where 80-90% of the sole was scratching and it didn't take much time.
372041
The thicker casting of the 19 did make it heavier but the difference is only noticeable to me because I was paying attention. Some people might prefer the heavier plane, others the lighter. Makes little difference to me.
-Iron and Chipbreaker. The 19 had a thicker iron. 0.088" versus 0.073" for the 14. I also noticed that it felt harder when being sharpened. Maybe it just felt that way because it was thicker but it definitely seemed harder to scratch. The chipbreaker on the 19 also looks less refined without the clear curve that the 14's chipbreaker has. That said, both work well and required minimal honing to get a solid fit.
372042
Summing Things Up
-Lever cap: Type 19's kidney-style hole is slightly more secure in my opinion but really negligible difference
-Tote and knob: Type 14 is clearly superior, though this is also easy to fix
-Frog and mating surface: Type 14 is a superior design with more contact and better adjustment. Whether or not that translates into superior performance I don't know
-Casting: Can't decide here. I tend to associate a thinner casting (type 14) with more precise manufacturing. It feels more refined and I wonder if it will wear me out less being lighter. That said, I imagine some would prefer the thicker casting of the type 19.
-Iron and chipbreaker: I give the edge to the type 19. Thicker iron is better, plain and simple. I could care less about the exact shape of the chipbreaker. Both work.
Performance Test
I cleaned up both planes and put a rather hasty 30* edge on each blade. Sharp enough to shave with but not a perfect mirror polish. I did get around to tuning the Type 19 which included lapping the sole, frog, and frog mating surface with 100 grit sandpaper on glass. The Type 14 had the frog lapped a little but that's it. I'm impatient, sue me. The quarry is quarter-sawn red oak.
Both planes were about equal in terms of ease of adjustment. Both could be adjusted to take nice, thin shavings without much trouble. The 19, having been lapped with 100 grit, was noticeably harder to push but I suppose that is my doing. I also found myself preferring the lighter weight of the 14. The heavier weight of the 19 might be nice for powering through thick shavings or harder wood but this isn't a jack plane so I feel that the benefit is negated. The 19's tote was less comfortable and became annoying. I would definitely do some shaping and finish it with something not so thick and plastic-y. Finishing rosewood in such a way is a crime. I did not notice either iron getting dull more quickly. As for the frog/mating surface issue? Neither plane chattered so I would say that the type 19's design isn't a disadvantage in use. Maybe with some tougher wood but I can't confirm that. Though I do have some osage waiting to be planed...
So, in conclusion: Yes, the SW-era plane does appear to be made better and given the choice I'd choose one over a newer plane. But the difference in performance is minimal so I wouldn't shy away from a newer plane. I'd take a type 19 in good condition over a SW-era plane in bad condition any day, and I wouldn't pay much more for an older plane. Moral of the story: make your decision based on price and condition of the plane. If you're a collector with a sentimental desire for certain types then enjoy your hobby and take pride in your piece of history. But if you're a pure user only concerned with performance? Buy your planes based on price and condition, not type.
372047 372048
Differences
Apart from just aesthetic differences:
-Keyhole on the 14 vs Kidney-style hole 19. The keyhole is easier to put on and take off but the Kidney-style is probably less prone to sliding. I do notice that with the keyhole-style if the screw is not tightened enough the lever cap will move slightly if you adjust the iron backward. Overall, not a big deal, though. If the iron's final adjustment is forward as it should be the lever cap will be forward all the way against the lever cap screw.
-Tote and Knob. The finish on the Type 19 is hideous. It's thick, conceals the color and figure of the wood, and even has a couple drips. It was clearly not done by a patient professional. The tote on the 19 is also not shaped as well in my opinion. It's thicker and kind of clunky. The 14's tote is thinner with smoother curves, and it is noticeably more comfortable to me. Again, not a big deal, though, because the tote would be cleaned up and reshaped without much trouble.
-Frog and Mating Surface. This is the big one. I'll let the pictures do most of the talking.
