What size board for a #8

[Bill Sutherland]

How small a board would a #8 Jointer handle?

[Bob Leistner]

What is the smallest piece of wood you would define as a "board" ?

[Jim Koepke]

If you are real careful maybe an inch or two. :D

Usually the piece shouldn't be too much shorter than the plane. The #8 has a lot of sole between the toe and the blade. This is for registering the sole on the work and to keep the plane above any dips on the surface.

Too bad Spokane is so far away. You could come by my shop and give it a try if you were in the area.

jtk

[steven c newman]

Let's see...a #8 is 24" long.....anything 2" longer than that should be fine.....

[Bill Sutherland]

Building small to medium boxes and trays. Right now my longest plane is a #62 LN. Sold my power Jointer and haven’t missed it.

[Jim Koepke]

Building small to medium boxes and trays. Right now my longest plane is a #62 LN. Sold my power Jointer and haven’t missed it.

You might look around at various junk shops, antique shops and yard sales and see if you can turn up a #5-1/2 or a #6 if you want something a little bigger.

My #6 often gets used on longer pieces.

jtk

[Bill Sutherland]

Since my Jointer is gone and i’m enjoying hand planing so much I think I need the #8.

[Jim Koepke]

Since my Jointer is gone and i’m enjoying hand planing so much I think I need the #8.

If you can think it, then you need it. :D

jtk

[Derek Cohen]

It is not just the length of a board that needs to be taken into account. The width of the edge is a bigger factor for me. I would rather use a #5 to joint a "narrow" 1/2" wide board than a #7. Shorter boards tend to be narrow as well.

As well as being longer and heavier, a #8 is 2 5/8" wide in the blade. By comparison, a #7 is 2 3/8" wide in the blade. For narrow jointing edges, I prefer either a 27" long woodie I made which has a 2 1/4" blade, or the HNT Gordon Trying Plane (18" long), and a 2" wide blade. Another alternative for narrow boards is the Veritas BU Jointer, which has a very low centre of gravity and a blade that is 2 1/4" wide. It seems to hug the wood, and has so much more control than a wider jointer on narrow boards.

Regards from Perth

Derek

[Patrick Chase]

Since my Jointer is gone and i’m enjoying hand planing so much I think I need the #8.

What's your biggest plane right now?

The reason I ask is because unless you're fairly strong you may find the #7 to be preferable for most jointing uses. It can handle basically the same range of board lengths, as the difference between 22" vs 24" sole length isn't very significant. There also aren't many cases where the difference between 2-3/8" and 2-5/8" iron widths matters that much, unless you happen to be edge-jointing a lot of 10/4 stock. The 1-5/8 lb weight difference (for Stanely #7 vs #8) becomes pretty noticeable over the course of a long session though.

Full disclosure: I have an 8, and use it fairly often, but I also tend to "go big" more than most.

[Bill Sutherland]

Right now the biggest plane I have is the LN 62. I am fairly strong since I'm still lifting weights and running so hours of planning is actually enjoyable for me. I find I can see what the wood is doing much better than using my previous power jointer and power planer. I still have my DeWalt 735 but after flattening one face and edge of boards I can run it through my drum sander and sneak up on the thickness I need fairly fast. I spent all yesterday afternoon doing that with much better success that with my power planer. I've also used my #62 to plane both sides of the board with success. That's why I'm wondering about the #8. I think my process would have been much faster with the #8.

[John C Cox]

What specifically are you using it for? It's not really clear to me....

If you want to knock the worst rough down before a ride through the power planer or your drum sander - then a #4 or #5 fitted with either a cambered iron or a toothing iron for roughing duty would be my go-to choice..

I have a Millers falls #7 equivalent.... I love it - but I honestly don't use it much since I got my drum sander... The old Stanley #4 and #5 see frequent duty for jointing and roughing, though.

[Bill Sutherland]

Most of what I’m making is wood boxes and trays. The trays are quite a bit bigger than the boxes. I’ll be making some wood tool chests also.

[David Bassett]

Right now the biggest plane I have is the LN 62. I am fairly strong since I'm still lifting weights and running so hours of planning is actually enjoyable for me. I find I can see what the wood is doing much better than using my previous power jointer and power planer. I still have my DeWalt 735 but after flattening one face and edge of boards I can run it through my drum sander and sneak up on the thickness I need fairly fast. I spent all yesterday afternoon doing that with much better success that with my power planer. I've also used my #62 to plane both sides of the board with success. That's why I'm wondering about the #8. I think my process would have been much faster with the #8.

