#7 or #8 jointer?

[Bruce Delaney]

I have a 60-1/2 LA block plane and a 4-1/2 smoothing plane, which have taken care of most of my planing work so far. By now, I would like to add a jointer plane to my arsenal for panel flattening and edge jointing, and can't decide between a #7 or #8.

I sort of like the idea that the iron width of the #7 is the same as on the #4-1/2 but this is probably a marginal benefit. The extra heft of the #8 seems like a double-edged sword: harder to start and more tiring to use than the #7, but probably helpful to keep up momentum.

I really don't envision ever needing both a #7 and #8 so I need to decide between these two.

Which jointer do you prefer, and why?

[Martin Shupe]

Bruce,

I pushed both around at the LN store and ended up with the 7. I am not a small man, and I can see where the 8 might get tiring after a while. I also liked the idea that the blades of the 7 and 4.5 are the same size. Both will do the job, it boils down to personal taste.

[Jim DeLaney]

Bruce,
I have three 7's and two 8's. I find myself using the 8's much more often than the 7's. That said, though, the seven is a perfectly adequate jointer for virtually any job you'd need a jointer for. I just like the extra heft of the 8.

One (minor) drawback might be sharpening, though. the 8's blade is wider than most stones. It's even too wide to fit into the Tormek's sharpening fixture - at least not without some finegling. Of course, if you're using the sandpaper sharpening method, there's no problem.

[Jim W. White]

I have an old Stanley Bailey #8. I like it a lot, and think the added weight is a good feature in this application.

...but then again I kind of subscribe to the ol' "Go Big ..or Go Home" philosophy across the board so.... :D

..Jim W

[Eddie Darby]

I think that the extra weight will help do the job better, and coffee breaks will help with the extra fatigue!

I have a #8 Stanley and love it.

Having said all that, I thought that since I have a #4 1/2 LN with the York Pitch attachment, it would allow me to use the York Pitch attachment all the way up to the #7, which is handy. Rob Cosman from LN in Canada was very much in favour of the #8, and said, "Why would you want a #7 when you can have a #8?"

I think that the Jet Waterwheel sharpening jig will handle #8 blades with no "finegling"!

This is from Tom Hintz's review of the Jet:

" The JET SEJ-1 (also compatible with the TORMEK machine (http://www.newwoodworker.com/reviews/tormekrevu.html)) has a width capacity of 3”, exceeding the similar TORMEK SVH-60 jig by ½”."

http://www.newwoodworker.com/reviews/jetsej1rvu.html

[Roger Nixon]

I set up my #7's as try planes with .005" or so camber in the blades. This is very helpful in squaring edges and flattening panels. My #8's are set as jointers with the blades sharpened straight across. These cut the edge joint, often match planing. The extra length of the #8 helps straighten the edge and the extra width is good for match planing two pieces of stock up to 5/4.
After a panel is flattend with a try plane, final smoothing can be done with a smoother such as your #4 1/2 or a panel plane like a #5 1/2.

[Ian Smith]

I went with the Lie-Nielsen No. 8 because I figured that the extra width, over a No. 7, would give me a greater capacity to match plane. I also like the extra weight.

[Tyler Howell]

I like them both. Each has it's own place. How much are you going to do and how much can you handle.
They both look great up in the till waiting for their turn in the game:D :D .

[Bruce Delaney]

I like them both. Each has it's own place. How much are you going to do and how much can you handle.
They both look great up in the till waiting for their turn in the game:D :D .

Hi Tyler,

Can you elaborate on what the place is of the #7 vs. the #8? If one were to have both jointers, which situations would call for the #7 instead of the #8? I can see that the #7 and #8 have a lot of overlap, which is probably the reason why many people have one or the other, but rarely both.

From talking with a woodworking buddy, he described the #8 as the macho-man jointer and the #7 as the weeny-man jointer. :rolleyes: Not a view I subscribe to, as I suspect there might be times where a #7 is a better choice than the #8, and vice versa--irregardless of one's physique.

So again, if you have to choose between these two jointers, which one would it be?

For the record, I consider myself normal-built, certainly no Arnie! :p