Latest Addition To The Fleet

[steve swantee]

Hello all, I have just finished refurbing my latest aquisition. It's a Stanley No.8 Type 4 (1874-1884) pre-lateral. It arrived in fairly good condition with no broken parts, and only needed some cosmetic enhancement. I think that at some point I will order a LN iron for it-maybe when the Xmas season is over. I have had my eye out for a pre-lateral No.8 for some time now, so I was pretty happy to finally find one.
102273

102274


Steve

[Douglas Brummett]

She's a looker. Nice clean up. Looks like the iron is pretty short, so a new blade isn't a bad idea. Out of curiosity, why pre-lateral?

[steve swantee]

Hi Douglas, thanks for the input. Actually the iron is almost full length, I think it's the angle of the picture and the N0. 8's extra width that is making it look short. I think I would like to have the extra thickness of the LN iron though, as the original is quite thin. As to the question about why pre-lateral, I guess I just prefer the look of the very early Stanleys to the later models, the shape of the totes, etc. Also I don't think that it's much of an inconvenience to make a lateral adjustment on these planes, just a tap on the side of the iron with a mallet does the trick. The LOML doesn't really see the necessity of so many planes, but thankfully she lets me indulge as long as I'm making her something with them.

Steve

[Derek Stevens]

I have a question, I have on that looks very similar, stanley on the iron, though the body says Bailey.. just a case of the wrong iron?

[Bill Houghton]

I have a question, I have on that looks very similar, stanley on the iron, though the body says Bailey.. just a case of the wrong iron?

Except for very early planes made by Bailey, Bailey refers to the top of the Stanley bench plane line - kind of like "Lincoln" is the best of the Ford Motor Company's cars. "Stanley" will show up on the iron and, depending on the type (years of production), on the lever cap, except for the Stanley Bedrock planes, where the lever cap will say "Bedrock," and, no, this is not named in honor of Fred Flintstone's home town, but is a geological reference ("solid as bedrock" was the idea they were trying to convey).

All this was intended to market the planes rather than to confuse newcomers to the trade, but it certainly can confuse.

[Bill Houghton]

I just prefer the look of the very early Stanleys to the later models, the shape of the totes, etc.

I agree with you about the looks - I do love those low knobs, though I have a low knob No. 4 that is a bear to grip at the front - the higher knob works a lot better on that size. But for a No. 5 or up, the low knobs are SO much classier.

[steve swantee]

Hi Derek, your plane says Bailey on the body because Stanley saw fit to honor the plane's inventor Leonard Bailey, who liscensed the patents for his planes to Stanley. Your plane would have come from the factory with a blade stamped with one of Stanley's various trademarks. I beleive only Bailey's own type 1 planes (1867-69) would have come with the Bailey name on the iron, and possibly some type 2's, I don't recall right off hand. I have a type 2 No.7 with the semi-circular Stanley trademark stamped into it. But the chipbreakers on Stanleys came with L.Baileys trademark stamped on it up to type 6 I beleive. Hope this helps.


Steve

[Derek Stevens]

Thanks, Bill, and Steve. I have tons of older tools handed down, and until signing on here, never thought of the pedigrees, just used them on a daily basis, (or weekly, depending on the tool)

[steve swantee]

I had the chance to sharpen the iron yesterday and took it for a test drive on some scrap birch from a project, and it is definitely in need of the heavier iron, especially in difficult grain. I find some of the early irons are really thin, even compared to some of the later models. As a lot of my projects are in hardwood, I think an iron upgrade is in the works.

Steve

[David Keller NC]

Steve - A comment about replacement irons for Stanley Bailey-type planes: I'd go with a Hock replacement. I have a lot of Lie-Nielsens, and a lot of antique Stanleys. On most of the Stanleys that get used in my shop, I've replaced the irons with Hocks to preserve the originals. Hands down, the Hocks are more consistent in edge-holding ability than the Lie-Nielsens. That's not to say that I'm unhappy with my Lie-Nielsens - I use them daily in the shop, but I've had some trouble with a few of their irons being either too hard (chips easily) or too soft (rolls the edge in anything harder than Eastern White Pine).

Out of 12 Hock replacement blades - 8 of which are Stanely/Bailey replacements, and 4 are British infill plane replacements, all are superb performers. It doesn't by the way, seem to matter whether they're A2 or O-1. After buying a few of each, I'd just save the extra dough and buy the O-1.

[Douglas Brummett]

Hi Douglas, thanks for the input. Actually the iron is almost full length, I think it's the angle of the picture and the N0. 8's extra width that is making it look short. I think I would like to have the extra thickness of the LN iron though, as the original is quite thin. As to the question about why pre-lateral, I guess I just prefer the look of the very early Stanleys to the later models, the shape of the totes, etc. Also I don't think that it's much of an inconvenience to make a lateral adjustment on these planes, just a tap on the side of the iron with a mallet does the trick. The LOML doesn't really see the necessity of so many planes, but thankfully she lets me indulge as long as I'm making her something with them.

Steve
Gotcha. I guess you are not alone. Even on lateral adjust planes of mine the original blades usually have some hammer marks. Guess once you get used to setting with a hammer it isn't a big deal.

RE: replacement iron
I too notice that my older Baileys were thin iron. Comparing that of my type 6 to a type 15 the difference is similar to the jump to a hock. I have really become a firm believer in the Hock iron and breaker upgrade. As David mentioned the edge holding ability is much improved. I also prefer the O1 steel, just for the fact that it might sharpen to a higher degree and faster.

[Marcus Ward]

I've got a big #8 like that, slightly newer it's got a lateral but no frog adjustment screw. It's my go-to plane for flattening things quickly. I've got it set for a fairly rank cut and use it to do the business quick. I follow up with a fine-set #7. My original iron seems to work fine, I never get any chatter, just lots of shavings.

[steve swantee]

Thanks for the info on the Hock irons, but I have had good luck with the LN .125 (1/8") in my No4 so I think I will go that route. Does anyone know if LN will take custom orders? I would like to have irons in this thickness (.125) for my No7 & No8. I thought I had read somewhere that they did custom orders, but I can't remember for sure.

Steve