Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 31

Thread: LV Combination Plane

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Jan 2018
    Location
    Ottawa, On, Canada
    Posts
    82

    LV Combination Plane

    Last week I decided to upgrade my Small Plow Plane to the Veritas Combination Plane. After a short deliberation the SPP went on Kijiji and in a few days was gone. Yesterday, I picked up the Beast. My first impressions are very positive, the CP has its own character, it's larger and feels more solid than the SPP. Don't get me wrong, I loved the SPP, but there is something to the CP which makes me hold it and look at it even more.... I didn't get a chance to use it yet, as we had some people over last night....
    Being an engineer, I appreciate the workmanship and the accuracy of micro adjustments for depth stops and a sub fence. The SPP feels just great in my hands, the balance seems to be excellent. Anyway, today, I am going to try it and perhaps put together some short review.
    Just a couple of questions:
    The instruction does not mention shaving deflectors... for tongue cutters, should shaving defectors be used? They come supplied with cutters (for SPP ONLY?).... There is no issue with jamming? Would one would even be able to install it in a threaded mechanism for the depth stop?
    My second question: for the rabbeting across the grain (dovetail's tail board), I should deploy one of the scoring spurs, just like i would in case of dados, correct?

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Sebastopol, California
    Posts
    2,319
    Question 2: yes.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    Perth, Australia
    Posts
    9,467
    Question 1: no deflectors needed.

    Regards from Perth

    Derek

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Jan 2018
    Location
    Ottawa, On, Canada
    Posts
    82
    Thank you for clarifying.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Jan 2018
    Location
    Ottawa, On, Canada
    Posts
    82
    First rabbet, not as clean as I expected, most likely due to incorrect deployment of a spur...
    Please notice that the spur is already damaged ?!?! After 5" in a hard maple.....
    Am I doing something wrong?
    Grooving works very well, just like with the little brother....

    IMG_7580.jpgIMG_7581.jpg

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    Perth, Australia
    Posts
    9,467
    Wojciech, I found that the tips of the spurs I have also chipped off. Rather than attempting to regrind them the same way, I rounded mine. They work well this way ...



    Regards from Perth

    Derek

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Jan 2018
    Location
    Ottawa, On, Canada
    Posts
    82
    Thanks Derek, I will do that as well.

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Jan 2018
    Location
    Ottawa, On, Canada
    Posts
    82
    Clarification, subsequent rabbets are perfect, even before regrinding the spur. I am really pleased with the tool.

  9. #9
    Quote Originally Posted by Wojciech Tryc View Post
    First rabbet, not as clean as I expected, most likely due to incorrect deployment of a spur...
    Please notice that the spur is already damaged ?!?! After 5" in a hard maple.....
    Am I doing something wrong?
    Grooving works very well, just like with the little brother....

    IMG_7580.jpgIMG_7581.jpg
    Rounding the nicker as Derek showed works. But the reason that it chipped was incorrect setting or projection in the first place. The nicker needs only to project slightly to score cross grain. Overtime, it may get dull for rehoning but it should not chip.

    Simon
    Last edited by Simon MacGowen; 09-14-2018 at 1:46 PM.

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Longview WA
    Posts
    27,347
    Blog Entries
    1
    But the reason that it chipped was incorrect setting or projection in the first place.
    To add to this, the spur only needs to cut as deep as the blade to be effective.

    jtk
    "A pessimist sees the difficulty in every opportunity; an optimist sees the opportunity in every difficulty."
    - Sir Winston Churchill (1874-1965)

  11. #11
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    Perth, Australia
    Posts
    9,467
    Quote Originally Posted by Simon MacGowen View Post
    Rounding the nicker as Derek showed works. But the reason that it chipped was incorrect setting or projection in the first place. The nicker needs only to project slightly to score cross grain. Overtime, it may get dull for rehoning but it should not chip.

