Restoring an old Stanley No. 2

[John Stevens]

Keep the Orange paint on the side of the frog they olny made them like that between 1931-32

Just out of idle curiousity, how sure are you about that? Regardless, at this point, I ain't doin' nothin' except getting out of the way and letting someone else enjoy it.

Regards,

John

[Johnny Kleso]

Keep The Orange Paint...
100% SURE

Miller Falls started a few years before painting frogs red and Stanley countered with painting type 15 frogs orange..
I collect Type 15 and T14s and love when the T15 has the orange paint, as not all do..
It confirms it as T15 with orange sides..


Jim I know you know that T17s sell for less than T10-T16s and especially when its a No.4 1/2C
I bet you can find two T17s that oppose what I said but I bet the tread is in general planes more ready to use sell for more..
As you know its a lot of hard dirty work to get old planes ready to use and no way was the 4 1/2C going on a shelf as a collector..

Jim, I was ready to say I bet a Minty No3 T18 I sitting on my desk but I'm not so sure I am expressing my feels into words well and you are also correct to a point as the No2 was not a rusty dog..
All of the dozen or so planes I call my collectors are un-restored but I did clean them to a sharp like new condition as much as I could..

I am not 100% postive that I never bid on ready to use planes much or that I was out bid most of the time and don't remmember..
Its been a few years since I was buying and selling hand planes and cant really recall what sells for more or its just what I want to think..
I think its the ready to use planes with a nice pic of shaving in the plane not the rust bucket but the No.2 is not a rust bucket..

I just know after cleaning, painting and sharpening 100s of hand planes for people I would pay more for someone else to do it

[Jim Koepke]

Johnny,
I think there are enough variables here to make us both right on different days of the week.

I know that a well fettled plane will have a higher value than the same plane in the rough. After all, I have done that a few times my self to make a bit of money. None of the planes going through my hands were really of great collector value.

With the plane in question, I would likely try to enhance its value with careful cosmetics. For someone who is not experienced with such, I would warn against much of the advice that they may receive like taking it to a wire wheel or even hitting it with Scotch Brite pads.

Making it pretty without the evidence of being prettied up is what is needed. In the long run, one would have to consider how much the value would be enhanced. I am not sure that for less than $50 it would be worth the time or taking a chance.

jtk

[David Keller NC]

I think Jim has the right idea here. My concern was "overcleaning and restoration", especially by an inexperienced person. Some of the tools in my collection have been carefully cleaned when I felt it was warranted, but the cleaning doesn't make them jump out at you and shout "I've been cleaned".

Mel

This was my intent as well - the reason I advise against cleaning old tools with collector's value has to do with someone without much experience in the area making a rather tragic mistake. Specifically, the "normal" ways one might clean off a rusty 1960's handsaw, such as naval jelly and/or a wire brush, is not at all appropriate for a rare or uncommon collector's item. It's true that a light solvent wash and application of paste wax may actually enhance the value of some types of tools, as it makes the true condition of the tool more apparent in an auction.

I'll give you an extreme example - an individual (not a tool collector, but thinks of themselves as a "handyman") lucked into a C. Chelor wooden plane. He was told that any attempt at restoration of this incredibly valuable old tool would heavily (negatively) affect its value. Unfortunately , the party in question ignored the advice, and "improved" the plane by sanding all of the surfaces to remove surface scratches and 250 years of grime. As most that know something about this area have surmised, what should've been a $6,000 to $8,000 historically significant, signed artifact sold for about $800. The point here is that a Cesar Chelor molding plane looks very similar to the untrained eye as an Ohio Tool molding plane. The former is worth thousands, the latter is worth 10s of dollars, or maybe even single digits. Doing whatever you want to the Ohio Tool tool isn't a big monetary mistake - but doing anything to the C. Chelor plane is.