I don't have a #62, but I just looked at the L-N and Blood & Gore sites and it's the length & approximate weight of a Stanley #5. (Making the #62 a little bigger than I'd thought....) You should realize you're skipping a lot of steps in the classic sequence if you jump to the #8 as your next plane. Plus you don't sound like you're working on really large surfaces (e.g. table tops.) But, ultimately only you can decide what's going to work best for you.

[Bill Houghton]

Be aware that a No. 8 weighs 9-3/4 pounds. This may not sound like much - heck, you can bench press a ten pound sack of flour all day, right? - but an enthusiastic day of work on your stock with a No. 8 will make you feel like either the Mighty Hulk or a bowl of overcooked spaghetti. Or the Mighty Hulk feeling like a bowl of overcooked spaghetti. A No. 7 weighs 8-1/8 pounds, and that pound-and-a-bit-more-than-a-half can make a difference in your endurance.

I'd never sell my No. 8, no I wouldn't, but I am glad that I later acquired a No. 7.

[steven c newman]

Maybe a little show & tell is in order....
378351
Ok, this is my Stanley No. 8 sitting behind the Millers Falls No.14 ( about the same size as a #62)
Next..
378352
Take the regular Jack away, and sit the Jumbo next to the #8 ( stanley #5-1/2, type 17)
Next..
378353
A Stanley No.7c sitting infront of the #8..not much difference?
378354
It is the width, where things differ...add in the #6 that everyone has been talking about..
378355
18" vs 22" vs 24"? Again, the width..
378356
Two of these have 2-1/8" wide blades, the #8 is 2-5/8 about a 1/2" wider. (Look JK..all low knobs!)
Almost makes my 2 patent date, low knob Stanley No. 4 look like a spare tire..
378357
( Friction tape is for a grip...sweaty hands tend to slip..)

A #8 is fine on wide items....but try to joint a "normal" 3/4" wide edge of a board? Too much work, hard to balance the plane on the edge, and push that 10 pounds of plane along. Heavy planes are hard to stop, ONCE they get moving.....it is the "return trip" where you have to lift the plane up to bring it back to the starting point, is where I do NOT like a heavy plane......try shoving these big things around ..all day long....pass the IB, please...

When boards are smaller than the #6 or the #5-1/2.....I can try the #5.....or, even the #5-1/4....all depends on the size of the work I am doing...and how the back and the arms are feeling that day.

Show & Tell is concluded...any questions?

[lowell holmes]

Just a sidelight to the discussion so far, I have 604, 605, and 607 Bedrocks, but my favorite plane is a 5 1//2 Bailey.
It is 2 3/4"x 14 1/2". It is a nice wide and long plane.

[Patrick Chase]

378356
Two of these have 2-1/8" wide blades, the #8 is 2-5/8 about a 1/2" wider. (Look JK..all low knobs!)

The 5-1/2 and 7 have 2-3/8" wide irons, or 1/4" narrower than the 8.

[Jim Koepke]

A #8 is fine on wide items....but try to joint a "normal" 3/4" wide edge of a board?

My #8 works fine at making a square edge on 3/4" stock. Sorry to hear yours is having a hard time. :(

jtk

[steven c newman]

Depends on how well I can balance that wide sole on a narrow board...nothing to do with the plane....

BTW: My #8 is usually just sitting on a shelf....prefer the #6 and #7 planes...so does my old shoulders...

[steven c newman]

Ok, besides the point about all the wear on the #8 cutter being mainly in the center of the edge......( have seen more than a few irons with that "reverse camber" )

Reminded me of a little story, from long ago.....even before Jim K's time..

The Grande Armee loved to attack in columns.....right up to the moment they would deploy to fire.....During that advance, only the first couple ranks could fire...the rest of the ranks might as well left their muskets behind. So, you had this long block of people walking through all the bullets and cannon balls,,,,

All the dead were in the front ranks...as they went down, the following rank was then hit....

Point being...while it is nice to have all that weight, and length......all the wear and tear will be in and around the center of the wide cutter. If you slide the plane to one side or the other, to spread out the wear, then balance becomes the issue. Plane becomes a bit tippy towards the un-supported side.....and you may wind up cutting a bevel along the edge.

I tend to size the planes I use to the work needed being done. Less wear & tear on me, too...;)

[Patrick Chase]

My #8 works fine at making a square edge on 3/4" stock. Sorry to hear yours is having a hard time. :(

jtk

Mine certainly works perfectly well for jointing narrow edges, too (it's not like an extra 1/4" of width really changes the balance), but it's not the most efficient solution to that problem.

