2-1/16 inch wide plane iron?

[Mark R Webster]

What Stanley/Bailey hand plane used a 2-1/16 inch wide iron in the 1920s. Was it just considered a 2" for the #4 and #5?
Thanks

[Patrick Chase]

What Stanley/Bailey hand plane used a 2-1/16 inch wide iron in the 1920s. Was it just considered a 2" for the #4 and #5?
Thanks

I don't know of any Stanley bench plane that used a 2-1/16" iron. The #4 and #5 have always been 2". The next step up that I know of was the original 5-1/2 at 2-1/4", though it was later embiggened to use the same 2-3/8" iron as the 4-1/2, 6, and 7.

[Mark R Webster]

Interesting, I am looking at a 2-1/16 wide iron with a Sweetheart logo:confused:

[Patrick Chase]

Interesting, I am looking at a 2-1/16 wide iron with a Sweetheart logo:confused:

As Patrick Leach has said, Stanley didn't know about things like type studies when they were building their products. A lot of variations crept in at different points throughout that run, that weren't necessarily reflected in specifications or consistent from factory to factory.

The bench planes do have some clearance in width, so it may be that one of the factories was grinding irons out of spec but not so much as to be unworkable. Modern statistical process controls didn't exist back then after all.

[steven c newman]

Maybe an owner was just trying to "re-size" an iron....to better fit a #4? Say from a 2-1/4" down to that 2-1/16" width? Does the chipbreaker match the width of the iron? Or, is it a 2" chipbreaker, sitting on the slightly wider iron?

[Mark R Webster]

I tend to agree with you Patrick as far as specs, Steven, the cap iron is narrower. I suppose the iron "could" have been wider and was narrowed. :rolleyes:

[Patrick Chase]

I tend to agree with you Patrick as far as specs, Steven, the cap iron is narrower. I suppose the iron "could" have been wider and was narrowed. :rolleyes:

That could be consistent with either theory (mine or Steven's). I can't think of any way you could tell offhand, other than maybe finding other people who've seen the same.

[steven c newman]

Those iron would have edges looking like they were forged.......IF it had been ground narrower, there may be grinder marks along the edges. Lay the iron on top of a 2" wide iron, and look at how the angled part lines up. Doubtful they would have ground those as well.

[Jim Koepke]

In the line of transitional planes the #27 had a 2-1/8" blade. Stanley did buy Union Plane Co. during the SW years and continued some of the line. My knowledge is zilch on what size blades any Union transitional planes might have used.

jtk

[Mark R Webster]

A lot of missing/hard to find history out there. Regarding the old tool world :( thanks Jim

[Jim Koepke]

A lot of missing/hard to find history out there. Regarding the old tool world :( thanks Jim

If you ever want to dive into the basics of Stanley planes check Patrick Leach's Blood and Gore at www.supertool.com.

He also has a monthly list of tools for sale with information on many other tools and makers. Even if one isn't considering purchasing any tools it is an excellent source of an old tool education.

jtk

[Mark R Webster]

Hi Jim I am on his mailing list. He has been and is a wonderful resource for me. Thanks for the post. :)

[Phil Mueller]

embiggened?! :D Made me laugh.