[OP]
Member
I definitely should have supplied additional info.
Narrowing down the question.... how often is a 5 1/2 used as a "super smoother" really the better option over another plane for final smoothing?
For reference, I have:
LN #3
WR #4, Sargent 409, MF No9
2 Stanley 5s (one set as scrub)
LV LAJ
Stanley #7
I don't want to throw money away, but if a 5 1/2 truly excels for smoothing larger pieces......
Or would a higher angle blade for the LAJ be a better choice?
Contributor
it would certainly be a want rather than a need as you are amply set. If you did huge panels on a daily basis I might give it a try but otherwise I think you are good. As always, if you wanted to try it then fine but I doubt that the 3/8” is going to be a substantial improvement in your work.Originally Posted by Nathan Johnson
Contributor
I have a LN 5 1/2 and 7, but not a 5. I chose the 5 1/2 because the blade and frog widths are the same as the 7. So I bought the 5 1/2 with a York Pitch frog and later added a toothing blade. All interchangeable with the 7. It sounds somewhat unconventional but I’ve found a use for it on each plane. I’m not sure but I don’t believe Stanley made different frog angles or toothing blades for their Bailey/Bedrock planes.
Btw, since someone mentioned it, for the rare occasions when I have to plane a door edge, I use a Porter Cable 126. Makes quick work of it and never found anything better. Guess that’s why companies make specialized tools for specific jobs.
Contributor
OK, a nay vote here.
The #5 1/2 often gets promoted as a "do everything" plane, which I suppose you could argue. That said, it is too long for a smoother, too heavy and wide for a jack, and too short for a jointer. It kind of does each of those roles kind of adequately, but not nearly as well as the individual planes. I can't imagine face jointing a 16' 1 x 12 with a #5 1/2. As for smoothing, rarely use my #4 1/2, specifically because of the extra width and weight compared to a #4 or #3. I suppose you could use a #5 1/2 as a panel smoother, although many use a #6 for that.
The #5 1/2 is like the low angle jack, jack rabbet, scraper plane, and the like; planes that were never used commonly by the people who used to earn their living using planes, but for some reason get promoted as essential for the modern woodworker.
You already have good smoothers, jacks, and a jointer, which all do their function better than a #5 1/2. If you ran into one cheap, maybe pick one up, but it isn't going to add much to what you already have, except maybe panel smoothing.
Last edited by Andrew Seemann; 09-22-2020 at 11:47 AM.
Contributor
Well, the 5-1/2 isn't going to change your life or anything. You can take maybe a 1/4" wider shaving than a #4 can, which is not going to make a lot of difference. If you plane a panel with a #4 and another with a 5-1/2 you're not going to think one looks better than the other. But you might take a few less passes with the 5-1/2.
The extra length on the toe can be nice vs. a #4 especially for beginners. Planing things like box lids, the extra width on the sole can be handy. But I could do all of that with a #4 and it would be fine.
It weighs more, which can be good or bad. Mine is a vintage Bailey so it's not crazy heavy, but a LN would be pretty hefty.
I tend to work with two smoothing planes when there's a bigger job to do. One is set a little heavier and gets used first, another is set finer and does a finishing pass. I tend to use the 5-1/2 for the first job.
I just like it, but I could live without it. You definitely don't need it given your plane collection.
Contributor
Part of what makes a plane a smoother is the shorter length to follow slight irregularities on a surface.
Some argument could be made a #5-1/2 taking a full length gossamer shaving may make a flatter surface than a sorter plane adhering to a less than perfectly flat surface. Not that anyone would likely notice the difference.
If you want a wider smoother a #4-1/2 is a possible choice.
jtk
"A pessimist sees the difficulty in every opportunity; an optimist sees the opportunity in every difficulty."
- Sir Winston Churchill (1874-1965)
Contributor
If you ever watch one of Rob Cosman’s videos, it will inevitably involve a #5 1/2 as a smoother. It was David Charlesworth who introduced the #5 1/2 as a “super smoother”. Rob uses a few of David’s methods in his videos.
The notable factor is that boards are prepared with machines rather than hand tool. They are flat to work on, and hand planning is about finishing rather than thicknessing. Rob makes a valid argument for a #5 1/2 in this circumstance: the width and mass lend authority to the plane, and it hugs the surface of the boards.
Some months ago I posted my thoughts after using a heavy smoother, a BU Marcou, which I had not used in a few years. The performance was superior. The effort required was low. On the negative side, the plane was detached in feedback (or, the feedback was different to that from a lighter plane, and needed to be re-learned).
Regards from Perth
Derek
Member
My LN 5 ½ has always been my favorite plane. I really don’t think you can go wrong with it.
Member
That's a less expensive proposition.
https://www.finewoodworking.com/2010...-can-do-it-all
Put me down for "desirable but not essential" – my 5 1/2 excels in smoothing large panels, particularly in softer woods (where the wider blade is easier to push). For me, length, mass and wide blade are ideal for final surfacing of large glued up panels. I don't have the strength to push a 5 1/2 for rough surfacing, particularly in harder woods – for me standard #5 is plenty in those situations.
Member
I use a Bailey 5 1/2 along with a #5 set as a scrub. Like the feel and the ability to smooth.
Just how i do it.
On the other hand, I still have five fingers.
Member
I wound up with a Stanley number six (only slightly longer than the 5 1/2) because it was cheap and in good shape. Find I have it on the bench nearly all the time I’m working along with a #4 and 102 block plane.
Contributor
One of my favorite uses of a #6 is on a wide piece with a cup in the middle the #6 can be used across the grain with a light cut. The plane can be heard as it starts cutting at the starting edge. Then it stops cutting over the low area then starts cutting again at the far edge. Eventually it can be heard with a full cut all the way across. As this is being done move down the length of the piece and continue until the full shaving is seen or heard. Then a few quick shavings with the grain and it is done.
jtk
"A pessimist sees the difficulty in every opportunity; an optimist sees the opportunity in every difficulty."
- Sir Winston Churchill (1874-1965)
Member
I really like the "1/2" format for smoothing. Their weight is enjoyable, as long as you only have to take light controlled cuts. They are nice for large hands and strong arms.
The 5 1/2 can be used an all around plane on dimensioned pieces, when most of the grunt work was done by machines / lighter planes. It seems common nowadays, even for hobbyists, to buy s4s or use thickness planer.
A "hand tool only" woodworker would probably play its instruments on a different key, with lighter planes. Using both flats and sharps though, to keep on with the music analogy,
Member
Everyone is different but a Stanley #5 is about as big a metal body plane as I'm comfortable using for any length of time. Any of my metal stock planes larger than a #5 for the most part just gather dust. When something larger than a #5 is needed the wood stocks come out to play and even the #5 is left on the shelf if the job is extensive. But then I've been told I'm a wuss and real men have no trouble slinging a LN #8 around all day and that I need to go to the gym. BTW, true story several years ago on this forum and he could be correct. But at the end of the day lighter is usually better.
I just want to add, sometimes a wide blade is good, I've a Type 9 Stanley #4 1/2 with a Japanese cutter and the OEM chip breaker that is a delight to use and in fact used it today.
As always with anything wood, YMMV.
ken
Last edited by ken hatch; 09-24-2020 at 6:08 AM.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote