Lie-Nielsen test drive

[Jake Helmboldt]

So I stopped in at L-N while visting family in ME for thanksgiving. Really cool place and nice folks. I was impressed at all the employees coming through the showroom saying good night and happy TG to the guy honing skew chisels and minding shop while I played with their products.

Their tools really are a cut above. Almost zero backlash, heavy, fine adjustments, nice feel, etc, but....when I came home I waxed up my vintage Bailey #4 (with a L-N thick iron) and started making shavings. And while the L-N is certainly more dialed in and refined, I couldn't discern that it was producing a finish that was better. Obviously it is hard to compare without having them side-by-side, but I have to ask:

How do I justify spending $300 when my Bailey w/ some sweat equity and the L-N iron cost me about $50? Am I missing something?

Jake

[Martin Shupe]

Because the steel bottom on your Bailey will move and become "unflat", and you will have to flatten it again every 3-5 years or so. Because of the ductile iron (I think that is what it is called) that LN uses, that won't happen.

Also, did you see the example of what happens when your LN hits the floor? It does not crack, but I'd bet your Bailey would!:eek:

Can you get a Bailey #4 in bronze?

Did you try out their chisels? Worth every penny, and you would have a hard time putting together an equal set of Stanley 750's, even off ebay.


One last question...

Who ever heard of needing to justify a new tool purchase?:D

[Jim Becker]

Who ever heard of needing to justify a new tool purchase?

Ah....the crux of the matter! LOL! :D

[Mark Rios]

............Who ever heard of needing to justify a new tool purchase?:D



Martin, If you would allow me to add a clarification...............

Who ever heard of needing to justify a nice new tool purchase? ;) ;) ;)

[Terek Johnson]

Jake, I asked myself the very same question for a few years. I too have an old #4 that's a joy to use, and felt that Lie Nielsens were perhaps more "buzz" than substence. But, last year I had an opportunity to take a friend's Lie Nielsen #5 home for a weekend test-drive and I must confess: after using and comparing that plane to a couple of my old Stanleys, I saved my money and bought a new LN #4 and have never looked back since.
Lie Nielsen's bench planes, in my humble opinion, are truely a cut above any Stanley's that I've owned or used. The first most obvious difference is that LN's are heavier than Stanleys. I find this weight difference makes for a smoother (in the sense of less hiccuping with the resultant washboard marking) cut.
Secondly, the machining is superior. Virtually zero backlash in the yoke, very smooth (and effortless) frog adjustments. Overall fit and finish: top notch. Related to this item is one observation I've noticed when comparing my Stanleys to Lie Nielsens: I find that I continually fiddle with angle and depth adjustments with Stanleys, whereas I've found that typically after setting the LN how I want it I can plane away quite carefree. As a result, I find that I can focus more attention on the wood I'm working and less attention to the vagaries of the tool.
As for Lie Nielsen prices, that ultimately is a question you have to resolve in your own mind. There are folks out there who have bought handplanes that cost as much as a new car, so the ultimate value of the tool is something that you have to feel out for yourself. Do I wish LN's were less expensive? Heck yeah! But I've never felt that the money I've spent for them was wasted. Moreover, taking a quick scan of e-Bay shows a remarkably robust 2nd hand market for LNs (case in point, a used LN scrub plane just sold yesterday for $130 - a new one costs $145). So, if you do end up taking the plunge and find that Lie Nielens aren't your cup of tea, you can probably recoup most of your money reselling it. Good luck.

[Chuck Nickerson]

I'm not a huge fan of investing sweat equity in tools. I do that at work and get paid, so when I'm at home woodworking I can make something.

[Ian Gillis]

Because the steel bottom on your Bailey will move and become "unflat", and you will have to flatten it again every 3-5 years or so. Because of the ductile iron (I think that is what it is called) that LN uses, that won't happen.
I'm not going to weigh in on either side of the LN v Stanley debate, but in the interest of fairness I'd like to challenge some of the above. Most Stanley bench planes are cast iron. This is not the same as ductile iron, but it is vastly superior to steel. Stanley did make some steel body planes which are designated as such - No. 5S, for example.

Cast iron will creep and warp in the period after casting. Once the casting is aged for a while and machined, there can be some movement due to internal stresses. That's why they often need flattening when you find them. If you flatten it at this point, the likelihood of further movement is very low. The notion that they have to be re-flattened every 3-5 yrs is not borne out in my experience (I did my first flattening jobs in the mid 80's) and I've never heard anyone else talk about it either.

I'm sure someone will correct me if I'm wrong.


Who ever heard of needing to justify a new tool purchase?:D
Some things never change :)

Cheers
IG

[Wilbur Pan]

One way to look at this is that getting a Lie-Nielsen #4 will serve a clear purpose: the last bit of planing for your final surface prep. You could use your Stanley #4 to do your planing up to your final stage, then use the Lie-Nielsen for the final finishing strokes. Kind of like the hand plane equivalent of going from 120 grit to 320 grit sanding. My neighbor uses this method for planing. I use Japanese planes, but also have a similar method: an older Japanese plane for rough planing, and a new one for the final planing steps.

[Jake Helmboldt]

Why are BU smoothers so popular? I didn't try it on soft wood, so I suppose that is where it would shine. But I didn't care for the feel of the low angle smoother on cherry.

The #4 and #4.5 on the other hand were very nice.

JH

[Terek Johnson]

There is an excellent article in the October issue of Fine Woodworking that answers this question perfectly.
In a nutshell the physical properties of hardwoods (cherry, maple, oak etal.) vs. softwoods (fir, pine, hemlock) are such that as the wood fibers are severed during the act of planing they cut in a different manner. Ultimately, softwoods respond better to a lower cutting angle - something lower than the standard 45 degrees on a standard plane, (which is achieved with a bevel-up set-up); whereas, hardwoods respond better to a steeper bevel angle (within certain limits, i.e. the york pitch - 50 degrees).
I work with a lot of CVG fir (more than hardwoods), and have just bought a BU smoother from Lie Nielsen. There is an appreciable difference in the finish of fir using the BU set-up (i.e. greater clarity and less tearout). My decision to purchase the BU design was predicated solely on the fact that I work mostly with softwoods.

[Charles McKinley]

In the article Terek talked about the also said the bevel angle can be changed with a back bevel to work optimally on the type of wood you use. Allowing you the chance to have an optimally performing plane on several different woods for the cost of an extra blade.

With bevel down planes you are stuck with 45 or 50 degree pitch or make you onw Krenov style plane as one of the reader suggested.

[Eddie Darby]

Their tools really are a cut above. Almost zero backlash, heavy, fine adjustments, nice feel, etc, but....when I came home I waxed up my vintage Bailey #4 (with a L-N thick iron) and started making shavings. And while the L-N is certainly more dialed in and refined, I couldn't discern that it was producing a finish that was better. Obviously it is hard to compare without having them side-by-side, but I have to ask:

How do I justify spending $300 when my Bailey w/ some sweat equity and the L-N iron cost me about $50? Am I missing something?

Jake

I would call this the "proof is in the pudding", approach and is fine for very obvious and practical reasons.... however I'm not a pudding. I enjoy working with a tool that has all of the characteristics that you listed above, which in-turn makes the job much more pleasurable, and the end product brings me a deep sense of satisfaction, which I owe to Lie-Nielsen in-part for making such a wonderful tool. I now look forward to having the tools I work with sing in my hands.

I use to wonder why fishermen hung fish on the walls, until I made something with my own hands, and sat back and enjoyed looking at the end result.
----------------------------
If you want to soup-up your "pudding approach", then try the Holtey S53 blades, since that is the only part of the plane that changes the surface of the wood. They ain't cheap!

http://www.holtey-planes.com/blades.htm


The other parts of the plane 'merely' provide a flat surface to work from and hold the blade steady at the right angle, some more steady and some less. The wood does not know what the plane cost.
--------------------------
Another option would be to wait until Woodcraft have a sale and spend less than $300 clams!:rolleyes: Then you can feel even better about getting it on sale!

[James Mittlefehldt]

One other option you could consider Jake is to look at the Veritas NO. 4.

Gives you ductile cast iron, thick blade and excellent customer service and for the relative bargain price of $189. US. Just something to think about.

[Chuck Nickerson]

For me, the big advantage is one I seldom see mentioned. It's very easy to change the plane's cutting angle: just pop in a blade ground with a different bevel. I have four blades for my BU smoother, each ground with a different bevel. The wood quickly tells me which one to use.

