Lie Nielsen with thin blade?I'

[Don Dorn]

I'm going to throw this out and then take a couple of steps back in preparation for the response that may come. I'll admit to having jettisoned two LN bench planes. The reason is not caring for the 1/8th thick iron. For me, it was difficult and more time consuming to grind (Ian Kirby method) and takes longer each time to sharpen due to the ever lengthening secondary bevel.

Having eventually become adept at free hand sharpening the Paul Sellers way, I've come to appreciate thinner irons (Hock, Stanley, aftermarket LV, etc) Due to the slightly convex bevel, don't even need to grind very often and can sharpen in a couple minutes. Now my question?

My fear is having missed the boat in parting with the LN bench planes (3 & 4.5). A friend pointed out that due to the ease of moving the frog forward, I could have kept the thinner blade and the premium plane. Does this sound reasonable to any of you in the know.

[ken hatch]

I'm going to throw this out and then take a couple of steps back in preparation for the response that may come. I'll admit to having jettisoned two LN bench planes. The reason is not caring for the 1/8th thick iron. For me, it was difficult and more time consuming to grind (Ian Kirby method) and takes longer each time to sharpen due to the ever lengthening secondary bevel.

Having eventually become adept at free hand sharpening the Paul Sellers way, I've come to appreciate thinner irons (Hock, Stanley, aftermarket LV, etc) Due to the slightly convex bevel, don't even need to grind very often and can sharpen in a couple minutes. Now my question?

My fear is having missed the boat in parting with the LN bench planes (3 & 4.5). A friend pointed out that due to the ease of moving the frog forward, I could have kept the thinner blade and the premium plane. Does this sound reasonable to any of you in the know.

Don,

Moving the frog doesn't fix the problem of thin blades. The reason thin irons do not work in LN planes without some modification is because the depth adjuster is too thick and does not fit in the cap iron slot when the cap iron is mated with a thinner iron, keeping the cutter from mating with the frog. The easiest fix is to file out the cap iron slot to work with the thinner irons. All my LN planes have been modded that way with no problem.

ken

[Derek Cohen]

Don, both my LN #3 and #4 1/2 have the Stanley replacement Veritas PM-V11 blades. These are thinner than the LN blades and just a little thicker than the Stanley blades. They fit the LN planes perfectly, used with the LN chipbreakers. No problems with adjustments.

Regards from Perth

Derek

[Patrick Chase]

I'm going to throw this out and then take a couple of steps back in preparation for the response that may come. I'll admit to having jettisoned two LN bench planes. The reason is not caring for the 1/8th thick iron. For me, it was difficult and more time consuming to grind (Ian Kirby method) and takes longer each time to sharpen due to the ever lengthening secondary bevel.

Having eventually become adept at free hand sharpening the Paul Sellers way, I've come to appreciate thinner irons (Hock, Stanley, aftermarket LV, etc) Due to the slightly convex bevel, don't even need to grind very often and can sharpen in a couple minutes. Now my question?

My fear is having missed the boat in parting with the LN bench planes (3 & 4.5). A friend pointed out that due to the ease of moving the frog forward, I could have kept the thinner blade and the premium plane. Does this sound reasonable to any of you in the know.

You may have to do a little grinding on the cap iron to make that work, due to the increased engagement of the depth-adjust yolk. I did that with my #3 to retrofit a thin iron.

I can't remember if I had to shorten the cap iron retention screw as well to clear the lever cap, but may have done so.

[Patrick Chase]

Moving the frog doesn't fix the problem of thin blades. The reason thin irons do not work in LN planes without some modification is because the depth adjuster is too thick and does not fit in the cap iron slot when the cap iron is mated with a thinner iron, keeping the cutter from mating with the frog. The easiest fix is to file out the cap iron slot to work with the thinner irons. All my LN planes have been modded that way with no problem.

This is what I did as well.

Note that modifying the cap iron that way will add a lot of depth adjust backlash if you subsequently switch back to the original iron. I bought a second cap iron to modify.

[Don Dorn]

Thank you for the input. I'm quite surprised that some of you are using the thinner blades and figured you would ask me why I wanted to do such a thing. Based on the advise, it doesn't seem difficult and if I use the LV thinner blade, it looks like no mod is necessary. Time to try again.

[Patrick Chase]

Thank you for the input. I'm quite surprised that some of you are using the thinner blades and figured you would ask me why I wanted to do such a thing.

In my case it's because I really don't like A2 plane irons due to their propensity to chip. I switched mine over to PM-V11.

The thickness isn't so annoying for me because I use a bench grinder, though I also think that irons that thick are utterly pointless.

[Robert Hazelwood]

I have a Hock O1 iron in mine. Not because I wanted a thinner blade but because I like the steel better. Anyways it works fine, but I did have to file the slot in the chipbreaker a hair wider in order for the depth adjuster to engage (if you don't do this then the taper on the depth adjuster causes the chipbreaker/blade assembly to hang up before it can fully seat on the frog. It's a five minute job, if that.