    Simon
    Simon, I do not know what percentage of these particular nickers end up like this. My plane was one from (a batch, most likely) for pre-production testing from the Lee Valley factory. In use, the nicker was set for just enough clearance, as always. The tip broke on both nickers, more quickly on one than the other. This is the type of information that helps in manufacturing. But I do not know if it can be avoided with that particular design, since the point is vulnerable. The steel there can be more brittle than lower on the blade. Rounding the cutting end seems to me to be a safer solution. (In my case, the slot for the screw on the blade needed to be extended a smidgeon to compensate for the slighter reduced length from rounding).

    Regards from Perth

    Derek

  12. #12
    Quote Originally Posted by Derek Cohen View Post
    Simon, I do not know what percentage of these particular nickers end up like this. My plane was one from (a batch, most likely) for pre-production testing from the Lee Valley factory. In use, the nicker was set for just enough clearance, as always. The tip broke on both nickers, more quickly on one than the other. This is the type of information that helps in manufacturing. But I do not know if it can be avoided with that particular design, since the point is vulnerable. The steel there can be more brittle than lower on the blade. Rounding the cutting end seems to me to be a safer solution. (In my case, the slot for the screw on the blade needed to be extended a smidgeon to compensate for the slighter reduced length from rounding).

    Regards from Perth

    Derek
    Derek,

    My cross-grain experience with this plane (loaned) has not been a disappointing one. I would have another chance to use it for about a week near the end of the month, and I will give the nicker another look.

    I don't know if it matters. I use it in the same way as my skew rabbet plane - when I start, I engage the nicker and pull it back at the front in the first few strokes to score. This is also why I can't exactly say if I had set the nicker at the same depth as the blade, which Jim has advised in his post. I might have, but might not have, too.

    I also, as I do with the plow plane, start my subsequent strokes at the front then progressively back, not starting from the far back like a handplane. I have seen people -- sometimes including Paul Sellers? (if my memory is correct, but don't trust it) -- use a plow like a regular plane beginning their very first cuts close to their bodies. Would starting a combo like a handplane have any negative effect on the nicker, I don't know as that isn't the way I use those joinery tools.

    Simon
    Last edited by Simon MacGowen; 09-14-2018 at 11:41 PM.

  13. #13
    Join Date
    Jan 2018
    Location
    Ottawa, On, Canada
    Posts
    82
    Quote Originally Posted by Simon MacGowen View Post
    Rounding the nicker as Derek showed works. But the reason that it chipped was incorrect setting or projection in the first place. The nicker needs only to project slightly to score cross grain. Overtime, it may get dull for rehoning but it should not chip.

    Simon
    Simon,
    The nicker was extended by 1/32”. I will continue with cross grain rabbets and I will take another look at the nicker.

  14. #14
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    twomiles from the "peak of Ohio
    Posts
    12,120
    Maybe take the time to check out the spurs used by Stanley.....how far they protude below the sole of the planes, the shape they are ground to...and why they never "chip, no fold" up. Then, sharpen/shape the end of yours to match. Planes I have with that spur..#78 and (2 spurs) the #45.


    The Stanley #39 I have has spurs like your's....PITA to sharpen, and to set....

    So..maybe sharpen your's to match the Stanley spur? It uses a rounded, beveled "point"..

  15. #15
    Join Date
    Jan 2018
    Location
    Ottawa, On, Canada
    Posts
    82
    Quote Originally Posted by steven c newman View Post
    Maybe take the time to check out the spurs used by Stanley.....how far they protude below the sole of the planes, the shape they are ground to...and why they never "chip, no fold" up. Then, sharpen/shape the end of yours to match. Planes I have with that spur..#78 and (2 spurs) the #45.


    The Stanley #39 I have has spurs like your's....PITA to sharpen, and to set....

    So..maybe sharpen your's to match the Stanley spur? It uses a rounded, beveled "point"..
    Yeah, this is what Derek suggested as well.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •