Added a new plane yesterday

[Mike Manning]

A few days ago, I reached out to a fellow I contacted thru CL last year. I ended up buying 5 Stanley planes from him last year - #3, #605, #10, #40 & #81. Those are all great users. Yesterday, I picked up this Stanley #8C plane. It isn't a showroom piece but it will be a very good user for me. He was confident it is a type 11. The original blade has the Stanley V-shaped logo. I got the two additional NOS Stanley blades with it for $10 each. Both have the original bevel and likely were never used. They have the Stanley trademark of the period and Pat Apl 19 92 (1892).

I did a little research last night. The plane does appear to be an early type 11 #8C. It has the two patent dates on the body along with the frog adjustment screw of a type 10 (1907-1909) but other features of a type 11 (1910-1918). The NOS plane blades appear to be even earlier type 6 (1888-1892).

Fyi, this fellow is a master carpenter by trade and used these in his work for decades. In the interest of efficiency he decided he had to start using power tools and he would rather these weren't just sitting on a shelf in his shop. I invested $60 in all today. I'm a happy camper.

I know there was a thread on plane pricing and some frustration expressed with being unable to find good planes out there in the wild. Central Texas isn't a hotbed of old vintage tools of any kind but I guess my advice would be - keep looking, be persistent and patient wherever you are. Eventually you'll find some.

402004402005402006402007402008402009402010

[Jim Koepke]

A few days ago, I reached out to a fellow I contacted thru CL last year. I ended up buying 5 Stanley planes from him last year - #3, #605, #10, #40 & #81. Those are all great users. Yesterday, I picked up this Stanley #8C plane. It isn't a showroom piece but it will be a very good user for me. He was confident it is a type 11. The original blade has the Stanley V-shaped logo. I got the two additional NOS Stanley blades with it for $10 each. Both have the original bevel and likely were never used. They have the Stanley trademark of the period and Pat Apl 19 92 (1892).

I did a little research last night. The plane does appear to be an early type 11 #8C. It has the two patent dates on the body along with the frog adjustment screw of a type 10 (1907-1909) but other features of a type 11 (1910-1918). The NOS plane blades appear to be even earlier type 6 (1888-1892).

Fyi, this fellow is a master carpenter by trade and used these in his work for decades. In the interest of efficiency he decided he had to start using power tools and he would rather these weren't just sitting on a shelf in his shop. I invested $60 in all today. I'm a happy camper.

I know there was a thread on plane pricing and some frustration expressed with being unable to find good planes out there in the wild. Central Texas isn't a hotbed of old vintage tools of any kind but I guess my advice would be - keep looking, be persistent and patient wherever you are. Eventually you'll find some.



My recollection is a type 11 would have three patent dates. Of course in the day, retailers and Stanley weren't building or selling to satisfy type studies.

It looks like a great deal.

It is also a good demonstration of how staying on the lookout for deals can lead to a deal.

jtk

[Stew Denton]

Mike,

Ya did good!

You got a wonderful deal in my opinion, definately a very good price, in my opinion. It is amazing you got NOS irons that were made over 100 years ago that are in that kind of condition. Those irons for #8s are few and far between, and you have better than a life time supply, at least for us normal hobby woodworkers. On the other hand, the carpenter got a price better than he would have gotten at a garage sale or flea market, so I think you both did well.

The plane and irons look to be in great shape, and you may want to spruce them up a bit, but it doesn't look like it will take a great deal of work to get them there, because you are starting with stuff that is in pretty nice shape to begin with. On the other hand, just to get them to nice user shape would take very little work at all. I normally try to get my planes and saws to look really nice, and it takes me a lot of time, but making them look really nice does not make them a bit better as a user. Also, guys like Steven can do the same amount of sprucing up as I do, but in a fraction of the time it takes me.

The tote and knob look to be in as good a condition as any I have seen, very seldom are such in that condition: almost no chips or cracks or roughness, the finish is still very nice, and the wood has a very nice grain. The Japaning looks pretty good, and there appears to only be some pretty light surface rusting, but it looks very light. Very nice plane. There aren't that many #8s around so again, and few type 10s or 11s that I have seen look that good, great job.

I am with Jim however, the body is a type 10 I believe, as Jim is right as usual, the type 11 body definately has 3 patent dates. That said, I don't think it makes any difference, I have a type 10 or 2, and I think that they are great users. I don't think I have experienced any difference in use between the type 10 and the type 11, I think they are both extremely desirable users, and have the desirable low form of knob.

Congrats and regards,

Stew

[Mike Manning]

Thanks Jim and Stew!

Yeah, as I mentioned it has only the 2 dates of a type 10 but the other features are of a type 11. Like I mentioned, the previous owner was confident it was a type 11. He even said he found he preferred the type 11 planes. I'm definitely NO expert. I'm just starting to feel halfway comfortable trying to make sense of all the information on HyperKitty/Patrick Leach's website and the Bench Plane Type Study on rexmill. Also like Jim stated, Stanley had no awareness or concern with types when they were making and selling planes.

I am curious to know what is usually the determining factor in saying a plane is a type 10 or a type 11 when it has features from both type periods? This is the kind of interesting stuff that most Stanley plane owners face when finding new old planes.

I didn't know the #8 irons were that rare. I think I'll just keep them with the plane. You are right I'll certainly never need them though.

I will just do a light housekeeping cleanup on the plane, sharpen the blade, make sure the bottom is good to go and that'll be it.

This #8C does have a blemish on the bottom. It looks like it was maybe dropped before. The PO said it was this way when he got it. It won't be a problem for me.

402036402037

[Stewie Simpson]

TYPE 11. STANLEY 1910- 1918.

All features of TYPE 10 except;

* APR-19-10 patent date now added to those cast behind the frog.
V. New trademark stamped on irons starting in 1910.

https://sawmillcreek.org/attachment.php?attachmentid=402008&d=1548433979&thumb=1

In summary, your plane looks to be an earlier TYPE 10, (2 patent dates only cast behind the frog) with a later TYPE 11 plane iron.

Stewie;

[Mike Manning]

TYPE 11. STANLEY 1910- 1918.

All features of TYPE 10 except;

* APR-19-10 patent date now added to those cast behind the frog.
V. New trademark stamped on irons starting in 1910.

https://sawmillcreek.org/attachment.php?attachmentid=402008&d=1548433979&thumb=1

In summary, your plane looks to be an earlier TYPE 10, (2 patent dates only cast behind the frog) with a later TYPE 11 plane iron.

Stewie;

Gotcha Stew.

In looking at the Stanley Bench Plane Study on RexMill, I was under the impression that the low knob was a change with type 11 because that is noted in one of the pics. But looking at the bench plane type timeline on hyperkitten I see they were all low style knobs until type 12. Interesting!

Thanks for the info!!

[Stew Denton]

Hi Mike,

If it were my plane, like you I would not be concerned about the chips in the bottom of the plane either. Don't think it hurts a thing. You might check the edge where the chip on the bottom extends to the side. If there is a sharp edge or burr caused by the chip, I would use a needle file to smooth and slightly round over the sharp edge or burr so it won't catch on the wood when you are using it.

As Jim points out, Stanley would have parts made up and used as need be. Thus, if they had bodies for a couple of years in their storage area, and made up the planes after they had run out of irons they would have made up a new lot of irons. Of course the new lot would have the current identifier on it. It is not unusual at all to see parts from two different type numbers on the same plane when they are compatable. Of course, the irons will be compatable with any other one of their Bailey or Bedrock planes, with the exception of the size 5 1/2 which went from 5 1/4" to 5 3/8", I think about 1937, but would have to look it up to know for sure.

This probably happened in the case of your plane, they ran out of type 10 irons before they ran out of type 10 bodies, and thus made up a new lot of irons at that time. your plane has a type 10 body, but a type 11 iron.

It also seems like Leach has mentioned on his site that he has seen some rare instances where the main body of the plane has features of a given type #, and also of the next type #, but it is apparantly extremely rare.

For what its worth I am sure that the type 12 has the tall form of knob, and the previous types had the short form of knob.

