Veritas #4 Sharpening Angles?

[Peter Daniels]

I’ve read the instructions. And searched. But don’t know that the answers Ive found are the best.

Is anyone sharpening a Veritas #4 to something other than the suggested 30°/35° angles?
Veritas recommends a 30° primary bevel w/ a 35° secondary bevel. And I’ve done that. But I’d swear no matter how carefully I work w/ this thing, I’m still getting better shavings off my battered old Stanley #4.

I’m considering putting the time into just making the Veritas match the Stanley’s 25°. But since that’ll take some time at the diamond stones, I’d like to know what’s best before I stand there for too long.

Thanks.
-Peter

[Derek Cohen]

I have a Veritas Custom #4. Is yours a Custom version, or the original, Bailey-like version?

Assuming it is the Custom version, the only issue I can imagine you have - other than a blade not sharpened well enough - is that the cutting angle is too high. This could happen if you have a 50+ degree frog along with a 35 -degree bevel. The cutting angle remains 50 degrees but a 35 degree bevel may limit penetration unless the edge is sharp.

30-32 degrees is the sweet spot for most bevel down plane blades. 25 degrees will not hold an edge for long.

Regards from Perth

Derek

[David Bassett]

With a bevel down plane your cutting angle is set by the frog, not the bevel angle. IIRC Stanley always used 45-degree frogs. Do you have the standard 45-degree frog in your Lee Valley plane? (The customs can be ordered with a range of angles.)

The bevel angle does provide clearance in the plane's cut. 35-degrees should be enough, but probably doesn't give you a lot of margin. Maybe try 31 or 32 -degree micro bevel with your 30-degree primary.

(BTW- I'd normally defer to Derek when he says a 25-degree bevel angle would be fragile, but this time I completely agree with him too. Are you sure you're measuring these angles accurately?)

If my assumption that you have a standard 45-degree frog are correct, it really seems like you should be having success. That brings it back to sharpening your edges. Your Stanley, if an original blade, would be some version of HCS. A Veritas plane is likely to have PM-V11. I really don't see much difference when sharpening either (on ceramic waterstones), but many have reported PM-V11, while not hard, is not as easy to sharpen as HCS. I guess it depends on the sharpening media. Your solution maybe as simple as a little more time and care when sharpening.

[Peter Daniels]

Good info. Thank you both.
Yep. It’s the basic, not the custom. The bed angle is at 45°.

The MKII honing guide micro bevel has sort of 4 settings. For years I’ve always just gone w/ the micro bevel knob in that recommended 12 o’clock position, then moved it to the 6 o’clock for that last micro bevel.
Any guesses on what the other two positions of that micro bevel knob might be? Lesser or more than the 6 o’clock position?
I’ll futz w/ it tomorrow and see what I can learn.
Also- should I even use the micro bevel on this plane? Or just go factory 30 primary and 35 secondary?

Fall always means more time at my little bench. And if that’s a canary in my own coal mine- it’s a good sign. A sign of a bit more free time. A bit more creativity. And a willingness to learn.
Thanks for you help.

-PD

[Tyler Bancroft]

I found it took me a while to start getting good results with my Veritas 4. Once I got used to it, it performs great (and IMHO, the ergonomics of the Veritas "classic" 4/4.5/5.25/6 are better than any other plane on the market). Assuming you've checked the usual suspects (cap iron set sufficiently back from the edge, mouth size okay, etc.), I'd do two things. First, I'd disassemble the plane and give it a good cleaning and oiling. Make sure the knob below the frog that locks its position is cinched down tight. Second, I'd check the squareness and angle of your bevel very carefully. I've always had trouble getting good results with the MKII (and if you look online, you'll see I have company). I get better results sharpening freehand or with the cheap Eclipse clone side-clamping honing guide. In particular, I'd check to make sure the bevel angle is consistent across the width of the blade.

What sort of results are you getting?