[Jim Koepke]

Mine certainly works perfectly well for jointing narrow edges, too (it's not like an extra 1/4" of width really changes the balance), but it's not the most efficient solution to that problem.

When there is an eight foot plank being worked it is better than a #3 for the task.

jtk

[Bill Sutherland]

Hmmm. Sounds to me that after I get the #8 I’ll HAVE to look at some more planes!!! You guys seem to all have planes that match just about every need/situation. Are they all that helpful?

[steven c newman]

Yup..they are...

[Jim Koepke]

Hmmm. Sounds to me that after I get the #8 I’ll HAVE to look at some more planes!!! You guys seem to all have planes that match just about every need/situation. Are they all that helpful?

A simple answer to, "are they all that helpful," for me is yes. Are they all necessary, not really.

Many woodworkers get by with a jack, a jointer and a smoother. For more on this and a better answer to your inquiry read an article by Chris Schwarz:

https://www.popularwoodworking.com/article/bench-planes-the-system-of-three

For some, their work never gets to the point of needing a full length jointer like a #7 or #8.

In my various endeavors, even a small plane like a #3 or a #5-1/4 can be used as a jointer on small projects. It is all relative to what one wants to do.

On really small things my #1 was sufficient as a jointer.

jtk

[Patrick Chase]

Hmmm. Sounds to me that after I get the #8 I’ll HAVE to look at some more planes!!! You guys seem to all have planes that match just about every need/situation. Are they all that helpful?

Yes they are, every single one, as far as my spouse knows. I don't know what I would do with any less than 9 smoothers.

[Jim Koepke]

Yes they are, every single one, as far as my spouse knows. I don't know what I would do with any less than 9 smoothers.

My first thought was to be jealous thinking there are only 8 smoothers in my shop. Then it came to me, a #4-1/2 is also considered a smoother.

Nothing wrong having an extra smoother (or four) for when you really don't want to stop and sharpen a blade.

jtk

[Bill Sutherland]

Is there another reason/justification for so many planes? I would think extra blades would be helpful rather than another plane. I was thinking I’df getting a extra blade for my 62 to use as a smoother.

[Warren Mickley]

Hmmm. Sounds to me that after I get the #8 I’ll HAVE to look at some more planes!!! You guys seem to all have planes that match just about every need/situation. Are they all that helpful?

A typical 18th century woodworker would have had four or five bench planes. A good kit is a jack plane 14-16 inches for rough work, a trying plane 22 inches long for truing the face of a board, a jointer for edge joints or especially careful face work, and a smoothing plane for cleaning off the dirt and scuffs from joinery work. A wooden jointer is usually 26 to 30 inches, but since that would be too heavy for an iron plane, iron jointers are usually 22 inches. A common fifth plane is a strike block, about 12 inches, which is used for making mitres or for truing smaller pieces.

Having more bench planes than this is counter productive because you lose the intimacy that is important for efficiency and quality work. If you have too many planes you can't remember the whether a certain plane needs more camber or less, what the history is since the last sharpening, and you lose the familiarity that makes for good technique. Intimacy with the tool is also important for developing sharpening skill because you need to be able to discern small subtleties in order to improve sharpening technique.

[Robert Hazelwood]

Is there another reason/justification for so many planes? I would think extra blades would be helpful rather than another plane. I was thinking I’df getting a extra blade for my 62 to use as a smoother.

Not really, besides having a fascination with tools (not that there's anything wrong with that...). You only need 3 or 4 bench planes, and possibly a couple extra for special situations. Jack, Try, Jointer, and Smoother basically. And the jointer and try plane can be the same. Keeping a dozen bench planes sharpened and ready to go would get old, I'd think. If you do everything by hand, you'll have enough on your plate keeping all the rabbet planes, routers, plow planes, fillisters, etc. in working order without having to deal with extraneous bench planes.

I'd extend that sentiment to having multiple blades for bench planes. It may be necessary for a low angle bevel up plane if you want to shoot end grain and smooth exotic woods with the same tool, but that's just a good reason to use bevel down planes with a cap iron. I want my bench planes to do as much as possible without having to change the setup.

As for the #8, I use one as my jointer plane. It is an old type 6, with a very thin casting, and so is not as heavy as you'd think. I like the size of it, and don't find it difficult to balance on an edge that's at least 1/2" wide. It is also nice for doing things like leveling the top of a drawer, box, or frame...the extra surface on the toe and heel help keep things level and avoid tipping, vs if you tried to do it with, say, a #4.

