Printable View
A hand plane makes a better surface than a planer because it makes one long straight cut vs many short curved cuts. But a planer impacts the wood. Does blade speed also make a difference?
This may sound like a power tool question but I've brought it to the Neandercult because here we think a little differently.
Thanks in advance for your insight
Tom
By blade speed I assume you mean cuts per inch. Cuts per inch on a powered planer makes a difference; blade speed per se does not as long as the blades are sharp. More cuts per inch means lighter cuts, which means less crushing of the fibers and shallower scallops in the surface for you to correct with your hand plane later on. Blade speed coupled with an identical feed rate would give you higher cuts per inch, but if the feed rate is also higher (say, comparing different models with the same cuts per inch but different blade speeds) the only advantage would be time saved. Blade speeds would also make a difference in likelihood of burning the wood and speed of dulling the blades; we’re all well aware of the issues with a dull blade, so no need to go into detail there.
Best regards,
Michael
I use both. My lunchbox planer quickly reduces the lumber to my desired rough thickness. I follow up with smoother planes to establish the final thickness and a smooth as glass finish. Could I do it all with my hand planes? Sure, but I just don't have the time.
+1. Same here.Quote:
Originally Posted by Rob Luter
I also use planes for small or short parts.
Cuts per inch helps, but the surface is still going to show scallops when you put a finish on it. So for any show surface you're going to have to sand or plane it to finish.
Not sure about the effect of blade speed, if it has any effect beyond increasing cuts per inch. Blade speed is usually limited by something else, like the max rpm the cutterhead can safely handle.
A bigger factor would probably be cutterhead diameter. The larger diameter the less pronounced the scalloping, and it begins to approach something more like a handplane's cutting action. This can help with tearout, and the shallower scallops means less planing or sanding to get it ready for finish.
The Japanese have a machine called a Super Surfacer. It is a type of planer, but uses a fixed blade instead of a rotary cutterhead. The work piece is fed through the machine and the cutter shears off a few thousandths. Even has a chipbreaker to limit tearout. This is the only power tool I can think of that would create the same surface as a handplane.
It's been suggested that planers with a low speed feed option, and especially those that combine that with a helical cutter head, can achieve "finish ready" surface quality. I have no personal experience and frankly I'm skeptical.Quote:
Originally Posted by Robert Hazelwood
Unsure what you mean by 'make a difference'. In surface quality?
I use my planer for thicknessing but usually a plane or sandpaper to finish, so the finish surface left by the planer (tearout notwithstanding) doesn't really bother me. In fact, I have come to kind of appreciate the scallops. They serve as a good reference guide for my hand planing. Also, because the tips of the wave break up the surface and you're really just knocking down the "tips of the wave" with the smoothing plane, there's less fear of tearing out.
Anyway, I do both.
Guess I didn't make my question clear. Suppose I put a 100 rpm motor on my planer, it would make the same cuts per inch. The blades would not impact the wood, they would have to power thru, more like hand tools. How would the surface be different? I'm imagining the fibers being crushed in length.
I use my planer only on fast feed rate. Few times I used slow, it took more time and end of the day I still had to sand it a after project was done.
Now a days, I use planer to dimension wood. After glue up and all, I either skim with a plane or sand for final finish. I find it faster than using the slow speed to get a little better initial results.
As a added benefit, I am not bothered with small Nick's in blade anymore.
Planer = DeWalt DW735
The only difference I found between the two....planes do not snipe.
Now, how well would a planer handle a board like this?
Attachment 419892
Hmmm?
Jointers manage, by design.Quote:
Originally Posted by steven c newman
Enter: the super surfacer. Basically a belt fed fixed blade machine that works similarly to a hand plane.
Here's a link to a Japanese Woodworker that has a YouTube channel. I love his work and his production style. He has a Super Surfacer that shown up in a number of his videos.Quote:
Originally Posted by Brian Holcombe
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC7F...U5I8FCHXQSQe9Q
Those are sweet. I've watched way more video of those in operation that I should have :)Quote:
Originally Posted by Brian Holcombe
I have both and I would not be without any of them. I thickness with the planer and finish with a hand plane.
I love hand planes, just like others on this forum...
I have a PM 20" planer with a Byrd helical head.
Its tuned just right. The surface comes damn close to my best hand planes.
maybe a quick swipe of 220 and its there. The good helical heads, in the right planer / jointer are a huge break through in ww.
I had a Makita Lunchbox planer, kept new blades in it, finish was smooth as glass. I would not suggest running hardwoods at max width capacity and deep cuts. U have to work with the planer, listen to it, adjust accordingly.
AS for cuts per inch on planner with stratight blades? I cant think of any good reason to slow down the cutter speed, other than if you are forced to feed the stock slower, or maybe have super knarly grain.
Also, a planer can produce a uniform thickness along the entire board... incredibly difficult with a hand plane, specially when the board is much longer than the hand plane.