[Jason Tuinstra]

Jake, sounds like you had a nice time at LN. I've seen a couple articles on LN lately and it looks like a nice place to go. Regarding price, not only do I think you get what you pay for, as has been covered here already, I trust that the LN employee's that you saw, get well paid for the work that they do. I trust that this "Made in America" product is going to stay made in America and I have no problem paying for that.

[Martin Shupe]

I'm not going to weigh in on either side of the LN v Stanley debate, but in the interest of fairness I'd like to challenge some of the above. Most Stanley bench planes are cast iron. This is not the same as ductile iron, but it is vastly superior to steel. Stanley did make some steel body planes which are designated as such - No. 5S, for example.

Cast iron will creep and warp in the period after casting. Once the casting is aged for a while and machined, there can be some movement due to internal stresses. That's why they often need flattening when you find them. If you flatten it at this point, the likelihood of further movement is very low. The notion that they have to be re-flattened every 3-5 yrs is not borne out in my experience (I did my first flattening jobs in the mid 80's) and I've never heard anyone else talk about it either.

I'm sure someone will correct me if I'm wrong.


Some things never change :)

Cheers
IG

I guess I should have clarified my statement. I was told about the Stanley iron "moving" by someone--can't remember who--, but I respected their opinion and filed it away for future reference. I have not observed this "fact" personally, so perhaps I should have said that in my original post. If it is untrue, I am sorry and stand corrected.

I don't have a large collection of planes, but the vast majority are LN, and I have never been dissatisfied in any way with any of their products. The price is high compared to other options, but I believe the price is fair for the quality you get in return. Furthermore, they stand behind their products, and are number one in customer service in my book.

I will stand behind my comment about dropping an old Stanley and new LN on a concrete floor. I am betting the Stanley will suffer more damage than the LN, not that I am willing to use any of my planes as test beds!:D

I will admit to owning a couple of Bedrocks that someday I will restore to their former glory...but I will also buy new LN blades to put in them!

[Roger Bell]

I have been using Stanley' bench planes since my introduction to them in grade school....1961. I was fortunate to get my first slightly used LN in the mail today (from a fellow Creeker no less). I had it set up and pushing 1.5 thou (miked) full width, full length shavings in less than 30 minutes, including re-sharpening and re-honing the iron. With a bit more time, perhaps it may perform a tad bit better, but that is more than good enough for most of what I do. I was also impressed with the relative ease of adjustment, the virtual lack of backlash and the ability of the plane to "stay" adjusted without the perpetual fiddling that is characteristic with the Stanleys. That kind of performance for that amount of effort might just have value for some.

I currently have a working stable of about thirty bench planes, mostly Baileys, a half dozen or so Bedrocks, and a smattering of other vintage brands as well as a couple of LV/BU's. And four vintage English/Scottish infills. Not counting the woodies. And I have owned various others over the course of my lifetime. Accordingly, I feel qualified to make comparative judgments based on what I feel is substantial experience without, I hope, appearing sanctimonious.

I was late coming to LN's version of Bedrock because I too was of the (internet-influenced no doubt) opinion that they couldn't possibly be much better than the Bedrock....same design after all with perhaps a somewhat better fit and finish. (Did I get the argument right?). But...I just got a bonus at work and, well, what the hey!

My experience with Bailey's (and even the occasional Bedrock, for that matter) is that sometimes you can tune them to work as well as my LN........and sometimes you simply cannot. And I think that this is the case more often than our "preWW2 Stanleys are all you will ever need" brethern will have us believe. The Stanley product is simply not as finely made as the LN. Not even close. No question whatsoever about that since it is so self-evident. Perhaps I got one of the "better" LN's...but I doubt it. Some Stanley's simply are not amenable to judicious tuning. Few Bailey's will come around without significant coaxing and putzing to get them worthy of final smoothing cuts in ordinary hardwoods. And fewer yet will without the benefit of a better iron. The ones that insist on remaining marginal can, of course, be relegated to their rightful place...rough carpentry work.

Is the LN product worth the price? If you believe in paying an American craftsman a decent wage for a superior product, then it certainly is. Is it "necessary" to buy LN or some other much more expensive modern-made plane when a used Stanley might meet your needs? Definitely not. So why should you do so? That is a value judgment that only you are qualified to make.

[Bob Smalser]

For a minute here, I thought this was a contest to see how many old wives' tales about tools that could be crammed into one thread. ;)

If you want to read a discussion on this among a group composed of largely professionals, head over to woodenboatvb.com Building and Repair and pull up the block plane thread.