help with a LN 4 High Angle

[mike roe]

Hi all

I recently picked up a bronze LN #4 with the high angle frog - 50 degree. I had it sharp and tuned it up to give it a run on some curly maple i had some trouble with in the past. As a comparison i first planed the board with a really old Sargent 408 that I have been working on. I was actually surprised at how well the sargent performed. I then went at it with the LN but with horrible results. No matter what I have done I cannot get full width shavings. I also get bad track lines and tear out. After a couple of hours trying everything I could think of I gave up. Each time the LN gave me a hard time I was able to go to the Sargent and clean up the board nicely. This was only as a test run and really just to try out the new plane, but I am dismayed. I really couldnt do anything to make it perform the way it should.

Just to let you know how i was set up:
Blade is nicely sharp and square- could be a bit sharper but not much
Chipbreaker is set right up to the blade edge (even tried pulling it back a bit)
Tight mouth opening

It seemed to be producing the type ii chip - the shaving was fine but crinkly. However the lateral adjustment was just finicky - i found it very difficult to get the blade to make square contact with the baord and stay there.

As a side note between the weight and the high angle it was a workout.

Anyway, does anyone have any idea whats up? Im already thinking of selling this off. I am planning a four post bed in curly maple and most of the finish work and chamfering will be done by hand. I really need a solution to deal with the maple.

THANKS!

[Greg Cole]

Sharpness is rather important.
The higher the angle, the more ummmph needed to push the plane. The track marks are a sign your blade needs some camber. Crinkly shavings are too thick for a #4 too..... a #4 should make curly whispy shavings that blow in the slightest breeze per say. I like my #4's shavings to be almost transparent.
Did you try the LN #4 on anything other than the curly maple? How'd it go?
If the Sargent gives good results, why not just use it? Just askin'?;)
MY LN #4 with out HAF gave me fits on curly maple too (I wound up sanding my last 2 curly maple raised panels :o).... fits enough to get me to pick up a LA Jack... so no more sanding.:D

[Pedro Reyes]

I have a LN 4-1/2 with the same frog.

First comment, the angle makes it considerably harder to push IMHO. I figured it was too much of a workout for me in most circumstances so I recently ordered a standard angle frog (45 deg.). I will use this most of the time and when challenged I will switch to the high angle frog.

I also faced similar problems with maple (not curly), but only where grain changed direction, the HA frog did perform a bit better but at the end of the day a $300 + tool was replaced by a piece of steel less less than $10. Sometimes you just have to scrape, specially my case which was a small area perhaps 2"x2".

As far as your tracks, soften the corners of your iron slightly, that's all I did. My blade was very sharp, 8000 Shapton followed by leather honing. As far as the blade making square contact and not moving, perhaps tightening (careful) the lever cap screw a bit is in order.

Don't lose hope, it is a good tool. That said if another tool performs better, then no reason not to use that instead.

hope this helps.

/p

[Doug Shepard]

...However the lateral adjustment was just finicky - i found it very difficult to get the blade to make square contact with the baord and stay there.
...


I just got a HAF for mine not to long ago. I seem to recall that when I first installed it, that it was possible to put it on not seated totally (almost) which would throw things out of whack. Since it's about the only thing you didn't mention, did you double check the frog?

[Casey Gooding]

Different planes react to wood differently. Oddly, two seemingly identical planes may have vastly different results to the same board.
You're best off using whatever plane works best. The LN will excel on other woods, no doubt.

[mike roe]

Thanks for the replies everyone. Im going to keep trying.
I had not double checked the frog so ill try that next.

One question: I was able to make some super thin shavings - although they were crinkly instead of fluffy - I thought that was due to the high angle making a Type II chip (no idea what that means other than supposed to stop tear out). Is that right?

Im really just surprised I guess. I dont mind using the Sargent and some scrapers - (i think i paid 8 bucks for the sargent). But I suppose because of the LN name I was expecting amazing results - hence the big let down. I actually would not have bought this if it wasnt for the upcoming bed project. Im planning on roughing out the pencil posts on the bandsaw and then going with all hand tools from there.