Steven, that would be a fairly simple task for a powered jointer. The board in question here is quartersawn. Anyone can plane quartersawn boards. Tearout is unlikely. And my Hammer A3-31 does not snipe.Quote:
Originally Posted by steven c newman
The real issue is whether one wants to do so with a hand plane or a power tool? That is another matter. Where there is a choice, it comes down to one's masculinity ... really. One is much more of a man if using hand planes, especially where the task ahead is onerous and consuming. :)
Many of us are members of the hand tool forum because we enjoy using hand tool, and in this case hand planes. We all know that anything a power tool can do, a hand tool can do as well. Learning to master hand tools is source of achievement and pride. Each can complete tasks in a better way than the other. If you want the best of all worlds, learn to master both groups of tools.
I would rather remove waste with power, and then refine with hands. Drive for the show and putt for the dough.
Regards from Perth
Derek
So..if I were to run the above board through a planer.....all the feed rollers will do is push the cupped board down flat......which will just pop back up once it is out of the planer....BTDT.
Plane in that photo is a WR #62, BTW.
This can not be turned around, power tools can not always do what a hand tool can do.Quote:
We all know that anything a power tool can do, a hand tool can do as well.
Also, a hand tool can do a job better than a power tool.
During my working days one of my woodworking co-workers was alway touting his power planer. One of the claims was it could remove 1/16" in a single pass. One of my counters to this in the shop where we worked was to hang a long translucent shaving over my work area. One day we were talking. The conversation turned to woodworking. When asked about his latest project, he replied he wasn't doing anything at the moment because he needed his planer blades sharpened. He then asked if this might be something my setup could handle.
jtk
Speaking of "how well would a planer handle a board like this?"Quote:
Originally Posted by steven c newman
How about this one:
Attachment 420977
That piece was approx. 4"X10-1/4"X7'. It was rough and uneven all around. It took awhile with hand planes but it looks good now.
jtk
From this ..
Attachment 420978
(panel is 3/4" x 16" x 18")
through this...
Attachment 420979
(plane is a Stanley No. 6, type 7)
To this..
Attachment 420980
Then flip the panel over, and repeat...
Attachment 420981
With a little clean up with a Stanley No. 3, type 11.
YMMV:rolleyes:
Steven, you are getting your machines mixed up here. One uses a jointer to flatten one side before running the board through a planer (thicknesser). Rollers do not come into the equation with the jointer.Quote:
Originally Posted by steven c newman
Both hand planes and jointers have a place in the armoury. Not many have jointers as wide or wider than 12”. Hand planes go where powered jointers cannot. However, the speed at which a single board can be levelled is where a power jointer reigns.
Regards from Perth
Derek
As Stephen points out, a large panel would require a larger planer. Machine tools are more about finishing a piece, hand tools are about the journey. The pleasure from using hand tools, understanding the grain across a piece, that final swipe to reveal the surface people will look at for 100 years are a big part of the pleasure.
Creating a reference surface then scribing all around and planing to the line produces enough accuracy (when you get the hang of it!). This is furniture not a car engine. The end user will learn to relish the small hand tool details and not wonder if the craftsman used a helical planer at the factory. The hand tool worker has more of a connection with the end user than you perhaps realise.
William I like your tag line....the last 1% is where science meets art. Sorry to get philosophical 😊
William, interesting point of view. It is the complete opposite of my comments in the preceding post.Quote:
Originally Posted by William Fretwell
I consider machines to be very valuable, however I do not view them as finishing tools. The jointers and planers of this world can do a fabulous job - if you wish to avoid tear out in interlocked boards on one of these machines, spritz the wood surface with water, allow it to sink in for a minute, than wipe it off. Now use the machine. The slightly moistened surface can produce magic.
Having suggested this, I view machines as grunt tools (not finishing tools). Grunt work is rarely pleasurable, unless you do woodwork for purely romantic reasons. I enjoy the romance of hand tools, but I use them primarily as finishing tools. They afford a delicacy which machines cannot in many cases (in some cases machines are capable of great delicacy).
Regards from Perth
Derek
Yes Derek, grunt work is rarely a pleasure. We all draw a line in our minds where the grunt work done by machines ends and the craftsman and his tools take over. For me that is at ripping rough lumber with a table saw. The idea of ripping 28 feet of 3 inch black walnut by hand (as soon as it dries some more) would be daunting! The machine frees up my time for the pleasurable part.
The raising the grain technique with water does produce a better final finish on some woods. It works with hand tools just as well. I let it dry completely before finishing. That technique is especially valuable if you are varnishing a piece as you are removing the fibres the varnish may also raise.
The technique does not aim to raise the grain. That is for sanding. With planing, it is to soften the wood and make it less brittle, thereby reducing or avoiding tearout.Quote:
The raising the grain technique with water does produce a better final finish on some woods. It works with hand tools just as well.
Regards from Perth
Derek
I will have to try it damp next time I have difficult grain, something I usually end up using my bevel up planes for. I generally don’t like using them and planned on selling them. I was somewhat annoyed when they did a better job on some very difficult grain as I now have to keep them!
Until one looks at the "cutters" in that lunchbox planer....and finds they are also "bevel down"......
Only use I have found so far for a bevel up jack plane? I use it as a SCRUB plane.
Steven, you need to qualify how you set up the LA Jack that you find it so limiting. Paul Sellers wrote on one of his blogs that he disliked his LA Jack as it would tear out when he used it. I asked him what angle he honed the bevel on the blade (knowing that he could not tell since he only uses a rounded bevel at about 30 degrees). That would create a 42 degree cutting angle, and so wonder it would tear out. He replied to me that he honed it at 50 degrees (= 62 degree cutting angle). I didn't believe a word of this since, on the tame wood he uses, 62 degrees would be impossible to tear out. So, what angle do you set your LA Jack to cut?
Regards from Perth
Derek
Wood River No. 62....right out of the box.
Angle of the bevel is the exact same as the one in my Stanley No. 60-1/2......and, that low angle block plane doesn't tear out.
Attachment 421094
Works fine...on straight grain Pine....except...I usually work with 1/4 sawn Ash.
Attachment 421096
And much prefer my planes to be bevel down...even with this Maple....
So..I usually stick with what WORKS for me....and can care less about how other theorize about fancy angles.
Steven, well this explains why you get such poor results on anything other than straight grained pine.Quote:
Originally Posted by steven c newman
Your cutting angle is 37 degrees (12 degree bed plus 25 degree bevel). That is far too low for interlocked grain. It is a recipe for disappointment on anything but end grain and cross grain planing. (by contrast, a Stanley #4 has a 45 degree cutting angle - even without the cap iron it is ahead of the game in this instance).
Just to satisfy your own curiosity, add a 50 degree secondary bevel to your blade, and try it again ... on the most interlocked board you can find. I mostly use BD planes these days however, if set up correctly, BU planes will consistently produce very high quality performances on the most difficult woods. You plane has such unlocked potential. It would be wasted as a scrub plane.
Regards from Perth
Derek
Well....for ONE thing....I consider the 62 merely a Jack plane...and it will be used as just that. Have enough #3 and #4 sized smoothers, anyway.
Not everyone feels the "need" to use difficult wood, unless to show off. Have more than enough "fun" with the Curly Maples, the White Oaks, the Quarter sawn Ash....that the Flame grained Cherry, and Black Walnut that comes through here seem tame. Even my BD planes use just a single bevel....without any need for complicated extra bevels, that only dull faster than a cheap putty knife.
That plane...was merely a "Door Prize" I won at a meet & greet. Feel zero "need" to unlock anything about it....it has enough trouble holding a setting long enough to joint an edge...without making it into a beveled edge....very poor for doing a glue joint.
I do have a decent Millers Falls No. 14, with zero camber, that works circles around the 62. At one time, I also had a #3 York Pitch smoother. Failed to find anything "special" about that one, either.
Attachment 421117
Friend of mine now has my old Lunchbox planer....every now and then, I slip over there, buy some rough stock off of him....sometimes, we even run a few boards through. Though..
Attachment 421118
Some won't quite fit through the planer....8/4 White Oak....
Just don't have the room to use it in my shop....the planer, that is...which was also the OP's question.
Could really care less about all the sales hype going with those fancier planes....don't really are for the plane design, anyway.
For some folks, difficult wood is the only thing available locally. To me the Pacific Northwest is full of easy to work wood. Many of the firs are easy to work. The woods like poplar and alder are also usually easy to work. Even though poplar and alder are considered hardwoods, they are not hard like maple, oak, ash or walnut. They are certainly not difficult like the lumber grown down under. With all the rain we get here the wood grows much faster which seems to add to the ease of working.Quote:
Not everyone feels the "need" to use difficult wood, unless to show off.
Some of my early work was done on harder woods. That was mainly because my job was selling paper and the shipping pallets were usually made from eastern hardwoods. The wood was seconds at best and difficult to work. My early days of woodworking required my scavenging and dismantling pallets for building material.
jtk
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jim Koepke
For some reason this reminded me of a book I read when I was maybe 10, that described a meeting (fictitious I believe) between Richard the Lion Heart and Sultan Saladin during the Crusades. The story goes that they compared swords. King Richard took a thick iron bar and with a huge swing of his heavy broadsword cleaved the bar in two. Saladin, instead took a silk scarf and threw it in the air. As it fell, Saladin cut in neatly in half with a swift stroke of his razor sharp scimitar. The two, who had earlier scoffed at the apparently ineffective weaponry of their adversary, left with a new-found respect.
Sorry, just thought the analogy was too similar.
Cheers,
Dom
They are similar Dom. Both stories illustrate the concept of "different strokes for different folks."Quote:
Originally Posted by Dominik Dudkiewicz
jtk
Difficult wood....about as close as I get...
Attachment 421201Attachment 421202
Have a 1 x 6 of Ash, IF anyone wants to try it out.....while I am on the "DL" for a while...( trying to figure a project to use it in..)
LOL! Good point. But, while not a lunch box, my planer would handle it. The plank would probably be a bit smaller that if hand planed, however.Quote:
Originally Posted by Jim Koepke
Attachment 421206