Jointer Plane - How much do you really use it?

[JohnM Martin]

I was just wondering how many of you use a jointer plane on a regular basis for things like flattening the face of long boards. For example, suppose you had a large project coming up like making a dining room table top or large headboard. Would you do all of the prep work for those types of projects by hand, or would you bring in the power?

As a secondary question, are the old stanley #7s (with a replacement blade and chip breaker) as good as the modern premium makers? I currently have an old stanley that is in decent shape that i picked up on the auction site a few years ago. I upgraded the blade and chip breaker because what it came with seemed worse for wear. It seems to work ok, but I can't help but wonder from those that have used both old and new if there is a significant difference in upgrading - especially given the significant price tag for a new jointer from a modern premium maker.

[ken hatch]

I was just wondering how many of you use a jointer plane on a regular basis for things like flattening the face of long boards. For example, suppose you had a large project coming up like making a dining room table top or large headboard. Would you do all of the prep work for those types of projects by hand, or would you bring in the power?

As a secondary question, are the old stanley #7s (with a replacement blade and chip breaker) as good as the modern premium makers? I currently have an old stanley that is in decent shape that i picked up on the auction site a few years ago. I upgraded the blade and chip breaker because what it came with seemed worse for wear. It seems to work ok, but I can't help but wonder from those that have used both old and new if there is a significant difference in upgrading - especially given the significant price tag for a new jointer from a modern premium maker.

John,

I have both Stanley and LN's #8 planes along with a couple or three wood stock joiners. I'll add all the machines needed as well. What I use machine vs. plane depends of wood, project, time, and mood. When I dig the joiners out the order of preference is wood stock followed by one of the Stanleys with a OEM iron and cap iron and very seldom, and usually just to remind myself why it is the last to be used, the LN #8.

ken

[Nathan Johnson]

Out of the old planes I've restored so far, my Stanley 7c was in the roughest shape, but turns out to be the best user. I don't know why, but it just seems to set up easier and give better results, to the point where I'm not even using a smoother afterwards sometimes.
It's been used on every project I've done so far and is the last plane I'd give up at this point.
This has the original blade and chipbreaker. They work so well I wouldn't consider swapping them.

[Matt Evans]

#6, #7, #8 are the most used planes in my shop. All have original blades or OEM. Stanly 6, millers falls 7, Sargent 8. All fantastic users.


Not sure about some of the newer jointers, as that I have only used one occasionally at either a friends shop or woodwoorking shows.

[steven c newman]

How much do I use my Jointers? Sometime, you might read one of my Build Threads.....

[Robert Hazelwood]

I use a wooden try plane and an old Stanley #8. I don't have a power jointer, so I do all face and edge jointing by hand. I can then run jointed boards through a lunchbox planer (if they are 12" wide or less) to bring them down to size. Even if I had a powered jointer, I would still need the hand planes for wide boards and slabs.

Vintage jointer planes are good, as long as the sole is reasonably flat, which unfortunately is not always the case. I have two vintage jointers, a 7 and an 8, and both were in decent enough shape that I had to do little work except prep the blade. I'm not sure how flat they actually are because I have purposefully not checked, but they can produce good shavings and flat surfaces, and so I reckon they are flat enough. If I were to check I might be tempted to spend many hours correcting some small error. If they were not flat enough, then it's a pretty big job to correct it. You really need a large, flat lap to do a good job...ideally twice as long as the plane, so something like 4'. Even then, there is so much surface area that the abrasion goes slowly due to lack of pressure. You could speed this up by working the high spots with a file or small sanding block. Still, it's a big job, perhaps an order of magnitude more work than for a #4. And it would be easy to make a mess of it compared to a shorter plane.

If you are worried about the possibility of buying a vintage jointer that needs sole work, then a LN or Veritas might make sense if you can swing the funds (money vs. time, etc.). The only drawback to these is they will be heavy, and face jointing is a lot of work. Also, big metal planes can have a lot of drag on a wood surface, and the more perfectly flat they are, the more drag (and suction) they seem to have. Which is why I've come to prefer a wooden try plane for working the faces of boards- it glides easier and doesn't require constant waxing.