I think Jim K. mentioned once that a seller had a real deal on a group of the short form knobs, and bought them all, and took the tall form of knob off his planes and installed all of the short ones. I am fine with either type, but know that the short knobs are highly desirable. If given a choice I would pick the short form of knob, but at the current prices that the short form knobs go for on the auction site there is no way I am going to spring for them. On the other hand, it may have been the larger diameter of brass verticle adjuster wheel that he bought a group of, and put on his older planes, replacing the smaller diameter ones, I don't remember for certain.

One other part on your plane that is not always in the excellent shape that yours is, is the swivel ring on the horizontal adjusted. Yours appears, from the photo, to be still completely round. Quite often they have flat spots on the sides, not a big deal, but round is better.

Stew

[Jim Koepke]

For what its worth I am sure that the type 12 has the tall form of knob, and the previous types had the short form of knob.

I think Jim K. mentioned once that a seller had a real deal on a group of the short form knobs, and bought them all, and took the tall form of knob off his planes and installed all of the short ones. I am fine with either type, but know that the short knobs are highly desirable. If given a choice I would pick the short form of knob, but at the current prices that the short form knobs go for on the auction site there is no way I am going to spring for them. On the other hand, it may have been the larger diameter of brass verticle adjuster wheel that he bought a group of, and put on his older planes, replacing the smaller diameter ones, I don't remember for certain.

Some of the later type 11 planes came with a taller knob.

The type studies were created using #4 & #5 planes as they were the most common sizes that people bought and used. Being the big sellers were more likely the ones to be found packed away in barns with receipts or other indicator of age in the box.

The plane models that didn't move through production and to the retailers rapidly didn't have their type transitions proceed in as timely a manner as the more in demand #4 & #5s.

One or two of my tall knobbed planes have been retrofitted with a short knob. Many of my pre-type 12 planes have had their adjusters changed to the larger wheel, thanks to an ebay deal.

jtk

[Mike Manning]

Thanks for all the information Jim and Stew. It's great learning the nuances of the Stanley planes. Even better having a few to use.

Fyi, this plane was a user for the PO once upon a time. No sharp edges on that blemish but I'll definitely give it a good checkup before putting it to use.

[Jim Koepke]

If you are up to restoring old planes, do not pass up the junker planes. Often during my rust hunts a broken plane was found for a very low price. The broken tools are great sources for replacement handles or other parts that are very handy to have when another plane is offered at a low price because the handle is broken or missing. This is one of my reasons for buying mostly Stanley planes. The other makers parts are not always interchangeable.

jtk

[Stew Denton]

Jim,

I have a few of the type 12 planes and newer, but have very few actually restored yet, so actually use the older ones, the type 10s and type 11s. Also, it seems like the sizes I use the most by far, are also the older types. Not a deliberate plan, it has just worked out that those are the ones I have had the longest, so use them by far the most. Thus the ones I use most have the short knob and small adjuster wheel.

The question I have for you, and others, is how much advantage is haveing the larger vertical adjuster wheel over the smaller ones that came on the type 11s and earlier if you adjust the iron on the run?

I generally stop and pick up the plane to adjust the depth, and almost never try to adjust it on the run. Mostly from habit I guess, and also don't get much time to do a lot of woodworking. That is one thing I intend to do, is get into the habit of adjusting on the run. It may also be that I do such just because the plane I mostly use have the small wheel.

By the way, I also buy broken planes and really ratty ones, if the price is right, just for the parts. I have bought broken or ratty ones for less than what a used iron costs.

Stew

[Kurtis Johnson]

Looks to me to be in really good shape. I've seen a lot worse! Some guys will never be so fortunate. Enjoy!

[Mike Manning]

If you are up to restoring old planes, do not pass up the junker planes. Often during my rust hunts a broken plane was found for a very low price. The broken tools are great sources for replacement handles or other parts that are very handy to have when another plane is offered at a low price because the handle is broken or missing. This is one of my reasons for buying mostly Stanley planes. The other makers parts are not always interchangeable.

jtk

Jim

I'm coming around to that as I get more comfortable with planes and thanks for the tip on buying those junkers as potential donors.


All

Last year I picked up two Stanley #7C planes for $30 from an old fellow in the Texas Hill Country. Both bottoms had rust on them and the rest of the planes had a good covering of surface rust. I wasn't real sure how they would clean up but it turns out the rust wasn't nearly as bad as it looked. Hit them with a brass wheel and some steel wool. Next I'll let them spend some time in a shallow Evaporust pool to make sure the corrugations are rust free.

