Coolest video on hand plane blade cutting wood EVER!!!

[Jim Matthews]

The only admonition I can offer is to keep the stone or plate fixed in place, and have the cap iron resting on something at the "free" end.

Their relative heights must be constant.

****
I put a silicone cooking mat under my grinding plate and ride the iron on my benchtop.

As in the article shown - when there's no light passed, I stop and try the assembly.

I also like the top (showing) face of the cap iron to be smooth.

[Warren Mickley]

I have used the cap iron to control tear out since 1973. I use a rounded edge to the cap iron as described by Peter Nicholson in 1811. He writes" The basil [bevel] of the cover [cap iron] must be rounded and not flat as that of the iron is".Because the cap iron is rounded the angle is difficult to measure, but it is around 80 degrees where it meets the plane iron. I had improved results when I moved up to this angle. Kato also reported good results with 80 degrees.

[Tom Trees]

So what I'm presuming from your comments is possibly a few things folks ...


That its an improvement because you can have some more camber on a closer setting
than I've pictured....(if you wanted)

And/or...
That it makes it less troublesome on a plane that has a big bend in the cap ...
For instance, one of my Bailey's with a laminated iron and bigger bend on the cap, and the cap iron on woodies travels quite the distance compared to a regular Bailey.

And/or
Ones eyesight might not be what it used to be

And/or
Less fine dust produced that needs occasional cleaning from the frog...

Hinting here that my more acute angle of the cap iron is a bit more dainty ...
I have honed the underside of my caps with a bit more of an undercut than what Bob has shown, which could possibly have compounded this occurrence...
Working reclaimed stuff with cement and whatever, so this could just be me experiencing this, not that its an issue to have a tiny bit of dust in the plane.

Do you get a glossier finish with it steeper?

Does the higher angle of the cap not add resistance, or is it that you can set the cap further away so the resistance is the same?

Sorry if I'm asking a lot here, I try and keep up on these things, apologies if I have missed an important thread on this.

Thanks
Tom

[Jim Koepke]

Tom, I wasn't able to see the picture. Anyone else?

To me it looks like there should be two images:

Missing Image?.png

Is one image missing?

jtk

[Jim Matthews]

I think of the cap iron fitting like coping moldings, I want just the front to fit tight. Mine all seem a little "sprung" such that the set screw puts a little flex into the assembly.

I just use fine wet/dry sandpaper left over from auto body work. I couldn't say if it passes shavings better.

I can tell if there's rust at a glance.

In my shop, rust never sleeps.

[Jim Koepke]

I think of the cap iron fitting like coping moldings, I want just the front to fit tight. Mine all seem a little "sprung" such that the set screw puts a little flex into the assembly.

Agreed, my cap irons are beveled so only a thin line makes contact across the blade.

Though a little spring is good, too much is not so good.

jtk

[Tom Trees]

Howdy folks
Was surfacing a really dense example earlier and some crud wiped out the edge on the cap iron.
Why not try honing the cap to a much steeper angle for the craic, I thought...

Honed a rounded profile about 70 degrees, sharpened up again and went to work.
I profiled my iron so I could get the cap closer than shown, but not quite a 64th", somewhere in between.
I instantly didn't like it, there was extra effort it seemed, maybe I should have played around a bit and set further away
but I rehoned the cap instead to 45 or 50 degrees and put the iron back in at the same distance as before.
It was tough stuff but easier going I reckon.
The timber was nearly at dimension so could not get a conclusive result.
It felt like more downforce was at play, along with added resistance,
Maybe the depth setting is more touchy than what I'm used to on the 5 1/2, and I was taking a bit of a heavy cut.
I do set the cap closer on this plane sometimes, for the last wee while since I have the shorter denser timbers to pick from, but this was particularly dense stuff.
I am used to this as the setting on one of my 4's is like this, but it seems preferable to me to have a bit more adjustability without the faff
of being worried that you will hog off a load of material.

It would have been nice to have a few irons that I could swap out and test, aiming for maximum camber,
Maybe someday, if I keep finding timber with cement and putty that might be soon.

Tom
Thankfully I have a 3 or 4 quid 400grit DMD hone epoxied to a granite base that saved the sandpaper coming out.
took a bit of time to get back to 45 or 50.

[Warren Mickley]

I don't think you are going to learn to use a cap iron in one day. That is why a lot of people have dismissed the importance of the double iron plane.
Here is what I wrote on another forum in 2008:


" I have used the double iron for controlling tearout for more than thirty years. It is a sophisticated system requiring practice and judgment. It does not surprise me that many do not have this skill. There is no shame in not knowing how to do it. However the lack of this skill is not something to brag about, as many have done.

The pole vault record is somewhere around 20 feet, but if you took a bunch of middle aged people and handed each a pole you wouldn't expect much the first day. I can imagine some saying the pole just got in the way, or they could jump higher without it.

It does surprise me how many were unable to read the information presented by Kato and Elliot. Those who suggested that the setting needed to be within .004" might reread the material."

[Derek Cohen]

Those who suggested that the setting needed to be within .004" might reread the material.

I don't believe that it is Earthly possible to set a chipbreaker .004" (0.1mm)!

.... well. perhaps, but the setting would last .004 seconds.