It is also much easier and more enjoyable to flatten the sole of a wooden plane. But there are other issues to deal with- blade bedding, wedge tuning, eliminating shaving traps, etc. The learning curve to use one is a little steeper. They require ongoing maintenance. And it can be hard to find an old one in good shape. You can buy new ones, but they are not any cheaper than a LN jointer. They make a lot of sense for someone who is serious about hand dimensioning and will do it all the time, but maybe not for someone who will only use them occasionally.

[David Bassett]

... As a secondary question, are the old stanley #7s (with a replacement blade and chip breaker) as good as the modern premium makers? ....

I think this question is the biggest advantage to a new premium plane compared to a quality older plane that is in good shape. With the new plane, if I have a problem, it's 99% chance it is my technique. With a vintage plane, there are other options: Did I restore it correctly? Is it working well or in someway out of whack? (Though, for me, it's still probably my technique. :( )

If your restored #7 is flat, square, and the adjustments work well, I don't think a premium plane offers much extra other than shine. (Go to a L-N event. Shiny! :) )

[James Waldron]

If you buy S2S or S4S lumber, a jack and jointer/foreplane are rarely needed except for edges, and even then, a smoother can do decently if not optimally. If, like me, you start with all rough lumber, both are essential. I stay away from machines these days, except for ripping and/or resawing on the bandsaw for large pieces. For small pieces, ripping and resawing are [may be, depending on energy level, etc.] done by hand. In any case, I start with a scrub plane if needed, then flatten with a jack, then straighten and further flatten with a jointer/foreplane.

In essence, the choice (or necessity) of hand planes depends on the work you're doing and the stock you'll be using. There is no magic bullet answer for all users.

[Mike Holbrook]

First, I guess we have to consider the size of the wood being jointed. If one tends to work smaller pieces then just about any plane will serve as a jointer. The OP specifically mentions large surfaces which is where the long jointers shine. I use mid size, #5, #5 1/2 & #6 planes a great deal. My Custom 5 1/2 does the majority of my jointer work. I have plans to make a new bench and a new table. When those projects get started I may use longer jointers. I may even finally finish a 26 1/2” wood jointer, that thus far I have not needed. I never fine tuned my long wood jointer because I figured it might change before I got around to using it. I was also starting to see new wood plane blades with chip breakers start to enter the market. Making ones own jointer can be a challenging project too.

Another consideration is how critical the flatness of the final surface is to the design of the piece. The table I make will have a little texture in the final surface. I am not sure I need a jointer with a chip breaker. My LV/LA jointer is easy to use and I am not as critical of final surfaces as many are. My jointers may have a little more camber than those of other posters, for the same reasons.

[Jim Koepke]

I was just wondering how many of you use a jointer plane on a regular basis for things like flattening the face of long boards. For example, suppose you had a large project coming up like making a dining room table top or large headboard. Would you do all of the prep work for those types of projects by hand, or would you bring in the power?

As a secondary question, are the old stanley #7s (with a replacement blade and chip breaker) as good as the modern premium makers? I currently have an old stanley that is in decent shape that i picked up on the auction site a few years ago. I upgraded the blade and chip breaker because what it came with seemed worse for wear. It seems to work ok, but I can't help but wonder from those that have used both old and new if there is a significant difference in upgrading - especially given the significant price tag for a new jointer from a modern premium maker.

Since my main power tools are a lathe, bandsaw and drill press, bringing on the power to flatten a board isn't an option. My hand held power tools do not get much use in the shop.

Then it depends on a few things as to which plane is used. One of my #6s gets used on smaller things:

378732

Here it is being used on pieces that are ~4' long. Bigger pieces are usually worked with larger planes, especially when planing for edge joints.

Though there are premium blades in some of my planes, most work quite fine with their original blades. A premium blade may save a few trips to the sharpening station during heavy work sessions.

The improvements available by upgrading are many of the modern planes have benefited from improvements in manufacturing and metallurgy. In the case of Lie-Nielsen planes the adjustment mechanism, having less backlash, is much better than on older planes. Some folks are bothered by backlash in the depth adjuster, not me.

Most modern planes are made of ductile metal so they do not break when they are dropped on a cement floor.

Veritas planes have set screws for guiding their blades which many people really like for saving a little set up time. Now Veritas (Lee Valley) has a Custom line so one can have different angle frogs to help with the characteristics of various woods.

