LV Combination Plane

[Wojciech Tryc]

Last week I decided to upgrade my Small Plow Plane to the Veritas Combination Plane. After a short deliberation the SPP went on Kijiji and in a few days was gone. Yesterday, I picked up the Beast. My first impressions are very positive, the CP has its own character, it's larger and feels more solid than the SPP. Don't get me wrong, I loved the SPP, but there is something to the CP which makes me hold it and look at it even more...:). I didn't get a chance to use it yet, as we had some people over last night....
Being an engineer, I appreciate the workmanship and the accuracy of micro adjustments for depth stops and a sub fence. The SPP feels just great in my hands, the balance seems to be excellent. Anyway, today, I am going to try it and perhaps put together some short review.
Just a couple of questions:
The instruction does not mention shaving deflectors... for tongue cutters, should shaving defectors be used? They come supplied with cutters (for SPP ONLY?).... There is no issue with jamming? Would one would even be able to install it in a threaded mechanism for the depth stop?
My second question: for the rabbeting across the grain (dovetail's tail board), I should deploy one of the scoring spurs, just like i would in case of dados, correct?

[Bill Houghton]

Question 2: yes.

[Derek Cohen]

Question 1: no deflectors needed.

Regards from Perth

Derek

[Wojciech Tryc]

Thank you for clarifying.

[Wojciech Tryc]

First rabbet, not as clean as I expected, most likely due to incorrect deployment of a spur...
Please notice that the spur is already damaged ?!?! After 5" in a hard maple.....
Am I doing something wrong?
Grooving works very well, just like with the little brother....

393268393269

[Derek Cohen]

Wojciech, I found that the tips of the spurs I have also chipped off. Rather than attempting to regrind them the same way, I rounded mine. They work well this way ...

https://s19.postimg.cc/71emv8asj/Nicker1.jpg

Regards from Perth

Derek

[Wojciech Tryc]

Thanks Derek, I will do that as well.

[Wojciech Tryc]

Clarification, subsequent rabbets are perfect, even before regrinding the spur. I am really pleased with the tool.

[Simon MacGowen]

First rabbet, not as clean as I expected, most likely due to incorrect deployment of a spur...
Please notice that the spur is already damaged ?!?! After 5" in a hard maple.....
Am I doing something wrong?
Grooving works very well, just like with the little brother....

393268393269

Rounding the nicker as Derek showed works. But the reason that it chipped was incorrect setting or projection in the first place. The nicker needs only to project slightly to score cross grain. Overtime, it may get dull for rehoning but it should not chip.

Simon

[Jim Koepke]

But the reason that it chipped was incorrect setting or projection in the first place.

To add to this, the spur only needs to cut as deep as the blade to be effective.

jtk

[Derek Cohen]

Rounding the nicker as Derek showed works. But the reason that it chipped was incorrect setting or projection in the first place. The nicker needs only to project slightly to score cross grain. Overtime, it may get dull for rehoning but it should not chip.

Simon

Simon, I do not know what percentage of these particular nickers end up like this. My plane was one from (a batch, most likely) for pre-production testing from the Lee Valley factory. In use, the nicker was set for just enough clearance, as always. The tip broke on both nickers, more quickly on one than the other. This is the type of information that helps in manufacturing. But I do not know if it can be avoided with that particular design, since the point is vulnerable. The steel there can be more brittle than lower on the blade. Rounding the cutting end seems to me to be a safer solution. (In my case, the slot for the screw on the blade needed to be extended a smidgeon to compensate for the slighter reduced length from rounding).

Regards from Perth

Derek

[Simon MacGowen]

Simon, I do not know what percentage of these particular nickers end up like this. My plane was one from (a batch, most likely) for pre-production testing from the Lee Valley factory. In use, the nicker was set for just enough clearance, as always. The tip broke on both nickers, more quickly on one than the other. This is the type of information that helps in manufacturing. But I do not know if it can be avoided with that particular design, since the point is vulnerable. The steel there can be more brittle than lower on the blade. Rounding the cutting end seems to me to be a safer solution. (In my case, the slot for the screw on the blade needed to be extended a smidgeon to compensate for the slighter reduced length from rounding).

Regards from Perth

Derek

Derek,

My cross-grain experience with this plane (loaned) has not been a disappointing one. I would have another chance to use it for about a week near the end of the month, and I will give the nicker another look.

I don't know if it matters. I use it in the same way as my skew rabbet plane - when I start, I engage the nicker and pull it back at the front in the first few strokes to score. This is also why I can't exactly say if I had set the nicker at the same depth as the blade, which Jim has advised in his post. I might have, but might not have, too.

I also, as I do with the plow plane, start my subsequent strokes at the front then progressively back, not starting from the far back like a handplane. I have seen people -- sometimes including Paul Sellers? (if my memory is correct, but don't trust it) -- use a plow like a regular plane beginning their very first cuts close to their bodies. Would starting a combo like a handplane have any negative effect on the nicker, I don't know as that isn't the way I use those joinery tools.