[Warren Mickley]

I’ve read the instructions. And searched. But don’t know that the answers Ive found are the best.

Is anyone sharpening a Veritas #4 to something other than the suggested 30°/35° angles?
Veritas recommends a 30° primary bevel w/ a 35° secondary bevel. And I’ve done that. But I’d swear no matter how carefully I work w/ this thing, I’m still getting better shavings off my battered old Stanley #4.

I’m considering putting the time into just making the Veritas match the Stanley’s 25°. But since that’ll take some time at the diamond stones, I’d like to know what’s best before I stand there for too long.

Thanks.
-Peter

I read the instructions as well. I think they were written by someone with very little experience. I recommend sharpening at a 30 degree angle, not 35. Unless your plane iron is really crappy, I think you will get results similar to what you are getting with your older plane, which you do sharpen at 30 degrees.

[Jim Koepke]

Also- should I even use the micro bevel on this plane? Or just go factory 30 primary and 35 secondary?

This seems confusing, isn't a "micro bevel" a secondary bevel?

My suggestion is to first get the plane to work without worrying about secondary bevels or any other "tricks."

Get the blade sharp with a single bevel and get it to work.

There are a few tests to indicate the blade is sharp. One safe test is to push the blade straight into a piece of paper. If the blade is sharp, it will cut instead of deflecting the paper. If you have to slide the edge across the edge to cut the paper, you are close to sharp. This is close enough for some work.

If your 35º bevel is off a few degrees in the wrong direction it will not have enough relief angle and will not produce a shaving.

A lot of my work is on soft woods. My plane blades are mostly sharpened at 25º. They may wear faster but I do not mind sharpening plus in many cases there is a spare sharp blade or another plane at hand.

A single bevel at 30º should be fine.

Once you get the plane working, then you can experiment with the micro bevels and such.

jtk

[Tyler Bancroft]

This seems confusing, isn't a "micro bevel" a secondary bevel?

If I'm following the OP correctly, he's referring to the micro-bevel feature of the MKII honing guide – it lets you select a primary honing angle, and then rotate a knob to add an extra degree or two.

[Jim Koepke]

If I'm following the OP correctly, he's referring to the micro-bevel feature of the MKII honing guide – it lets you select a primary honing angle, and then rotate a knob to add an extra degree or two.

My point is to get things going with a single bevel.

A micro bevel or secondary bevel seems like a work saver until it grows to be the only bevel. That is when instead of staying with a single bevel people have to grind a new lower angle bevel and start all over.

Most of the time it is rare for my blades to have to be put to the grinder.

Free handing a bevel only gets tough with very thick blades.

jtk

[Peter Daniels]

Good information Tyler. Thanks.
I took it all apart, cleaned it up. And sharpened it (again) per Veritas’ instructions. What kind of problems have you had w/ the MK guide?
A quick search of the Eclipse style guide makes them look so much more simple than the MK, which appeals to me. As usual- many of the “features” of an item are more lures than benefits.

The plane is re-assembled, snug and tight as it should be. It’s being used more lately to cut miters w/ a donkey’s ear shooting board. It’s fine. Does the job w/o too much chatter.
I think part of my issue is that I would overadjust the blade adjust knob. I would turn it like it’s a Stanley knob, not the more precise Veritas style.
Now I’m really trying to carefully move the blade forward in teeny increments. If I’m hoping to make thin end grain shavings- I want the mouth of the plane closed right? So that there’s not much room between the blade and the front of the soul?

Shooting miters on end grain is asking a lot of a plane. And I suppose there are better plane (lower angle block planes right?) options for the task but like to use most things for a wide variety of problems. The bench is cluttered enough w/ tools that are only used for some things. (Curse you Lee Valley and that overpriced Skew Rabblet plane… that I love. Which gets used now and then, but is perfect when it’s needed)

But when I pick up the old Stanley #4 for that same end grain miter shooting- it’s smoother. No matter how carefully I creep that Veritas blade forward.

Thanks for your responses and considerations w/ this.

[David Bassett]

... Shooting miters on end grain is asking a lot of a plane. ....

It seems to me shooting end grain doesn't have many of the complications you might face with edge or face grain. You will be perpendicular to the fibers and won't be seeing any contrary grain.

I'm trying to reason this out, to see if I understand, but also so I can articulate it. The chip-breaker, the mouth size, and high angles (with the frog or a back-bevel) are all techniques to control tear-out in contrary grain. I don't see how end grain is affected by anything but sharp. You should be able to (within reason) open the mouth, move the chip-breaker back, and not affect the cut on end grain. Have you tried just end grain without the shooting board? Without the shooting board you can skew the plane, which lowers the effective cutting angle, and maybe see a difference. You could also use different parts of the blade, (left, right, center,) to see if any works better than the others. Anyway, the experiment might provide insight into what's going on with your planes.

[Peter Daniels]

I think the experimentation is a great suggestion. But hadn’t considered some of your suggestions.
You’re thinking perhaps to open the mouth more, and move the chip breaker back? So that there’s a bit more blade shown between the breaker and the leading sharp edge? Huh… In a few hundred years I don’t think moving the breaker back would have occurred to me.

Several hurdles in between right now and when I’m next standing at my bench- but thank you.
I’ll give it a try.
-PD

[Jason White]

Is the back of the blade flat?

[David Bassett]

... You’re thinking perhaps to open the mouth more, and move the chip breaker back? So that there’s a bit more blade shown between the breaker and the leading sharp edge? ...

"within reason"! :)

If you have the chip breaker tight, say less than 1/32", it will effectively control tear-out and produce a better (than torn-out) surface. But it will be a little harder to push and a little less "bright" on cooperative grain because the extra pressure that limits tear-out also resists cutting. Since you don't need this effect on end-grain, relaxing that pressure by setting to maybe as much as a "fat" 1/16" might help. (But at something huge, e.g. 1/4", who knows what else might start happening.)

Likewise with the mouth. Don't go crazy, just give it a little extra room to make sure it doesn't choke on the shaving.

BTW- looking at the shavings can be informative! When you get a good shaving from your #4, how does it differ from what you get from your Veritas? If the Veritas is twice as thick, or something, it may just be an adjustment issue caused by the less familiar controls.

[steven c newman]

I seem to recall at least one plane maker that would stamp right on the iron...what angle to sharpen THEIR irons to.....25 degrees. Just a single, simple, easy to sharpen bevel.

K.I.S.,S.

I keep the frog co-plannar with the ramp at the back of the mouth...otherwise, things will chatter. I USE the chipbreaker, set 1mm back from the edge of the iron.

have never had to "close up" a mouth....change a angle, ad more than that single bevel.....as on a bevel down plane, that is also a "wear bevel" acting as clearance behind the edge.

bevel up planes? I treat them as simply over-grown block planes...nothing more. I do use a WR #62....rarely.....not as much as I use a Stanley No. 60-1/2.

There WAS a person that used to talk about how to add FOUR bevels to an iron? My question with that would be .....WHY?

[Tom M King]

Record has it on their blades, or at least used to. Both the angle stated in degrees, and a line to set something by.

[Peter Daniels]

After running to the web to check various plane’s bevel angles, Ive been writing the appropriate degree notation on each blade.
A similar visual has infected my bike repair world too. Now everything has become color coded so that I can more easily grab the right wrench, the first time.

I can’t imagine 4 bevels on a plane. Way too complicated for me to want. Seems like you might spend more time managing your blades than actually creating something.

I’ll start w/ moving the chip breaker back a bit more to see if that helps. Then will read the tea leaves of shavings.
-PD

[Tony Wilkins]

Charlesworth advocated three bevels, four only if you had a back bevel on the blade. However, the first of those was only from the grinder so only two would be regularly dealt with and the last was the one honed. It’s not that difficult to deal with in practice and the goal is to achieve sharpening fast as you have much less steel to move.

[Edward Weber]

I just thought I would remind some people who may be over thinking this.
From the Veritas pdf.
"In a bench plane, the blade is used bevel down, so the bevel angle has no bearing on the cutting angle. This is determined by the angle of the bed which, in this case, is 45°."

This is where i'm in agreement with Jim Koepke, where he says "get the plane to work without worrying about secondary bevels or any other "tricks.""

Secondary bevels, micro bevels, relief bevels are something you can always tweak later, after you get the basics working.

[Derek Cohen]

I’ve read the instructions. And searched. But don’t know that the answers Ive found are the best.

Is anyone sharpening a Veritas #4 to something other than the suggested 30°/35° angles?
Veritas recommends a 30° primary bevel w/ a 35° secondary bevel. And I’ve done that. But I’d swear no matter how carefully I work w/ this thing, I’m still getting better shavings off my battered old Stanley #4.

I’m considering putting the time into just making the Veritas match the Stanley’s 25°. But since that’ll take some time at the diamond stones, I’d like to know what’s best before I stand there for too long.

Thanks.
-Peter

Peter, having determined now that this is not a Custom Veritas model, I would treat it like your Stanley #4, with the exception that it has a thick blade.

The items to focus on are the (1) mouth size, (2) blade sharpness, (3) shaping and (4) positioning of the chipbreaker (assuming that the mouth/sole are flat/coplanar … as I have not come into contact with a Veritas plane that is otherwise).

1. If you have a closed up chipbreaker, then the mouth needs to be opened up a little - enough to allow shaving to pass through. When the chipbreaker is closed up, it is easy to block up the escapement and prevent shavings passing.

2. Thicker blades require a different technique for sharpening than the original, thin Stanley blades. With the thin Stanley blades one can use a honing guide, or just freehand, a single bevel. Thick blades would be hard work to do the same (too much steel to abrade), and then the danger is that they do not get honed correctly. With thick (non-laminated) blades you want to "create" a thin blade. You do this either by hollow grinding or by using a secondary bevel.

I hollow grind all my blades (with the exception of Japanese blades) at the angle they will end up. This is between 30-32 degrees. The grind is taken to the edge of the blade. This leaves very little steel to hone. I then freehand hone on the hollow, with acts as a guide. I start with 1000 grit, straight across until there is an even wire and micro bevel. Then I add in the camber on this stone (a few strokes at each end). Once done, this is followed with 6000 and 13000 stones, which polish the cambered edge. Done.

If you choose to use a honing guide, remember that the aim of one is to add a secondary bevel (never use it on the full face). This will be at a higher angle than the primary bevel. For example, the primary bevel may be 25 degrees, and the secondary bevel created at 30 degrees. I do not change the bevel angle for subsequent stones, that is, all remain at the 30 degree angle (in other words, no multiple tertiary bevels). Always watch for the wire - that is your gauge that the honing has reached the back of the blade. Of course, the back of the blade needs to be honed to the same degree as the front.

3. Chipbreakers need to be shaped. They all come with a 25-degree leading edge, and this is too low to influence the shaving/performance of the chipbreaker. Get out your honing guide and create a 50 degree secondary bevel. It is fine to leave this secondary bevel flat. Also ensure that the underside of the chipbreaker is flat, and that there is no gap between chipbreaker and the back of the blade for shavings to jam into ….. anything that jams the chipbreaker with jam the mouth/escapement, and stop the plane cutting.

4. Positioning the chipbreaker can make-or-break the performance. Too close to the back of the cutting edge, and the plane will experience too much resistance when pushing the plane. This is evident in concertina-like shavings. Too far back and the chipbreaker has no effect at all (shavings are generally curly). The Rule of Thumb is to position it around 0.4mm from the edge, and adjust its position after a few trials. After a while, it is easy to do by eye. The position of the chipbreaker also depends on the thickness of the shaving. Move the chipbreaker further forward for very fine shavings, and further back for thicker shavings. You can tell the chipbreaker is working nicely when the shavings straighten up.

Note that the chipbreaker is unnecessary if the wood being planed is straight-grained. It is used for controlling tearout.

A local woodworker, Daniel, came to visit me with the same issue as you. He was struggling to plane a very interlocked Jarrah slab (for a table top) with his Stanley #4. In his case, the blade was okay, but his sole was not coplanar. In the meantime, he used my Lie Nielsen #4 1/2 (after a Veritas Custom #7 jointer). With little effort, this was the result he obtained (note the long, straight shavings) …

https://i.postimg.cc/23pPRcYm/Daniel.jpg

Regards from Perth

Derek

[Tom M King]

This post just made by Derek may be the best post made to date on this Forum. It should be a sticky at the top.

[Jim Koepke]

This post just made by Derek may be the best post made to date on this Forum. It should be a sticky at the top.

I agree, Derek is very clear in describing his methods.

The one draw back that occurs to me is:


I’m considering putting the time into just making the Veritas match the Stanley’s 25°. But since that’ll take some time at the diamond stones, I’d like to know what’s best before I stand there for too long.

Derek mentions using a grinder and describes the advantages of a hollow grind. From what the Peter mentions it sounds like he may not have a grinder.

This is a common challenge when trying to answer questions posed on a forum. We often do not know the starting point from which the question is asked. We do not know the range or types of stones involved. We do not know if Peter has a strop?

My deductions may be completely wrong. My first impression is the OP is using diamond stones. Not really sure what metal is in his blade. Is it PMv-11, A2 or O1?

A 35º bevel is about the most I have ever used on a bevel down plane. Now mine are 25º or 30º and seem to do fine.

jtk

[Derek Cohen]

Derek mentions using a grinder and describes the advantages of a hollow grind. From what the Peter mentions it sounds like he may not have a grinder.

Jim, I have this covered. If one cannot hollow grind a thick blade, then you use a secondary bevel (either freehand or using a honing guide). As I mentioned, there are two ways to make the thick blade work like a thin blade when it comes to sharpening.

Regards from Perth

Derek

[Jim Koepke]

Jim, I have this covered. If one cannot hollow grind a thick blade, then you use a secondary bevel (either freehand or using a honing guide). As I mentioned, there are two ways to make the thick blade work like a thin blade when it comes to sharpening.

Regards from Perth

Derek

Well stated, I am not very familiar with the Veritas bench planes. Are their blades thick? I may be misinformed but my impression was they are only 1/8" thick. Thicker than a Stanley blade, but not as thick as those on many of the bevel up "bench" planes.

Discussions on sharpening always seem to meander all about and much of it is based on the original inquiry not providing as much information as is needed to provide an informed reply.

My opinion on secondary or micro bevels is after a lot of honing, they are either no longer a micro bevel or quickly becoming the primary bevel. What started as a way to speed up the sharpening process will eventually have to be reground. The time saved on one operation is then lost on another.

jtk

[Peter Daniels]

Outstanding! Great read to sip my coffee as the day starts. Thank you all.
True- I am using diamond stones. I’m sure there’s a grinder somewhere in a friends garage. Or more likely a grinder that is used to put an edge on a ski (I live in a ski town) that would be liquid cooled and such. But, I’ll hold off on that now.

There’s no way the mouth is closed enough that the shavings are hanging up or catching.
To start- I’ll move the chip breaker back a bit. Perhaps 1.5mm from the cutting edge.
And depending on how that goes, I may take the time to use the stones to go to a 25° angle like the Stanley.
And I’m split on the micro bevel. Perhaps I’ll start w/o it. See how it goes, then try to to see what changes.

I work nights and often find my brain crawling over such things around 2 in the morning while I drive around.
Thanks for the brain fodder.

