Do I want/need a 5 1/2?

[Nathan Johnson]

I watch a lot of Cosman's youtube videos (among others).
He seems to use that 5 1/2 for everything.
Larger surface registration might be nice? Yes? No?

[bill epstein]

Oddly, I find that my 7.5 lb. WR 5 1/2 Jack is easier to control on edge planing than my lightweight Stanley #4, even though my 73 year old arms are a mere shadow, etc. Of course, the Jack excels at the typical heavy duty jobs like taking down raw faces or those right off the planer. You'll likely still want a cambered 4 or 4/12 for smoothing.

[Howard Pollack]

Personally, after buying more tools than I need or can even remember purchasing, I've come to the conclusion that it makes sense to buy what your projects demand. Some tools are "cool" and fun to buy, and that is OK also. I'd say just be careful about tool lust and focus on making things. -Howard

[steven c newman]

I have the Stanley No. 5-1/2,Type 17..and the Millers Falls No. 15, Type 2....rarely use either....

[Rafael Herrera]

Depends on what you do and type of wood you use. The bigger the blade the harder it is to push the plane, including the friction caused by the bigger sole area.
I just dimensioned two blocks of beech, approx. 2 1/2" x 1" x 12". It was hard, i used a no. 5 scrub, a no. 5 jack, and a no. 4 smoother. Not that that's the only right way to do it, but it didn't occur to me that a 5 1/2 would make it easier.

[Nathan Johnson]

Hold off for now.
Got it. :)

[Stew Denton]

Nathan,

One place it is handy is for something like using a plane on the edge of exterior doors and similar width items. These are only a 1/4" narrower than a #5 iron, and if your ability to run a plane accurately is a little suspect (now how would I know the disadvantages of problems in using a plane accurately?) the extra width of the 5 1/2 is kind of nice.

I think there is drastically less need for the 5 1/2 than there is for the #5, however. Even a quick glance at the number of #5s available at garage sales, on Fleabay, etc. tells you that.

Regards,

Stew

[Tom Trees]

Workhorse of the workshop. I bought another for having two cambers, but it proved so handy for the shooting board, that's where it stays.
Don't like no.5's. there is a big difference, left that for the folks house.
So definitely, my Bailey no.5 1/2's are my favourite planes, and a big yes from me.

Tom

[Nathan Johnson]

Uh oh.
Yes votes.

[Tony Wilkins]

As with anything, there are a lot of variables. What are you going to use it for? Rough work or as a super smoother? What is the scale of work that you do? Is being used in a Neanderthal only or hybrid workflow? Puniness of arms? Even if you answered all of those questions in a way that benefited the 5.5 then you might find you didn’t like it (or vice versa).

I’m currently giving an LV 5.5 custom a go. I’ve mainly used it as a super smoother but I’m not sure I have formed a decision on it yet.

[Jim Koepke]

I watch a lot of Cosman's youtube videos (among others).
He seems to use that 5 1/2 for everything.
Larger surface registration might be nice? Yes? No?

This really depends on the kind of work you do.

Just because someone else likes a particular tool doesn't mean it is the best for you.

My #5-1/2 does get used at times. One of my #6s is usually pulled out more often. The #6 is only a little longer. An early #5-1/2 is a little narrower and lighter.

The #6 is more common to find when out rust hunting.

What other sizes of bench planes do you currently have or use?

It also depends on the lumber you use. Most of the hardwoods that come my way are smooth cut, but all four sides need to be planed. This is when it is helpful to have a lighter plane with a wider blade. It might be a good idea to compare weights on the different options. It used to be the weight didn't matter as much to me. Getting older tends to change that.

jtk

[Bob Jones 5443]

Borrow one from a friend who knows how to tune it, and try it. I do nearly everything with my 5 1/2. But then again, I use the machines for coarse flattening and dimensioning. (No scrub plane for me.) Then out come the winding sticks and shims, and the shooting board, for final milling. And smoothing: it does a “super” job at that. I have three blades so I can always drop in a pristine edge for a finesse shaving as needed.

One plane to rule them all.

My 5 1/2 has a 2 1/4” blade, not the 2 3/8” size of the 5 1/2s made post-1939. But I camber my irons and take shavings that are typically about 20 mm wide (fat 3/4”), so I don’t miss the 2 3/8“ width.

Count me a Yes.

[Tom Trees]

Just had to take off a half inch off a long length of timber just now,
Got it to a few mm to the line with my no.4 plane with a heavy camber.
It was starting to get a bit frustrating as my jumper sleeve was catching under the plane.
I totally forgot about that.
I don't normally have to use this plane and was glad to switch over to my 5 1/2.
Maybe I need to rethink my stance on the no.5 plane, as it was one reason I bought it...but I had parts of a broken one already, so found a casting for a tenner.
I just have no want for a pair of scrubs, as its mainly dutchman plugs that need that much hogging off.