Combined the cost of my #7 & #8 was $71.25. No, it isn't everyday deals like that come along. My patience waiting for a deal is legendary among some of the folks who know me. The planes mentioned were bought at different times in different places.

When it gets down to the finished piece, there will not be any difference between the work done with a carefully fettled yard sale find and an equivalent modern premium plane. 'Equivalent' is used because the Custom planes from Veritas with different angled frogs may be capable of producing a smoother surface with a low angle frog or less tear out with a high angle frog. These are not generally big issues with a jointer plane. The chip breaker and lighter shavings can usually control tear out and the evidence of any tear out can usually be mitigated with a smoother afterward.

jtk

[John C Cox]

With guitars - I do a lot of hand jointing plates... But I generally use a good #4 or #5 to shoot the joint... And sometimes even a finely set and hair popping sharp block plane...

I use the same planes for shooting joints on longer and larger boards... Yes - including the block plane where I need to massage a certain spot..

What I have learned is that good jointing is more about technique than a huge long plane... The plane will cut deeper wherever you put more pressure and vice versa... As such - clamp positions and hand positions must move around as you are pushing towards a joint that candles properly..

[Jeff Heath]

For me, when I make the conscientious decision to build a project totally unplugged, then the combined efforts of my jointer planes come out. I have a woodie I made myself, as well as #7 & #8 hand-me-downs. This is typically done by me in furniture that I am building as a gift to a family member or friend. I enjoy giving the gift better when it is "hand made."

I must confess, however, that typically in my shop, when completing commissions, that these become the weapon of choice, for speed's sake.

378736

[Nicholas Lawrence]

I use my jointer less than I used to. I do not have a powered jointer or planer. I used to use it a lot more, but over the years have gotten to where I do more with the jack, less with the jointer, less with the smoother.

[Patrick Chase]

I was just wondering how many of you use a jointer plane on a regular basis for things like flattening the face of long boards. For example, suppose you had a large project coming up like making a dining room table top or large headboard. Would you do all of the prep work for those types of projects by hand, or would you bring in the power?

I lack a powered jointer (no space) so I use mine all the time, probably second only to my #4.

[Brian Holcombe]

I have a powered jointer now, but still use my jointer and try planes. They're just essential kit.

[steven c newman]

All this Jointer talk reminded me I had a Jointer to finish rehabbing.....chipbreaker was gappy in the middle, Got that detail fixed...refreshed the edge of the almost too short iron...
378747
Had a scrap of Pine, cupped a bit..flattened the cup down a bit....Old No. 8 seems to want to work,,now..
378748
Just maybe.

[Jim Koepke]

The plane will cut deeper wherever you put more pressure and vice versa...

This could also be a sign of a plane being concave from toe to heel. A simple test is to set the blade for a minimum cut using a small block of wood held in hand. Then set the plane on a piece longer than the plane that is known to be straight. Push the plane forward without downward pressure. If there is no shaving, then the area under the blade is off the work. To further test, push down on the plane on the same set up. If it then takes a shaving, concavity is confirmed.

jtk

[Andrew Seemann]

My 6" jointer is really too small to be useful for either edge or face jointing, so the #7/#8 come out on larger projects.

If I need to square a long board, I will mark a straight line on it, cut it on the bandsaw, hit the edge with a #7 or #8, and then use that edge against the rip fence on the table saw. I suppose I could use the planed edge, but I know the table sawn edge will be square; I'm not quite as confident in my edge jointing skills.

For face jointing, it seems most of the rough lumber I have gotten from my hardwood supplier recently has been at least skip planed, but when do need to face joint, I will take a #5 (I'll start with a scrub plane if it is bad) and knock off the high spots on a board until it will go through the 15" planer flat. I don't do the whole board flat, just enough to properly register on the base of the planer. Anything that is too cupped or twisted for this technique usually gets left at the lumber yard.

Jeff,
Is that a Kearney-Trecker horizontal mill with a vertical mill attachment in the back left of the shop?

[JohnM Martin]

I appreciate all of the feedback; a lot of good information here. It sounds like most do make significant use of the jointer plane... even when owning a power jointer. It makes sense, especially for fine tuning off of the machines. I don't have a power jointer option so the choice is easy for me, but I think for now I will just stick with the #7 and forgo trying to save for a power jointer - especially since I'm not trying to push out quantities of anything.