Simon

[Wojciech Tryc]

Rounding the nicker as Derek showed works. But the reason that it chipped was incorrect setting or projection in the first place. The nicker needs only to project slightly to score cross grain. Overtime, it may get dull for rehoning but it should not chip.

Simon
Simon,
The nicker was extended by 1/32”. I will continue with cross grain rabbets and I will take another look at the nicker.

[steven c newman]

Maybe take the time to check out the spurs used by Stanley.....how far they protude below the sole of the planes, the shape they are ground to...and why they never "chip, no fold" up. Then, sharpen/shape the end of yours to match. Planes I have with that spur..#78 and (2 spurs) the #45.


The Stanley #39 I have has spurs like your's....PITA to sharpen, and to set....

So..maybe sharpen your's to match the Stanley spur? It uses a rounded, beveled "point"..

[Wojciech Tryc]

Maybe take the time to check out the spurs used by Stanley.....how far they protude below the sole of the planes, the shape they are ground to...and why they never "chip, no fold" up. Then, sharpen/shape the end of yours to match. Planes I have with that spur..#78 and (2 spurs) the #45.


The Stanley #39 I have has spurs like your's....PITA to sharpen, and to set....

So..maybe sharpen your's to match the Stanley spur? It uses a rounded, beveled "point"..
Yeah, this is what Derek suggested as well.

[Mike Brady]

When I had my LV Combination plane, I eventually made a pair of spurs from spring steel that did not fold and crumble like the ones supplied. In my experience with this shape of blade, such as used in a marking gauge, a thumbnail grind that slices rather than digs into cross-grain is the ticket. Thumbnail grinds are also much easier to hone by hand and you can freshen them on a strop.

[lowell holmes]

I have both lh and rh skew rabbet planes and also the small plow plane. You guys are talking about the combination plane. Rob Lee has enough of my money already.:)

Oh Well, I guess there is another plane coming.:rolleyes:

[Steven Mikes]

I'm looking to get a plane to cut grooves, was trying to choose between these two (or making one-off wooden ones, but that sounds like too much work). Seems like the combination plane might be a better choice.

[Jim Koepke]

I'm looking to get a plane to cut grooves, was trying to choose between these two (or making one-off wooden ones, but that sounds like too much work). Seems like the combination plane might be a better choice.

By "choosing between these two" do you mean between the small plow and the combination plane?

If you imagine you will be cutting grooves only for things like boxes and drawers, the small plow plane may be all you need.

If you will be cutting grooves in the range of 3/4" or larger, then you may want to go with a combination plane. The combination plane can utilize larger blades than the small plow is able to use.

The combination plane will also take a wider range of blades to create decorative features like beads and reeds.

For many things in the area of plowing and beading, a Stanley #45 is one of my go to planes. (It is for all intents and purposes a combination plane.)

For 1/4" grooves my go to is a Stanley #50 which is set up for this job. (It is similar in size to the Veritas Small Plow Plane.)

Here is a post of mine on the Small Plow Plane:

https://sawmillcreek.org/showthread.php?251419

You might also want to check Derek's site: inthewoodshop.com and click on Tool Reviews to see what he has posted about the two planes.

jtk

[Simon MacGowen]

Derek,

My cross-grain experience with this plane (loaned) has not been a disappointing one. I would have another chance to use it for about a week near the end of the month, and I will give the nicker another look.

...

I also, as I do with the plow plane, start my subsequent strokes at the front then progressively back, not starting from the far back like a handplane. I have seen people -- sometimes including Paul Sellers? (if my memory is correct, but don't trust it) -- use a plow like a regular plane beginning their very first cuts close to their bodies. Would starting a combo like a handplane have any negative effect on the nicker, I don't know as that isn't the way I use those joinery tools.

Simon

As I noted in my last post (above), I had another chance to use the combo plane yesterday and today.

After finishing my joinery job (on mahogany, not a tough wood, but not as soft as fir or pine), I repeated the same on a poplar scrap for the pictures.

The nickers have never been honed by the owner since he bought it as far as I know, so the pictures show their condition after their repeated uses (5 or 6 times? -- My last job I borrowed it for was done in maple and walnut about two months ago).

The nickers are blunt but not broken. One of the tips is slightly deformed but its edge is still holding. The scoring was done backwards as I explained last time.

I measured this time and the nickers protruded about 0.5mm, similar to the depth of cut.

This time, I will hone the nickers before I return the plane.

Simon

[Simon MacGowen]

Simon,
The nicker was extended by 1/32”. I will continue with cross grain rabbets and I will take another look at the nicker.

1/32" is about 0.8mm; mine was about half of that. I set the nickers by feel with my finger, not by measuring.

A 1mm depth of cut is pretty heavy in my view unless it is used for hogging off waste.