Between the the Plane Flow Chart on hyperkitty and the plane type study on RexMill, the one with the "TS" painted on the body in red looks to be a type 15 or 16. Bailey on the toe, Made in USA behind the knob, no patent dates, raised ring to receive the knob, no broad flat rib on front or rear of the bed and lastly, it has the new frog design noted for type 16 planes. The knob and tote don't look like rosewood to me (?). It has the post-Sweetheart "Stanley in a notched rectangle with Made in USA" stamped on the iron and the lever cap has the lever cap has the Pat No 1918750 stamped on the backside per type 16 planes.

The other #7C might be a type 11 or 12? It has three patent dates and a small brass adjustment nut. The iron is stamped with the V-shaped logo. It appears to have a high knob. Not sure what else to look at and I haven't broken this plane down completely. Yet.

Any thoughts on these two #7s and what type you think they are?

After getting these cleaned up I will definitely sell one. I also feel lucky as heck that I've been able to find some really nice users at pretty darn good prices, at least in my opinion. Thanks for everyone's help and advice!


402119

[Jim Koepke]

Between the the Plane Flow Chart on hyperkitty and the plane type study on RexMill, the one with the "TS" painted on the body in red looks to be a type 15 or 16. Bailey on the toe, Made in USA behind the knob, no patent dates, raised ring to receive the knob, no broad flat rib on front or rear of the bed and lastly, it has the new frog design noted for type 16 planes. The knob and tote don't look like rosewood to me (?). It has the post-Sweetheart "Stanley in a notched rectangle with Made in USA" stamped on the iron and the lever cap has the lever cap has the Pat No 1918750 stamped on the backside per type 16 planes.

This could be a case of type overlap. The handles during the war were made of beech or other hardwoods. This might have been all type 16 parts that were in stock when WW II started and there weren't any rosewood handles to put on it. The dark coating Stanley put on them may have been stripped by a previous owner.


The other #7C might be a type 11 or 12? It has three patent dates and a small brass adjustment nut. The iron is stamped with the V-shaped logo. It appears to have a high knob. Not sure what else to look at and I haven't broken this plane down completely. Yet.

Small adjuster and a tall knob, if those parts are original it is a late type 11.

They both look like they can become great user planes.

jtk

[Phil Mueller]

Mike, you mentioned a shallow bath of evaporust. Just a word of caution, the evaporust can leave an “etch” line if the piece isn’t fully emerged.

[Stew Denton]

Hi Mike,

One small addition to what Jim wrote about the plane being a later type 11. The "V" trademark was one of 2 used on the type 11. The first was somewhat rectangular and had "Stanley Rule and Lever Co." written in it the top of that line written in an "arched" way, the later logo was the "V" logo that yours has. More evidence of it being a late type 11, as Jim wrote.

Keep the type 11, sell the other one. By the way, as you know, if you restore the later one before selling it, you should get a lot more money for it than you paid for both of them. You got a really good deal, to say the least.

Stew

[Mike Manning]

Hi Mike,

One small addition to what Jim wrote about the plane being a later type 11. The "V" trademark was one of 2 used on the type 11. The first was somewhat rectangular and had "Stanley Rule and Lever Co." written in it the top of that line written in an "arched" way, the later logo was the "V" logo that yours has. More evidence of it being a late type 11, as Jim wrote.

Keep the type 11, sell the other one. By the way, as you know, if you restore the later one before selling it, you should get a lot more money for it than you paid for both of them. You got a really good deal, to say the least.

Stew

Stew I did see the other iron logo in the Plane Type Study. I did plan on keeping the older plane. I don't know if anyone noticed but the tote on the later #7 has a piece of electrician's tape on it. I've assumed there's a crack or a repair there but haven't built up the courage to take a peek yet. Yes, I got a good deal on those. The gentlemen was still sharp as a tack and still working in his very large shop. Still doing a lot of wheeling & dealing too. He had a really nice old metal lathe outside under an awning. I'm not a metal guy but if I was I would have tried to get that from him. Thanks for the advice!