After reading all of these responses, I decided to spend some time with my old #7 this evening to see if I could really dial it in. I got everything sharpened up and put it to work on the edges of some 7 ft long, 1 3/4" thick walnut. Overall, I'm pretty happy with the performance - I think the tool is plenty good enough for my skills at this time. I think I'll stick with the vintage #7 and skip the premium makers for now and focus on working on my technique.


378768

378772

[Patrick Chase]

I appreciate all of the feedback; a lot of good information here. It sounds like most do make significant use of the jointer plane... even when owning a power jointer. It makes sense, especially for fine tuning off of the machines. I don't have a power jointer option so the choice is easy for me, but I think for now I will just stick with the #7 and forgo trying to save for a power jointer - especially since I'm not trying to push out quantities of anything.

One thing that I forgot to say earlier: The power jointer and the jointer plane don't perform equivalent tasks.

The power jointer performs the jobs of both a jack/fore/scrub (roughing to shape) and a jointer (refining the shape). In the usual coarse/medium/fine succession the power tool is nominally both coarse and medium, whereas the plane is canonically used for the medium step. On the flip side of the coin, IMO the handplane does a much better job of achieving a precise surface (though admittedly I'm much better with the plane than with the power tool, so I may be biased as a consequence).

[Stanley Covington]

If the boards/surfaces are too large to handle with the power equipment available, (which is everything nowadays), and they are longer/ wider than a few feet, then my jointer plane is an essential tool. In most cases it does a better job than a powered planer or jointer, but takes more time and sweat. I would consider my tool kit incomplete without a jointer plane.

[Matthew Hills]

My usage is similar to what Stanley just said.

I do use powered tools for a number of projects -- 6" jointer and 12" planer.
If a board fits the planer, but not the jointer, I'll typically just use a jack and winding sticks/straightedge.

My #7 is most used when working on wider panels, and for an occasional quick/fun project where I want to just use hand tools.
It has a hock blade with the corners eased a bit.

Matt

[Andrew Seemann]

I've debated on whether to upgrade to the 6" Jet jointer to an 8" Grizzly, but I'm not sure that the extra 2" of width and foot and a half of bed length gets me much compared to my current process (I don't have room or appetite for a larger jointer), especially since it would cost around a grand. I suppose it would cover most of my jointing needs, and I could use my jointer plane/table saw method for edge jointing long boards, and jack plane/planer method for face jointing wide boards. Or I could keep doing what I do now, and keep the extra grand. That plan keeps winning the debate:)

[Jeff Heath]

My 6" jointer is really too small to be useful for either edge or face jointing, so the #7/#8 come out on larger projects.

Jeff,
Is that a Kearney-Trecker horizontal mill with a vertical mill attachment in the back left of the shop?

A keen eye, Andrew. It's a model 2K Universal with the high speed vertical head attachment. Adjustable to any angle, as it rotates on 2 axis, and has horizontal adjustment out from the horizontal spindle up to 17". This was a project (and then some) to rebuild, but what a gem now. It was an upgrade to my former 2H. Built in 1946. More discussion on my YouTube channel, if you're interested. Just see the shop tour.

[Jeff Heath]

If the boards/surfaces are too large to handle with the power equipment available, (which is everything nowadays), and they are longer/ wider than a few feet, then my jointer plane is an essential tool. In most cases it does a better job than a powered planer or jointer, but takes more time and sweat. I would consider my tool kit incomplete without a jointer plane.

Stanley,
I would say that in all cases, a hand plane is going to leave a better quality finish. I always use my power tools just for doing the bulk of the roughing work, but finish the job with a jointer plane, followed by a smoothing plane. Machine tool ripples look horrible when finish is applied, and I'm not a fan of sanding dust. Besides, I find a hand planed finish more desirable (as do my customers), and my lungs appreciate the effort to keep sawdust to a minimum in the shop.

[Stanley Covington]

Stanley,
I would say that in all cases, a hand plane is going to leave a better quality finish. I always use my power tools just for doing the bulk of the roughing work, but finish the job with a jointer plane, followed by a smoothing plane. Machine tool ripples look horrible when finish is applied, and I'm not a fan of sanding dust. Besides, I find a hand planed finish more desirable (as do my customers), and my lungs appreciate the effort to keep sawdust to a minimum in the shop.