I had considered the veritas LA planes before going with the LN. If this doesnt work out maybe ill have to correct the situation with a new delivery:)

[Joel Goodman]

If you decide the LN #4 is not for you try to get LN to exchange it for a LN #62 low angle jack with an extra blade. Put a micro bevel on one blade at 35 degrees. I much prefer that as my go to smoother and if you got the LN new (either from them or a dealer) they are usually good about exchanges. I like the LN 62 and it has the BU advantage of "adjustable" angle of attack depending on the bevel angle of the blade as do the LV.

[Larry Williams]

Set the cap iron back out of the way, at least 3/32". Any value they have is far less than working with a steeper pitch. I think your deformed shaving is caused by the cap iron.

[Michael Faurot]

If you decide the LN #4 is not for you try to get LN to exchange it for a LN #62 low angle jack with an extra blade. Put a micro bevel on one blade at 35 degrees.


Regarding additional blades for Lie-Nielsen planes. If you don't want to re-grind the angle on a blade yourself, you can get Lie-Nielsen to grind to the angle you want as part of the order process for an additional $10. I don't think they make this known on their web site, I found this out by asking. I like to hone my blades by hand, so I need the blade to all ready be at the desired angle as I don't use a honing guide.

[Marcus Ward]

I'm with joel, get that low angle jack or a low angle smoother. I've found them to be much better at stuff you'd expect a high angle to be better on and far easier to push.

Oh and... Oh me oh my! A very modern expensive handplane didn't work better than its vintage counterpart bought for a fraction of the cost? I can't frickin believe it!!!! :P

[Tony Zaffuto]

I have the same plane & set-up and when first using it, I got what I think you are calling "crinkly shavings". The shavings were thin, but appeared as if they were "acordion folded".

It did not perform the way I thought it should until I did the following: get the blade as absolutely sharp as you can, and back the chipbreaker off a tad as Larry Williams suggested. Also make sure the frog is adjusted & seated correctly. I also polished the top of the chipbreaker so as to not give shavings a chance at hanging up. You say you are leaving plane tracks, and if you are and they are only on one side, then the lateral adjuster needs moved a bit.

I do not find the HA plane any harder to push than my normal #4, but you got to be sharp. Take a bit of time to get familiar with the plane, make sure you're sharp and you'll love this plane.

T.Z.

[Eddie Darby]

How did you have your old Sargent 408 set-up?

What blade?

[mike roe]

When i get some time im gonna go over this and see what works; check the frog, play with the breaker etc.

The Sargent is set up pretty basic actually. I re-habbed it and made sure the frog sat nice and tight. But it has the original blade - nothing fancy (edit: 25 degree bevel). In fact the chip breaker could use some work. Its a bit beat up. I have spent a good amount of time on the blade and its sharp. The 408 is much lighter too which made the whole process easier.

I skewed the sargent as I ran it and the results were good - occasional tear-out but not deep - easily fixed. The surface was smooth and consistent. the shavings were wispy thin and full width.

I will be deciding this weekend on the LN - its a gorgeous tool but to be honest I am disappointed- partly from high expectations and partly from having to now decide what to do.

I was also previously looking at the low angel smoothers (LN and Veritas). I like the idea of the versatility.

[Wiley Horne]

Is the frog on the LN mated well to its base, and cinched down tightly?

Wiley

[Danny Burns]

Something smells funny here.:eek:

You are comparing the two planes, you've taken the time and trouble to post about both, and yet you haven't even bothered to sharpen the LN blade, or make sure the frog was setted.:confused::confused:

Your Sargent plane leaves no ridges but your LN plane does. Hmmmm!:confused::confused:

[mike roe]

when exactly did i say the LN wasnt sharp?

[Marcus Ward]

You are comparing the two planes, you've taken the time and trouble to post about both, and yet you haven't even bothered to sharpen the LN blade, or make sure the frog was setted.:confused::confused:

I thought the whole point of the LN when suggesting newbies buy them is that they need no setup?

[David Keller NC]

Mike - I have a fairly large number of planes in use. They vary from flea-market Stanely #4s, through L-N #4s, to Norris A5s and a very high-end Konrad Sauer A6. My take on all of these is that if set up correctly, they will all perform reasonably well on straight grain. The differences start showing up on highly curled wood. In general, the Norris and KS planes perform best on these woods, but I attribute most of this performance difference to the higher weight and, in the case of the KS A6, the higher pitch angle.