Mike, you mentioned a shallow bath of evaporust. Just a word of caution, the evaporust can leave an “etch” line if the piece isn’t fully emerged.

Dangit! I knew that but forgot it and likely would have forgotten when the time came to bathe them. Thanks Phil!

All Anyone got any thoughts about how to make sure I've got all rust out of the corrugations?

[steven c newman]

Wire wheel in a drill press does the job for me.

[Mike Manning]

As I suspected...

402419402420

The tote was broken and looks like someone tried to repair it. There isn't 100% surface to surface between the two pieces. You can see that someone has either planed or sanded both ends. I'd appreciate advice on the best way to fix the tote. Additionally, IF I looked to find a replacement what planes had the same tote as the #7? This is just a hardwood tote not rosewood but I'm sure that's obvious to 99.99% of you.

Thanks!

[Jim Koepke]

The Stanley #4-1/2 and all the larger planes (not the #5-1/4 or #10-1/4) used the same tote with two fasteners. The later #5s may have used a different tote, this may have been in the handyman line.

They are often available on ebay. This is one of my reasons for always checking for old or broken planes while rust hunting.

One way to repair a broken handle when the pieces do not fit together properly is to re-saw it near the break and then make a shim with similar wood or make a multi-ply piece of various woods for effect, to fill in where wood was lost. One of my handles was made larger doing this. It is the only plane all my fingers can fit comfortably around the tote with room to spare.

jtk

[Stew Denton]

Mike,

I have trouble telling the Rosewood totes with certainty, but can usually tell the later ones that aren't Rosewood.

Jim's idea is good advise. One thing on that, I usually clean off the joint areas when I glue up a tote, especially if it is Rosewood. The rosewood is an oily wood, and so you want to clean off the oiliness before glueing it up. This can be done with acetone, MEK, or lacquer thinner. Let it dry really well after this treatment, however, to make certain that all of the solvent has dried. I have all three solvents, so usually clean the joint first with MEK, because it is a better solvent for this purpose, and follow that with acetone to get as much of the MEK off as possible, to aid in drying.

To make sure the glue up is straight, use the bolt to check allignment, or better yet sand a dowel to a somewhat snug fit, insert it into the two pieces and slide the pieces together to see how they line up. You can use the original bolt through the tote when you glue it up, to keep things alligned, but watch things carefully and remove it before the glue dries and glues the bolt in place....a bad thing indeed.

I like to use the original formula of Gorialla glue, and it has done a good job for me. If you have the original break that hasn't been messed with (unfortunately I know this is not your situation), if you do the glue up carefully, getting everything lined up virtually perfectly, and then sand the glue joint area carefully after a thorough drying, it is often difficult even to find the breakline after you refinish the tote. This is the case with a clear finish. In your case, where you paint it black to match the original paint, it should be invisible if you do it fairly carefully.

Again, if you buy a replacement tote on the auction site, take care to make sure that the totes have the same profile. The later painted/non-rosewood totes sell for a little less money, and that is what you want to match your plane. To flesh out what Jim wrote, the #5s, 5 1/2s, 6s, 7s, and 8s all take the same tote.

Note that your broken tote is not like the totes from the older planes. It has a one piece bolt to attach the tote to the plane body, not the rod threaded on both ends with the brass nut type. This means that the totes for the earlier planes, mostly the Rosewood ones, will not fit with the one piece bolts. Thus the need for the later type. I do not know if the once piece bolt has the same threads as the treaded rod type, you can check by trying the treaded rod type from your other plane. If it does have the same thread type, you might be able to replace the broken tote with an earlier one using an earlier threaded rod and brass nut. It will cost more, but is an option.

Stew

[Mike Manning]

Stew, Jim,
Thanks for the advice. I'll keep my eye out for a replacement tote and attempt to fix this one. What glue would you guys recommend one of these tote repairs?

Mike

[steven c newman]

I have used just good old Elmer's...some will used epoxy...but they also add a colour to the epoxy to match the handle's colour. Most planes from the WW2 era, when brass was needed elsewhere...would have a blued steel bolt ( and a washer, or two) usually having a slight dome to the head. Hole for the bolt did not need to be as deep as the ones with a brass end.