Just another consideration that I have never seen mentioned.
All the best
Tom

[Jim Matthews]

What planes do you already own?
Are you satisfied with them?

Is there a budget? If money isn't an issue, you can own whatever you can store.

If there is a budget - beware planes missing parts.
Beware old, obscure brands that are shiny from lack of use.

If you must buy, the LN 5 1/2 (secondhand) is beautifully made, and holds its value.

[Robert Hazelwood]

I like it for a heavy smoother for wider parts. It works fine on smaller parts, too.

I think the extra width is wasted if used for jack plane work, better to just use a #5.

[Nathan Johnson]

I definitely should have supplied additional info.
Narrowing down the question.... how often is a 5 1/2 used as a "super smoother" really the better option over another plane for final smoothing?

For reference, I have:
LN #3
WR #4, Sargent 409, MF No9
2 Stanley 5s (one set as scrub)
LV LAJ
Stanley #7

I don't want to throw money away, but if a 5 1/2 truly excels for smoothing larger pieces......
Or would a higher angle blade for the LAJ be a better choice?

[Tony Wilkins]

I definitely should have supplied additional info.
Narrowing down the question.... how often is a 5 1/2 used as a "super smoother" really the better option over another plane for final smoothing?

For reference, I have:
LN #3
WR #4, Sargent 409, MF No9
2 Stanley 5s (one set as scrub)
LV LAJ
Stanley #7

I don't want to throw money away, but if a 5 1/2 truly excels for smoothing larger pieces......
Or would a higher angle blade for the LAJ be a better choice?

it would certainly be a want rather than a need as you are amply set. If you did huge panels on a daily basis I might give it a try but otherwise I think you are good. As always, if you wanted to try it then fine but I doubt that the 3/8” is going to be a substantial improvement in your work.

[Stephen Rosenthal]

I have a LN 5 1/2 and 7, but not a 5. I chose the 5 1/2 because the blade and frog widths are the same as the 7. So I bought the 5 1/2 with a York Pitch frog and later added a toothing blade. All interchangeable with the 7. It sounds somewhat unconventional but I’ve found a use for it on each plane. I’m not sure but I don’t believe Stanley made different frog angles or toothing blades for their Bailey/Bedrock planes.

Btw, since someone mentioned it, for the rare occasions when I have to plane a door edge, I use a Porter Cable 126. Makes quick work of it and never found anything better. Guess that’s why companies make specialized tools for specific jobs.

[Andrew Seemann]

OK, a nay vote here.

The #5 1/2 often gets promoted as a "do everything" plane, which I suppose you could argue. That said, it is too long for a smoother, too heavy and wide for a jack, and too short for a jointer. It kind of does each of those roles kind of adequately, but not nearly as well as the individual planes. I can't imagine face jointing a 16' 1 x 12 with a #5 1/2. As for smoothing, rarely use my #4 1/2, specifically because of the extra width and weight compared to a #4 or #3. I suppose you could use a #5 1/2 as a panel smoother, although many use a #6 for that.

The #5 1/2 is like the low angle jack, jack rabbet, scraper plane, and the like; planes that were never used commonly by the people who used to earn their living using planes, but for some reason get promoted as essential for the modern woodworker.

You already have good smoothers, jacks, and a jointer, which all do their function better than a #5 1/2. If you ran into one cheap, maybe pick one up, but it isn't going to add much to what you already have, except maybe panel smoothing.

[Robert Hazelwood]

I definitely should have supplied additional info.
Narrowing down the question.... how often is a 5 1/2 used as a "super smoother" really the better option over another plane for final smoothing?

For reference, I have:
LN #3
WR #4, Sargent 409, MF No9
2 Stanley 5s (one set as scrub)
LV LAJ
Stanley #7

I don't want to throw money away, but if a 5 1/2 truly excels for smoothing larger pieces......
Or would a higher angle blade for the LAJ be a better choice?


Well, the 5-1/2 isn't going to change your life or anything. You can take maybe a 1/4" wider shaving than a #4 can, which is not going to make a lot of difference. If you plane a panel with a #4 and another with a 5-1/2 you're not going to think one looks better than the other. But you might take a few less passes with the 5-1/2.

The extra length on the toe can be nice vs. a #4 especially for beginners. Planing things like box lids, the extra width on the sole can be handy. But I could do all of that with a #4 and it would be fine.

It weighs more, which can be good or bad. Mine is a vintage Bailey so it's not crazy heavy, but a LN would be pretty hefty.

I tend to work with two smoothing planes when there's a bigger job to do. One is set a little heavier and gets used first, another is set finer and does a finishing pass. I tend to use the 5-1/2 for the first job.

I just like it, but I could live without it. You definitely don't need it given your plane collection.