Simon

[Stewie Simpson]

It would seem the OP was only following the tool manufacturers recommendation on setting the spur depth. http://www.leevalley.com/us/wood/page.aspx?p=75620


To deploy the scoring spur(s), loosen the spur retention screw and lower the spur slightly below the skate (to a maximum of 1/32").

[Simon MacGowen]

It would seem the OP was only following the tool manufacturers recommendation on setting the spur depth. http://www.leevalley.com/us/wood/page.aspx?p=75620









The max. is the limit and like the max. limit settings for many other things, skills and experience matter. If the nickers are forced through wood with the plane not held in an upright position, it is possible the nickers could break. Many users cut rabbets or grooves that are out of square because they do not know how to keep their multiplanes or plows upright while charging.

Can I set the nickers to the limit of 0.8mm and not break them? Absolutely, because I use the tool unlike many who rely on force (rather than a sharp edge).


Simon

[Wojciech Tryc]

It would seem the OP was only following the tool manufacturers recommendation on setting the spur depth. http://www.leevalley.com/us/wood/page.aspx?p=75620








You are absolutely correct...
I will hone the nickers and run some tests making sure that they are extended by no more than the depth of cut...

[Jim Koepke]

This is one of the reasons it is nice to have the luxury of a dial gauge that can measure so 0.001". Not to set knickers, but to know how heavy your shavings tend to be. For me, about 0.015" is my maximum. Yes, it isn't that hard, but it wears me out five times faster than takin 0.005/6" cuts. My recollection of my thickest cut with a Stanley #45 was ~0.125. with a 1/4" blade. Whoopie!!!

Find a cut depth that works. Hone the knickers with a more rounded profile. Then give it another go.

BTW, the dado looks good.

jtk

[Simon MacGowen]

This is one of the reasons it is nice to have the luxury of a dial gauge that can measure so 0.001".
jtk

This statement (from a hand tool user) took me by surprise...until I read the next sentence.:D

Simon

[Simon MacGowen]

You are absolutely correct...
I will hone the nickers and run some tests making sure that they are extended by no more than the depth of cut...

Because of Stewie's post, I checked out the online instructions for the first time (I relied on my experience with the Veritas plow and rabbet plane when setting and using the borrowed plane. You know woodworkers are "famous" for not reading manuals before they...). This is the part related to the spurs (nickers is not the term used there):

- To deploy the scoring spur(s), loosen the spur retention screw and lower the spur slightly below the skate (to
a maximum of 1/32") and then tighten the retention screw to lock the spur’s position. Adjust the amount
of protrusion of the spur to match that of the blade.

My usual technique of setting the plow or skew rabbet is opposite to the above instructions: I set the blade cut before the spur(s). To me, the depth of cut (apart from the sharpness of the cutter) is more important than any other settings in determining the cut quality, and so the cutter is the first thing to set.

In other words, my cutter is used to determine the spur protrusion, which is, I believe, a hair less than the cutter's depth in use.

Simon

[steven c newman]

Just a thought, since the spurs on my #45 are at a fixed depth.....Since the spurs have to make a cut ahead of the iron, shouldn't both be at the same depth? If the iron is set deeper, doesn't that negate anything the spur is doing? Once the surface has been cut cleanly by both the spur and the cutter, THEN you can deepen the depth of the iron.

Might be a tad hard to drag the plane backwards a few times, using only the spurs, IF the iron is set deeper? Unless the intent is to polish the bevel while pulling the plane? YOE......

[Jim Koepke]

This statement (from a hand tool user) took me by surprise...until I read the next sentence.:D

Simon

Oops! Fortunately there was still time for my correction on my thick shaving.

jtk

[Simon MacGowen]

Just a thought, since the spurs on my #45 are at a fixed depth.....Since the spurs have to make a cut ahead of the iron, shouldn't both be at the same depth? If the iron is set deeper, doesn't that negate anything the spur is doing? Once the surface has been cut cleanly by both the spur and the cutter, THEN you can deepen the depth of the iron.

Might be a tad hard to drag the plane backwards a few times, using only the spurs, IF the iron is set deeper? Unless the intent is to polish the bevel while pulling the plane? YOE......

Steven,

I have had almost zero experience with the #45 other than for some test runs, and couldn't remember how the spurs were set vis a vis the fence and blade. With my pal's combo, I set the spurs close to the blade (by feel) and engage the spurs on the stock at a slight angle to score the lines in two or three strokes, like scribing a line with a marking gauge. All this done with the fence held against the stock -- critical here, otherwise the blade's path won't match the scored lines, and tear out could happen. The lines are there just to prevent tear-out, not for cutting which is the job of a sharp cutter.

It is easy to score backwards with the combo as described. Is it much different or harder with the #45? Frankly, no idea there.

Simon

[Simon MacGowen]

Oops! Fortunately there was still time for my correction on my thick shaving.

jtk

I knew you had a typo or something there with a 0.9" shaving!:p

Simon