To use a rod & brass "bolt" in those style handles....you would need to drill a bit deeper, for the brass end to fit down into. The other "sticking point" would be under the handle....they changed the size of the hole where the bolt came out....as the "boss" where the bolt threads into the base changed....some needed a larger diameter hole, to fit over the boss. Not sure when Stanley ( and others) started using that boss....if the base has a raised "platform" for the handle to sit on, usually there wasn't any boss, or hole to match.

Tip: If you do glue the handle parts, leave the threaded rod in the hole.....wax the rod so glue won't stick to it...rod keeps the hole clear of glue, and helps align the parts.

"Handyman" handles tended to use a tab sticking up from the base, instead of the small toe bolt. Millers Falls Type 5 style handles had a hollow pin, that fit into both the handle and the base...

Note: IF the rear handle had the blued steel flat head bolt....so did the front knob....have seen both with a lockwasher added....

[Jim Koepke]

Titebond and epoxy have been used to repair my broken totes. Epoxy more recently in favor of the Titebond. The epoxy is easier for blending in rosewood sawdust to help hide the repair.

Epoxy will actually fill gaps, Titebond will not.

As was mentioned earlier it is important to degrease rosewood before gluing.

jtk

[Jim Koepke]

Here is my shop made clamp for gluing totes. Sometimes this is merely a third hand to hold the parts while they are being aligned. With epoxy the clamping doesn't have to be tight:

402582

This is the page from the site that inspired me to build such a thing:

http://www.rexmill.com/planes101/handle_repair/handle.htm

This is another set up of mine for working on totes:

402583

Just because a base is broken doesn't mean it is useless.

jtk

[Mike Manning]

Thanks Steven & Jim.


I didn't think the tote and knob were rosewood. I thought that just because I could see what I thought was wide grain on the knob. How can I tell if the knob and tote are rosewood versus hardwood? I posted pics of the knob and tote above. Does that not help?

Jim,
I like you jig and my create something similar. Also, like that you gave new life to a broken base!

[Stew Denton]

Mike,

That is one of the totes that I view as not being Rosewood. Stanley couldn't get Rosewood during the war, and used hardwood that they generally painted black. They did that later on as well, switched back to Rosewood briefly I think, and finally used hardwood exclusively. The hardwood they used may have been beech but I don't know for certain. The totes I have seen that were minus the black paint, were very light color with grain that was not pronouced at all. To me it clearly looks like a painted hardwood tote, becuase the raw wood portion appears to be nearly white, and I don't see any strong grain pattern.

Every knob and tote that I have sanded and refinished, which was from the Rosewood era, was much darker than the inside of your tote, and had a pretty noticable grain.

Stew

[Mike Manning]

Today has been a good day. Found these 2 Stanley planes on Craigslist this morning. They are now in my shop ready for a little rust removal and cleanup. They're in really good condition and I think the components are correct for the planes - a #3 and a #5. Blades show little use, the knobs and totes are in great condition as well. The #5 has 3 pat dates, the small depth adjustment nut and the iron has the correct V-shaped logo which leads me to believe it's a type 11. The #3 has 2 pat dates, small depth adjustment nut but it doesn't have the enlarged and arched frog rib, the iron has the Pat Ap'l '92 on it. Leads me to think it's a type 9 with an older iron but possibly the irons were still available at that time. The seller was a guy who does storage unit auctions. The two planes set me back $40. Yep, it's been a very good day thus far.

403236403237403238403239

I hit the bottoms of the planes with a razor to remove a couple of rust buildups and then followed with some 000 steel wool. They weren't very rusty at all. Spent about 5 minutes on both the bottoms.

[Stew Denton]

Mike,

Another "ya did good!" They look like you will not have to do much to restore them to good user status. The knob and tote on each look excellent, and the irons have a lot of life left, and you may only need to grind off a very short section down on the business of the irons. Good planes indeed!

Stew

[Jim Koepke]

Two very gloat worthy finds.

The #3 is especially good. You do not find them in that price range often. It is hard to find a decent #3 by itself for $40.

The #3 looks to be an early type 9. Your mention of the blade logo also suggests this. Some of the early type 9 planes also had a single patent date on the lateral adjustment lever.

jtk