The point is that the L-N, if there is nothing wrong with it, will indeed plane highly curled maple satisfactorily, and I use it for this purpose fairly often.

Some thoughts -

The blade - if there are visible tracks from the middle of the shaving, you've a blade problem, period. Short of a REALLY scratched sole, there is nothing else that can cause this issue. Tracks from the corner of the blade are a different matter - typically, this is the result of insufficient camber (curve) on the blade. Since I don't have your blade in front of me, I'll note some things that you might already know (apologies if this is a repeat):

1) The back of the blade - next to the edge, must be honed to a mirror. It does no good to hone the stuffing out of the bevel and have surface texture on the back of the blade. I've taught a few classes on handplaning, and I've seen some students come in with a blade that is a mirror over most of the back and with a mirror bevel, but the mirror shine on the back fades into a matte finish within 1/16" of the blade edge. This sort of situation results in an apparently sharp blade that isn't, and will leave a surface that's unnacceptable. If you have trouble with polishing the last bit of the back next to the edge, David Charlesworth's "ruler trick" is worth doing on a fine (8000 grit) stone, which will put a small back-bevel on the blade that ensures that the edge is sharp.

Also - I've had a few L-N blades that were not up to snuff. Once sharpened, the edge either folded over (too soft) or chipped out (tto hard) once a couple of passes over a hard wood was made. Take a close look at the edge with a magnifying glass - if you find small chips in the edge, this may be an indication that the blade is chipping under load. IF that's the case, L-N will cheerfully replace the blade at no cost - they're very good with this.

2) The sole - For a roughing plane, the flatness of the sole of a plane doesn't matter that much, at least within reason. However, when trying to use a plane as a smoother to take very thin shavings, it makes a big difference. L-N planes are castings, and while they go to great effort to anneal the bodies after casting to remove stresses and grind/lap the soles flat, a manufacturing problem is not out of the question. With the frog and the blade installed in the plane and cinched down (like you were going to use it), set a straight edge on the sole lengthwise. The straightedge needs to be straight within about a half of a thousandths of an inch over its length. That may seem like a high standard, but it's pretty common in the modern age - any of the Starrett steel rules will meet this standard, as well as some of the less expensive foreign brands.

Hold the sole with the straightedge up to a light source - you should be able to see either no light coming through, or the barest sliver. It's important that the strightedge contacts the sole at the front of the plane, in front of the mouth, and at the back of the plane. If any of these areas are recessed much over three thousandths of an inch, the plane will be balky and want to stall, depending on how much pressure you put on the front or rear tote. Also, check the side-to-side flatness of the sole as well. The surface on the sole doesn't have to be a mirror, but it does need to be fairly uniform. A big scratch on the sole may result in a visible track in the planed surface if the scratch extends through the mouth.

Hope this helps - I can say without reservation that L-Ns in use in my shop are the go-to planes, they perform superbly. Properly set-up and without a manufacturing defect, yours will as well.

[Greg Cole]

Oh and... Oh me oh my! A very modern expensive handplane didn't work better than its vintage counterpart bought for a fraction of the cost? I can't frickin believe it!!!! :P

Even a blind squirrel finds a nut every so often.:D:rolleyes:;)
How long have you been waiting to toss that up here? Just funnin'.
I admit to using my LN's a little bit before really tuning it to my liking, then again I didn't exactly know what I liked nor disliked when I bought them. A little additional honing and polishing the blade and a wee bit of camber helped alot, but I still have some fits with very curly stock. The new LV LA jack has been a very nice addition in this respect.

[Marcus Ward]

Oh you know I couldn't resist that one. You might as well have hung a huge red sign on this thread. :D

I'm sure the LN's require an order of magnitude less tuning than the vintage ones. I'm just sayin... ;)

[Danny Burns]

could be a bit sharper but not much

Get the blade sharp, not 'could be sharper' sharp, and set the plane up properly, and then inspect the edge of the blade with a magnifying glass before and after having a go with it.


If it's a Bad blade, contact LN for good service and a new blade. End of story.

[Randy Klein]

Not sure if you mentioned this or not, but what bevel angle do you have honed up on the iron? On my LN's, I have found that I need about a 33 degree bevel or I get edge failure real quick. An iron with a rolled edge won't work real well.