Type 14:
372037372038
Type 19:
372039372040
The 14's frog has a lot more contact area both with the iron and with the plane body. I think this is what high-brau collectors would fuss about the most. Personally, I'm skeptical that it makes a tremendous difference. If the 19 has enough solid contact to not chatter or anything then it's good enough. The one thing I will say is this--see that little notch at the front of the frog? And the little hump at the very front of the frog mating surface on the plane body? On the 14 that notch and hump fit together and limit the lateral movement of the frog. On the 19 there is no contact between the frog's notch and the plane body's hump, so the frog can shift laterally by quite a bit. This makes the 19 more of a pain to adjust initially. Even with that, most of us don't touch the frog adjustment after we set it so it's a minor inconvenience.
-Casting. The 19 has a noticeably thicker casting. Both planes have solidly flat soles. I didn't lap the 14's sole at all because it doesn't need it, and the 19's sole turned out to have slight high spots at the toe, heel, and right in front of the mouth so it probably didn't need to be lapped. Using 100 grit on glass I got it to the point where 80-90% of the sole was scratching and it didn't take much time.
372041
The thicker casting of the 19 did make it heavier but the difference is only noticeable to me because I was paying attention. Some people might prefer the heavier plane, others the lighter. Makes little difference to me.
-Iron and Chipbreaker. The 19 had a thicker iron. 0.088" versus 0.073" for the 14. I also noticed that it felt harder when being sharpened. Maybe it just felt that way because it was thicker but it definitely seemed harder to scratch. The chipbreaker on the 19 also looks less refined without the clear curve that the 14's chipbreaker has. That said, both work well and required minimal honing to get a solid fit.
372042
Summing Things Up
-Lever cap: Type 19's kidney-style hole is slightly more secure in my opinion but really negligible difference
-Tote and knob: Type 14 is clearly superior, though this is also easy to fix
-Frog and mating surface: Type 14 is a superior design with more contact and better adjustment. Whether or not that translates into superior performance I don't know
-Casting: Can't decide here. I tend to associate a thinner casting (type 14) with more precise manufacturing. It feels more refined and I wonder if it will wear me out less being lighter. That said, I imagine some would prefer the thicker casting of the type 19.
-Iron and chipbreaker: I give the edge to the type 19. Thicker iron is better, plain and simple. I could care less about the exact shape of the chipbreaker. Both work.
Performance Test
I cleaned up both planes and put a rather hasty 30* edge on each blade. Sharp enough to shave with but not a perfect mirror polish. I did get around to tuning the Type 19 which included lapping the sole, frog, and frog mating surface with 100 grit sandpaper on glass. The Type 14 had the frog lapped a little but that's it. I'm impatient, sue me. The quarry is quarter-sawn red oak.
Both planes were about equal in terms of ease of adjustment. Both could be adjusted to take nice, thin shavings without much trouble. The 19, having been lapped with 100 grit, was noticeably harder to push but I suppose that is my doing. I also found myself preferring the lighter weight of the 14. The heavier weight of the 19 might be nice for powering through thick shavings or harder wood but this isn't a jack plane so I feel that the benefit is negated. The 19's tote was less comfortable and became annoying. I would definitely do some shaping and finish it with something not so thick and plastic-y. Finishing rosewood in such a way is a crime. I did not notice either iron getting dull more quickly. As for the frog/mating surface issue? Neither plane chattered so I would say that the type 19's design isn't a disadvantage in use. Maybe with some tougher wood but I can't confirm that. Though I do have some osage waiting to be planed...
So, in conclusion: Yes, the SW-era plane does appear to be made better and given the choice I'd choose one over a newer plane. But the difference in performance is minimal so I wouldn't shy away from a newer plane. I'd take a type 19 in good condition over a SW-era plane in bad condition any day, and I wouldn't pay much more for an older plane. Moral of the story: make your decision based on price and condition of the plane. If you're a collector with a sentimental desire for certain types then enjoy your hobby and take pride in your piece of history. But if you're a pure user only concerned with performance? Buy your planes based on price and condition, not type.