-PD

[Aaron Rosenthal]

Besides all the great advice here, there was one item you mentioned that got me to thinking - and I paraphrase; you said you were having trouble adjusting the blade for cuts liek the Stanley.
I've just sold my Veritas #4 while waiting for the Custom #4, (delayed 2 weeks.......AGAIN!!) but one of the first things I put into that plane was the slow adjuster. I found I could get much better results with the tiny tweak using that adjuster, rather than the OEM.
Now, if I misread, I didn't mean to lead you down the garden path, "ea culpa".
Once it Custom 4 FINALLY arrives, the first accessory I install will be the slow adjuster.

[Peter Daniels]

There’s a SLOW ADJUSTER!!?
Well, now I know.
I do think that was a portion of my problem. My fingers had been used to spinning the Stanley knob to move the blade forward and I was overdoing it w/ the Veritas.
So for a while I would just barely nudge it forward to get my first shavings. It helped- some.
I’ve been spending some spare time sharpening that Veritas blade to the 25° primary bevel that works on the Stanley. Funny how close it is to the 30. It’s taking forever w/ a 300 grit diamond stone.
But I’m gaining on it. Each day when I commit to it… the fall leaves and still open bike rides call me away from the bench.
It’ll be done soon.

-PD

[Peter Daniels]

This Veritas puzzle is a good one for me. It’s helped me find lots of ways to adjust a plane. But also lots of ways to puzzle and wonder why.
I’ve spent way too much time at the diamond stones reducing the Veritas blade from 30 to 25 degrees. What a slight difference in actual angle- but it sure took a while.
As a rainy afternoon turned to evening I was wondering if this coarse stone was actually coarse enough. But in time I got to where I wanted it.
And as long as I had the set up out, I went ahead and put the old Stanley blade to the stones too.
It’s not that the stone doesn’t work. It’s that the Veritas PM-V11 metal must be insanely hard. The Stanley blade must be much softer. The stones made short of of the STanely. Slow slow progress in the V11.

Long story short- I pulled out the test board. A knotty piece of weird walnut. And I carefully advanced the blades ever so slowly. Trying to just find that moment when the dusty spiderweb shavings become just a bit more substantial.
And now the Veritas works great.
Was it the new 25 degree angle? Or just a much more careful set up.
I don’t know. But I’ll stay at 25 for a few months and see where that gets me.
Thanks all.

I’m sure I’ll be back w/ more thoughts/questions. And I’m sure Sawmill will provide.

-PD

[Robert Hazelwood]

Sounds like I'm too late, but a 300 grit diamond stone is not the right tool for a big job like reducing the primary bevel angle. It's not very fast to begin with and the stone will wear out a lot in the process. Save the diamond for odd jobs on HSS or carbide, and for conditioning other stones.

If you don't have a power grinder, I recommend getting a roll of 60 or 80 grit PSA sandpaper and sticking a length of that that down onto something reasonably flat. 2 or 3 feet long would be great. Then get one of the cheapy eclipse honing guides (this is about the only time I'd recommend a honing guide) set it at the angle you want, then go to town on the sandpaper with long strokes. Change the sandpaper every few minutes of honing. This will literally be orders of magnitudes faster than rubbing on a diamond stone.

If you want to use a stone for this sort of job, the best stone I've found for bulk material removal is a coarse Crystolon, which are fairly inexpensive. But the long sandpaper lap beats anything.



Regarding the angle, I can't tell exactly what you are doing. Are you making a single flat bevel at 25 degrees? Or "grinding" a primary bevel at 25 and then honing a small secondary bevel at some higher angle? The second is more typical and what I'd recommend for a thick blade in a wear resistant steel like V11.

To me 25 degrees is too acute for a final edge in a bevel down handplane. About 32-33 is ideal in my experience. We are trying to balance between two failure modes, one being the edge breaking or folding and the other being the edge losing clearance due to wear. Eventually one or the other will occur and we'll have to resharpen, but the latter requires far less work to rectify (especially if you don't have a power grinder). So the ideal angle is basically the most acute angle that does not fail by chipping or rolling. For most steels that will be between 30 and 35. Higher and you won't plane very long before losing clearance, lower and you'll get edge chipping and have to remove a bunch of steel to fix.