Agreed on all points.

Even a rough plane finish, steps, and warts and all, is better than planer/jointer ripples.

From a more practical viewpoint, and this is something everyone that uses handplanes a lot knows well, I find that the cut made by a handplane creates a better gluebond. The ripples, and damaged fibers electrical dimensioning equipment leave are less than ideal.

And using a handplane, I can tune edges for a better fit than an electric jointer can (no snipes), and even spring edges for very tight joints, with very little effort or brain-damage.

A good jointer handplane is a critical tool in my opinion, at least when the boards get a longer. I prefer wooden-bodied planes for most jobs, but nothing beats a metal body for long planes

Stan

[Robert Hazelwood]

This could also be a sign of a plane being concave from toe to heel. A simple test is to set the blade for a minimum cut using a small block of wood held in hand. Then set the plane on a piece longer than the plane that is known to be straight. Push the plane forward without downward pressure. If there is no shaving, then the area under the blade is off the work. To further test, push down on the plane on the same set up. If it then takes a shaving, concavity is confirmed.

jtk

Agreed. I dealt with this issue yesterday with my wooden try plane. The shavings were not always coming off where I thought they should. When I was able to get a complete shaving from one end to the other and then checked with a straight edge, I would always have a hump in the center. This can be caused by bad technique, which I am not immune to, but it was too consistent for that to be the only culprit. I retracted the iron, flipped the plane over and checked the sole with my straightedge. Sure enough, there was a tiny concavity along the length of sole. I did not check with feeler gauges but from experience the hollow was 1 or 2 thou deep. This is not deep enough to keep the blade from cutting with the heavy shavings I take with a try plane- the effects were subtle and are similar to those caused by a dull blade and bad technique.

Anyways I spent a couple of minutes lapping the sole with 220 grit and there was a definite improvement in the consistency of the shavings. I could plane from end to end and keep the workpiece flat, which makes adjusting a face for twist or squareness much more straightforward.

Moral of the story: a sole that is concave to any degree is an unacceptable condition if you want to do fine work and preserve your sanity. This is the main risk when buying an old metal jointer, as far as I am concerned. If on the other hand the sole is slightly convex, that is workable and there are even some advantages.

[Andrew Seemann]

The K&T was probably my favorite mill in the research lab I worked at in college. It was a WWII era universal, not sure which model. We had the vertical head for it and the power driven rotary index head. I always wanted to make a worm gear on it, but never had the opportunity. I probably used the Bridgeport more, but I really liked the K&T especially the power feed on the knee, also there was something about the war finish and the whole history of the thing. It sat next to a WWI vintage Brown and Sharpe mill. That one was slightly more versatile, but not as heavily built. Plus it had a B&S taper spindle and we didn't have much tooling for it (not surprising since it was the 1990s and it was built in about 1916).

We had the WWII version of your Monarch lathe, and a 50's version of that DoAll as well. The Monarch was pretty beat up with worn ways, but it still got used a lot. This does bring back memories:)

[Brandon Speaks]

I bought a no 7 this morning, still needs a little rehab but I sharpened the blade and put it to use on my bench project. I was amazed how well it worked. I had ripped the edges on the table saw already, but had a glue up ready surface in no time with the 7. I am planning to use it a lot.

[Stanley Covington]

I bought a no 7 this morning, still needs a little rehab but I sharpened the blade and put it to use on my bench project. I was amazed how well it worked. I had ripped the edges on the table saw already, but had a glue up ready surface in no time with the 7. I am planning to use it a lot.

I have mentioned before how my LN No.7 had a warped sole, and require significant effort to flatten. That was before 2004. Don't take it for granted that it will be straight. Check it before purchasing if you can.

Stan

[Bobby O'Neal]

I use mine quite a bit, as i do not have a powered jointer or planer. I mill small parts as much as possible with the tablesaw, but I use my jointer plane to create the reference edge and face first. I really like using multiple planes with different tasks, maybe because it saves some immediate sharpening. I may use a scrub, a jack, a jointer and a smoother all on the same piece.

I'm currently using a Woodriver #7. I also have an old Stanely #8 that doesn't get much use any more but it's a fine plane.