To answer the original question, I would use my #8 for anything longer than about a foot, probably. You can even use it on very short parts, but it makes more sense to just use the smoother. On a few occasions the extra long toe comes in handy, like when planing short thin pieces where a smoother would tend to bow and break the piece.

[Stewie Simpson]

imo; there is little justification for a metal bodied hand plane that exceeds the weight of a Stanley # 4 1/2 & # 5. (4 3/4 lbs)

[Patrick Chase]

In case it wasn't obvious, my post about 9 smoothers was mostly ironic
, and Warren is certainly correct about the negative effects of not spending enough learning a small set of core tools.

I'm ashamed to admit that I do in fact have 9 smoothers

[Jim Koepke]

In case it wasn't obvious, my post about 9 smoothers was mostly ironic
, and Warren is certainly correct about the negative effects of not spending enough learning a small set of core tools.

I'm ashamed to admit that I do in fact have 9 smoothers

There is no shame attributable to my 9 smoothers. A few of them could be put up for sale or given away if the occasion arises.


If you have too many planes you can't remember the whether a certain plane needs more camber or less, what the history is since the last sharpening, and you lose the familiarity that makes for good technique. Intimacy with the tool is also important for developing sharpening skill because you need to be able to discern small subtleties in order to improve sharpening technique.

At my age it warms my heart to feel my memory is doing so well. Actually my accumulation is of various types by date. It makes it easier to recall their individual quirks. Though two of my #3s and #4s are of the same type they have differences in the totes and knobs that make them easy to tell apart. Each one of my planes also has a memory of how they were found in the wild or off ebay. Ebay memories are not as fond as ones about finding them in the basement of an antique mall or under a bench at an estate sale. One of those was my type 6, #4-1/2 for $30 at Phog Bounders in Astoria, OR. Another was a type 11, #5 for $10 in the hills north of Berkeley, CA.


imo; there is little justification for a metal bodied hand plane that exceeds the weight of a Stanley # 4 1/2 & # 5. (4 3/4 lbs)

Stewie, in my travels some of the longer wooden planes seemed to weigh more than this. Would that be an indication of something one would want to avoid in a wooden jointer?

Maybe if my journey into woodworking started out with wooden bodied planes my plane accumulation would be totally different. However once my path went down the Bailey slope my slide hasn't wavered. Though my accumulation of wooden molding planes is growing. There really aren't many true metal molding planes. Combination planes are planes that can cut molding, but to me they are not really the same as a dedicated molding plane.

jtk

[David Bassett]

While we're talking about jointer planes (sorta') and sliding off-topic...

Would someone please buy the clean looking Type 15 (1931-33) #7 (https://www.jimbodetools.com/collections/whats-new/products/stanley-no-7-jointer-plane-type-15-circa-1931-33-with-decal-sweetheart-78500) Jim Bode just put up for $150 shipped, so I won't? Thanks!

[Bill Sutherland]

My enjoyment using handplanes has really made me look at the other tools in my shop that I really don’t enjoy using and one of them is a complete Router and router table with the Incra LS and clean sweep setup. It’s noisy, time consuming to set up and I just plain and simple don’t find it fun to use. I’m going to sell it and invest in a Veritas combination plane. I have a LN router plane and have enjoyed using it.

[Jim Koepke]

My enjoyment using handplanes has really made me look at the other tools in my shop that I really don’t enjoy using and one of them is a complete Router and router table with the Incra LS and clean sweep setup. It’s noisy, time consuming to set up and I just plain and simple don’t find it fun to use. I’m going to sell it and invest in a Veritas combination plane. I have a LN router plane and have enjoyed using it.

My router table hasn't been used more than once since moving to Washington ~10 years ago. Mostly for the same reasons.

You will likely find a Veritas Combination Plane to be an investment you will enjoy.

jtk

[Bill Sutherland]

I really think I will enjoy using the Combination plane over a router. My hand tool arsenal is slowly growing.

[Patrick Chase]

You will likely find a Veritas Combination Plane to be an investment you will enjoy.



I really think I will enjoy using the Combination plane over a router. My hand tool arsenal is slowly growing.

I think that you'll enjoy the Veritas Combo *if* you have experience using other similar combination planes like the Stanley #45. If you don't then it will probably seem quite frustrating at first, though IMO taking the time to learn how to use one is worth it in the long run.

[Jim Koepke]

I think that you'll enjoy the Veritas Combo *if* you have experience using other similar combination planes like the Stanley #45. If you don't then it will probably seem quite frustrating at first, though IMO taking the time to learn how to use one is worth it in the long run.