So whatever angle you are sharpening at, just observe what happens. If you notice chipping (split shavings are a sign of this) then raise the angle a couple of degrees at the next sharpening. If you never notice chipping, you can try lowering the angle.

[Peter Daniels]

Oh no- you are not too late Robert.
This self taught woodworking marathon is a long one, and your words will be dutifully tucked away for the next time I’m wondering about planes and angles.
Thank you for taking the time- it’ll be the sandpaper/glass trick next time I find myself wondering about more than just sharpening!

-PD

[Peter Daniels]

I will say-One treat from this has been that I’ve really slowed down while advancing the blade.
I think I’ve been focused more on the project instead of just how to get there. So now, as I ever so carefully advance the blades (on the Veritas or Stanley’s, heck even on a shoulder plane) w/ small turns- I really enjoy that moment when it just starts to scufff the wood. And the ever so thin slivers start to come off the wood.
That moment is really rewarding for me.

[Jim Koepke]

Peter, sorry it didn't come to me to post this link earlier > https://sawmillcreek.org/showthread.php?148076

You won't be able to see the images without becoming a contributor (a good use of $6). The words & some of the links might be of use.

Here is a quote on adjusting the blade after putting a plane together:


I often have spare blades so a sharp one can be at the ready. If a blade is changed, even though they are of the same vintage, the lever screw may need adjusting. Usually only a sixteenth or so of a turn unless one is switching from a Stanley cap and blade to a Hock cap and blade.

Making Shavings

At this point, the blade is likely well below the sole of the plane. Retract the blade by turning the depth adjusting nut. Stanley planes made after 1891 will turn counter clockwise to lift the blade. Before we start, one needs to read the grain on the wood. Sometimes it will fool you, but most of the time, you will want the grain to rise in the direction you are planing. So find a piece of scrap 1X or 2X and clamp it in your vise. Start with the business part of the plane off the wood and just the toe (the part of the sole in front of the blade) on the work piece. This is how one usually starts a plane on a work piece. This is especially true when using a jointer. With a smoothing plane, one may at times just be working a small area on a large piece.

161174

When it is flat on the wood and pushed forward, nothing should happen because the blade is retracted.
Some set their blades by sighting down the sole and turning the adjuster until they see the blade. When you get to wearing bifocals and your close up sight needs different glasses, you may want to find a different way. I am not knocking the sight set method. I envy those whose eyesight is still that good.

My method is to adjust the depth while pushing the plane on the edge of the scrap wood.

161169

This plane is a type 6. The depth adjuster turns to the left to lower the blade. Shavings are just beginning to appear in the mouth.

At this point take a shaving on the one side of the plane and then the other to check the lateral adjustment.

161173

Notice that the shaving on the left are visibly heavier than on the right. With the Stanley plane, the lever is moved to the side that is cutting heavier to even out the cut.

(The image that should be here was incorrectly labeled. This caused the wrong image to be uploaded. The correct image will be added later)

Notice that the blade is being held on both sides by my fingers. This is so that any movement can be felt. Over time, you will get used to feeling how much movement is needed. Though some times a blade that is not straight or other factors can make setting the lateral adjustment a pain in the tukus.

My preference is to set the lateral adjustment with very thin shavings. It just seems easier to tell if they are the same. After a bit of experience, you will likely be able to determine by feel if one side of the blade is cutting deeper than the other.

161170

The shavings shown are for all purposes equal.

This and many other useful posts are in the archive > https://sawmillcreek.org//showthread.php?103805-Neanderthal-wisdom-FAQs

jtk

[Peter Daniels]

That’s good stuff Jim. Thank you.
My thread style is just to search for my answer, not sure I’ve ever delved into that bank of answer.

I’m glad you posted it.
-PD