Regards from Perth

Derek

[William Fretwell]

Have seen that video before. It just shows you need to be taking a coherent shaving for the back pressure from the cap iron to work.
My Clifton’s have the worlds best cap irons, thick, heavy and machining perfection. Set too close, even they get wood dust jammed beneath the edge, then you just have a very bad scraper.
Every wood varies, the moisture content of the same wood changes everything also. Looking along the plane base you can set the blade projection for the shaving and level the blade. Get your desired shaving then, reduce the cap iron to maintain the shaving but no further. Cap irons are not difficult to use but there are lots of examples when they just don’t work well.

Some old dry woods with difficult grain just don’t plane well, then I get out my LV bevel up planes and they usually work well. Strangely I resent the fact they work, as I don’t like them for most regular planing.

[Steve Voigt]

Honed a rounded profile about 70 degrees, sharpened up again and went to work.
I profiled my iron so I could get the cap closer than shown, but not quite a 64th", somewhere in between.
I instantly didn't like it, there was extra effort it seemed, maybe I should have played around a bit and set further away
but I rehoned the cap instead to 45 or 50 degrees and put the iron back in at the same distance as before.
It was tough stuff but easier going I reckon.
The timber was nearly at dimension so could not get a conclusive result.
It felt like more downforce was at play, along with added resistance,

When the bevel terminates at a steep angle (70-80 on a common pitch plane), the cap iron tends to work within a narrower range than if the bevel were 50-ish. Thus, the difference (in distance from the cutting edge) between maximum effect and no effect is comparatively small. As I have written before, it is a little like operating the clutch on a sports car vs a sedan (for those who are old enough to know how to drive stick).
Some increase in resistance is good; it tells you the cap iron is working. If you feel a great deal of resistance, it may be that the cap iron is too close. But if the cap iron is not particularly close, then the cause (of excessive resistance) is elsewhere--a flat on the edge is one possibility.
As a general comment, I'm finding this thread slightly depressing. It feels like the collective knowledge here has slipped. I'd encourage anyone new to this topic to research the huge volume of stuff that's been written in the last eight or so years. The "links of interest" tab on my website is an easy way to find some of that stuff (sorry if that comes across as shameless self-promotion).

[Warren Mickley]

I don't believe that it is Earthly possible to set a chipbreaker .004" (0.1mm)!

.... well. perhaps, but the setting would last .004 seconds.

Regards from Perth

Derek

Larry Williams and Chris Schwarz both suggested that a cap iron needed to be within .004 inches to have an effect in that era.

https://blog.lostartpress.com/2007/1...duce-tear-out/

Larry Williams wrote 6/30/2008:

"The reality is that for the cap iron to even begin to mimic the performance of the single iron plane at a steeper bed angle, the cap iron needs to be set within .004" of the iron's cutting edge. That's the thickness of the paper a dollar bill is printed on. You can go to Steve Elliot's information to read about this. How practical is it to set the cap iron .004" or closer to the iron's edge?"
I

[Derek Cohen]

Steve, I was on the point of writing something similar, so I will just support your comments.

It may be that many here were not party to the debates and experimentation we went through from 2012 onward. It may also help for others to read some of the research on setting the chipbreaker distances and leading edge angles, especially that of Kees, as well as the articles on Steve Elliott's site, and that of David Weaver.

I also want to commend Warren for linking to John Strawn's post. Re-reading it, I am again amazed by the insight John had (does anyone know what has happened to John - we were good mates several years ago, and then he dropped out of sight). Warren, of course, has been the one who argued and argued the value of the chipbreaker in the face of detractors - and I was one of them many years back .. until I saw the light.

One of the "problems" with selling the chipbreaker method is that some, such as David, will say it can be learned in one hour, and others, like Warren, will say it take years to do so.


Regards from Perth

Derek

[Derek Cohen]

Larry Williams and Chris Schwarz both suggested that a cap iron needed to be within .004 inches to have an effect in that era.

https://blog.lostartpress.com/2007/1...duce-tear-out/

Larry Williams wrote 6/30/2008:

"The reality is that for the cap iron to even begin to mimic the performance of the single iron plane at a steeper bed angle, the cap iron needs to be set within .004" of the iron's cutting edge. That's the thickness of the paper a dollar bill is printed on. You can go to Steve Elliot's information to read about this. How practical is it to set the cap iron .004" or closer to the iron's edge?"
I

Well I can believe that of Larry. Bless his single-iron-socks

Chris changed his tune along the way. And, to be fair to Chris, that article was written in 2007 - and most hand plan users believed this. He was no different.

Regards from Perth

Derek

[Charles Guest]

Have seen that video before. It just shows you need to be taking a coherent shaving for the back pressure from the cap iron to work.
My Clifton’s have the worlds best cap irons, thick, heavy and machining perfection. Set too close, even they get wood dust jammed beneath the edge, then you just have a very bad scraper.
Every wood varies, the moisture content of the same wood changes everything also. Looking along the plane base you can set the blade projection for the shaving and level the blade. Get your desired shaving then, reduce the cap iron to maintain the shaving but no further. Cap irons are not difficult to use but there are lots of examples when they just don’t work well.

Some old dry woods with difficult grain just don’t plane well, then I get out my LV bevel up planes and they usually work well. Strangely I resent the fact they work, as I don’t like them for most regular planing.

Exactly right.