There is a learning curve of course. The Veritas Combo isn't likely as steep a learning curve as trying to set up an old Stanley #45, even with a few extra knobs.

jtk

[Matt Evans]

For small pieces you can use a standard jack, smoother or jointer as a pseudo coopers jointer. Just mount the plane in a fixture or clamp it in a vise upside down. You then run the wood over it, rather than running it over the wood.

You can do things like add a fence and have a small neanderthal version of the powered jointer, you can skew the fence for gnarly grain, you can use a fence with a rebate plane for consistent rabbets, etc. It is also a great way to get repeatable angles by hand when building mitered boxes with any number of sides.

Length doesn't matter quite as much if you build a fixture for it, since you can add length via the fixture if you want to.

That said, I typically work in a larger scale, and use a no 6, 7 and 8 more than anything else, and use them in the standard fashion.

[Jim Koepke]

For small pieces you can use a standard jack, smoother or jointer as a pseudo coopers jointer. Just mount the plane in a fixture or clamp it in a vise upside down. You then run the wood over it, rather than running it over the wood.

BTDT, works great! Usually done with one of my #5s in the bench vise.


That said, I typically work in a larger scale, and use a no 6, 7 and 8 more than anything else, and use them in the standard fashion.

The #6 is my most used plane in that group. Maybe that is why there are still two in my shop. When there were two #7s, one got sold. There are two #8s, one of which hasn't been assembled of yet. Most likely it will be sold next time funds are needed to purchase something else.

jtk

[Bill Sutherland]

For some unknown reason I seem to be able to understand/read what is happening to the Wood by using hand tools. I never warmed up to the power Jointer because I always ended up with a tapered board and never could fully control it. That’s when I tried hand planing with my old Sears 9” hand plane and had better results and a lot more fun and peace and quiet. Same with the router in that I always seemed to bugger up a edge or corner and like the girls say ‘“ it just never blew wind up my skirt”!! I really enjoy using my LN router plane so now that the combo plane is on its way i’ll see if my router stays or gets sold.

[Bill Sutherland]

You can do things like add a fence and have a small neanderthal version of the powered jointer, you can skew the fence for gnarly grain, you can use a fence with a rebate plane for consistent rabbets, etc. It is also a great way to get repeatable angles by hand when building mitered boxes with any number of sides..

I’ve seen that done in a few videos but haven’t tried it yet. With the number 8 on the way I look forward to setting up the plane to work on small boxes I want to make.

[Patrick Chase]

You can do things like add a fence and have a small neanderthal version of the powered jointer, you can skew the fence for gnarly grain, you can use a fence with a rebate plane for consistent rabbets, etc. It is also a great way to get repeatable angles by hand when building mitered boxes with any number of sides.

I do that all the time. I often just "lock" a plane in place on my shooting board or donkey's ear (by intentionally over-tightening the rear stop) to do that.

[steven c newman]

378538
My Stanley #7c Type 9 came with two threaded holes for a fence....was an easy job to make a walnut fence...
378539
Bought a couple of thumbscrews, didn't like the allen headed ones...
378540
Had to do a rebate, for the fence to wrap around...
378541
Just like training wheels....was soon working without a fence..

[Jim Koepke]

Here is a fence held in place by hand:

378543

Like Steven said, once you get used to working with a plane it isn't needed.

Here is an image of a #4 being held in a vise to use on small parts:

378544

The picture of a an angled piece in next to the plane for cutting a bevel can not be found at the moment.

If you use a plane in this manner be sure to mind the tips of your fingers, it can be mighty a painful and then embarrassing experience.

jtk

[Bill Sutherland]

I’ve seen a number of “training wheels” for the larger planes. I think Veritas has a magnetic fence that attaches. At my age anything is helpful.

[Jim Koepke]

I’ve seen a number of “training wheels” for the larger planes. I think Veritas has a magnetic fence that attaches. At my age anything is helpful.

The best training wheels is learning to use a small square to check your work. In time you can train yourself to see very close to square by looking at the end of the piece being worked. A square will give you a visual of how much you are on or off square. After a while, when out of square you will be able to judge how many shaving thicknesses out. Then you will be able to tilt or bias the plane to the high side knowing that if you are about four shavings out you want to take a shaving about a quarter of the thickness from the edge you are working. The next pass is then biased to take about a half the width and so on. In my experience if the first cut is a quarter of the thickness, riding the flat made by that pass will have you at square when the shaving is full width of the work.

If you get a lot of practice planing and checking you will be surprised in how you will get in the groove and your work is square. Kind of like riding a bike without training wheels. sure there are a few errors, but in short order the training wheels become a hinderance.

jtk