[Jim Koepke]

Part of what makes a plane a smoother is the shorter length to follow slight irregularities on a surface.

Some argument could be made a #5-1/2 taking a full length gossamer shaving may make a flatter surface than a sorter plane adhering to a less than perfectly flat surface. Not that anyone would likely notice the difference.

If you want a wider smoother a #4-1/2 is a possible choice.

jtk

[Derek Cohen]

If you ever watch one of Rob Cosman’s videos, it will inevitably involve a #5 1/2 as a smoother. It was David Charlesworth who introduced the #5 1/2 as a “super smoother”. Rob uses a few of David’s methods in his videos.

The notable factor is that boards are prepared with machines rather than hand tool. They are flat to work on, and hand planning is about finishing rather than thicknessing. Rob makes a valid argument for a #5 1/2 in this circumstance: the width and mass lend authority to the plane, and it hugs the surface of the boards.

Some months ago I posted my thoughts after using a heavy smoother, a BU Marcou, which I had not used in a few years. The performance was superior. The effort required was low. On the negative side, the plane was detached in feedback (or, the feedback was different to that from a lighter plane, and needed to be re-learned).

Regards from Perth

Derek

[Rick Erickson]

My LN 5 ½ has always been my favorite plane. I really don’t think you can go wrong with it.

[Jim Matthews]

Or would a higher angle blade for the LAJ be a better choice?

That's a less expensive proposition.


https://www.finewoodworking.com/2010/12/09/one-bench-plane-can-do-it-all

[Mike Allen1010]

Put me down for "desirable but not essential" – my 5 1/2 excels in smoothing large panels, particularly in softer woods (where the wider blade is easier to push). For me, length, mass and wide blade are ideal for final surfacing of large glued up panels. I don't have the strength to push a 5 1/2 for rough surfacing, particularly in harder woods – for me standard #5 is plenty in those situations.

[Bill White]

I use a Bailey 5 1/2 along with a #5 set as a scrub. Like the feel and the ability to smooth.
Just how i do it.

[Josh Robinson]

I wound up with a Stanley number six (only slightly longer than the 5 1/2) because it was cheap and in good shape. Find I have it on the bench nearly all the time I’m working along with a #4 and 102 block plane.

[Jim Koepke]

I wound up with a Stanley number six (only slightly longer than the 5 1/2) because it was cheap and in good shape. Find I have it on the bench nearly all the time I’m working along with a #4 and 102 block plane.

One of my favorite uses of a #6 is on a wide piece with a cup in the middle the #6 can be used across the grain with a light cut. The plane can be heard as it starts cutting at the starting edge. Then it stops cutting over the low area then starts cutting again at the far edge. Eventually it can be heard with a full cut all the way across. As this is being done move down the length of the piece and continue until the full shaving is seen or heard. Then a few quick shavings with the grain and it is done.

jtk

[Jerome Andrieux]

I watch a lot of Cosman's youtube videos (among others).
He seems to use that 5 1/2 for everything.
Larger surface registration might be nice? Yes? No?

I really like the "1/2" format for smoothing. Their weight is enjoyable, as long as you only have to take light controlled cuts. They are nice for large hands and strong arms.

The 5 1/2 can be used an all around plane on dimensioned pieces, when most of the grunt work was done by machines / lighter planes. It seems common nowadays, even for hobbyists, to buy s4s or use thickness planer.
A "hand tool only" woodworker would probably play its instruments on a different key, with lighter planes. Using both flats and sharps though, to keep on with the music analogy,

[ken hatch]

Everyone is different but a Stanley #5 is about as big a metal body plane as I'm comfortable using for any length of time. Any of my metal stock planes larger than a #5 for the most part just gather dust. When something larger than a #5 is needed the wood stocks come out to play and even the #5 is left on the shelf if the job is extensive. But then I've been told I'm a wuss and real men have no trouble slinging a LN #8 around all day and that I need to go to the gym. BTW, true story several years ago on this forum and he could be correct. But at the end of the day lighter is usually better.

I just want to add, sometimes a wide blade is good, I've a Type 9 Stanley #4 1/2 with a Japanese cutter and the OEM chip breaker that is a delight to use and in fact used it today.

As always with anything wood, YMMV.

ken

[steven c newman]

Well...I did give the Millers Falls No. 15 a try-out...
441870
A little jointing work...
441871
Flattened the panel to make a lid for the box....much prefer a #3 for other things...
441872
But,,,I also gave the #62 a chance..
441873
Balance seemed a bit...off...
Leveled the top of the box...
441874
"Just a little off the top.."
Was a busy day, today....once the camera's battery got recharged....now trying to get me recharged...

MF No. 15 is about the same as a Stanley No. 5-1/2.....BTW.

[Jim Koepke]

There is a Record #5-1/2 currently listed in the SMC Classifieds.

jtk