[Eddie Darby]

Mike - I have a fairly large number of planes in use. They vary from flea-market Stanely #4s, through L-N #4s, to Norris A5s and a very high-end Konrad Sauer A6. My take on all of these is that if set up correctly, they will all perform reasonably well on straight grain. The differences start showing up on highly curled wood. In general, the Norris and KS planes perform best on these woods, but I attribute most of this performance difference to the higher weight and, in the case of the KS A6, the higher pitch angle.

The point is that the L-N, if there is nothing wrong with it, will indeed plane highly curled maple satisfactorily, and I use it for this purpose fairly often.

Some thoughts -

The blade - if there are visible tracks from the middle of the shaving, you've a blade problem, period. Short of a REALLY scratched sole, there is nothing else that can cause this issue. Tracks from the corner of the blade are a different matter - typically, this is the result of insufficient camber (curve) on the blade. Since I don't have your blade in front of me, I'll note some things that you might already know (apologies if this is a repeat):

1) The back of the blade - next to the edge, must be honed to a mirror. It does no good to hone the stuffing out of the bevel and have surface texture on the back of the blade. I've taught a few classes on handplaning, and I've seen some students come in with a blade that is a mirror over most of the back and with a mirror bevel, but the mirror shine on the back fades into a matte finish within 1/16" of the blade edge. This sort of situation results in an apparently sharp blade that isn't, and will leave a surface that's unnacceptable. If you have trouble with polishing the last bit of the back next to the edge, David Charlesworth's "ruler trick" is worth doing on a fine (8000 grit) stone is worth doing, which will put a small back-bevel on the blade that ensures that the edge is sharp.

Also - I've had a few L-N blades that were not up to snuff. Once sharpened, the edge either folded over (too soft) or chipped out (tto hard) once a couple of passes over a hard wood was made. Take a close look at the edge with a magnifying glass - if you find small chips in the edge, this may be an indication that the blade is chipping under load. IF that's the case, L-N will cheerfully replace the blade at no cost - they're very good with this.

2) The sole - For a roughing plane, the flatness of the sole of a plane doesn't matter that much, at least within reason. However, when trying to use a plane as a smoother to take very thin shavings, it makes a big difference. L-N planes are castings, and while they go to great effort to anneal the bodies after casting to remove stresses and grind/lap the soles flat, a manufacturing problem is not out of the question. With the frog and the blade installed in the plane and cinched down (like you were going to use it), set a straight edge on the sole lengthwise. The straightedge needs to be straight within about a half of a thousandths of an inch over its length. That may seem like a high standard, but it's pretty common in the modern age - any of the Starrett steel rules will meet this standard, as well as some of the less expensive foreign brands.

Hold the sole with the straightedge up to a light source - you should be able to see either no light coming through, or the barest sliver. It's important that the strightedge contacts the sole at the front of the plane, in front of the mouth, and at the back of the plane. If any of these areas are recessed much over three thousandths of an inch, the plane will be balky and want to stall, depending on how much pressure you put on the front or rear tote. Also, check the side-to-side flatness of the sole as well. The surface on the sole doesn't have to be a mirror, but it does need to be fairly uniform. A big scratch on the sole may result in a visible track in the planed surface if the scratch extends through the mouth.

Hope this helps - I can say without reservation that L-Ns in use in my shop are the go-to planes, they perform superbly. Properly set-up and without a manufacturing defect, yours will as well.

That's a great reply!!!;););)

[Eddie Darby]

Not sure if you mentioned this or not, but what bevel angle do you have honed up on the iron? On my LN's, I have found that I need about a 33 degree bevel or I get edge failure real quick. An iron with a rolled edge won't work real well.

Great point!

I've run into this 'steeper bevel for A2' idea at sharpening sites, and since a bevel down plane only needs a few degrees of clearance to get the job done, I put 35* micro-bevels on my LN A2 blades, and I find that the edge stays sharp for a long long time.

I do most of my work with A2 for this reason, and reserve my O1 for delicate finshing work where edge durability isn't an issue.

My sharpening really improved when I got a small high power microscope and started to check my blades regularly.

[David Keller NC]

Thanks, Eddie - Just trying to be helpful (which is the point of internet forums, in my opinion). Problem is I keep finding spelling and grammar mistakes that I didn't use to make. Old age is creeping up on me....