Iron and Chipbreaker upgrade.

[Laurent Marshall]

My experience is limited to a handful of Hock blades and one PM v-11 from Veritas. The Hock O1 blades are excellent. The PM x-11 just keeps on going. After its first honing it has been used a lot without signs of dulling. It is an amazing material.

My experience is similar. I've purchased a few Hock O1 blades and chip breakers, and used one PMV11 blade from Veritas in my jointer plane. The Hock blades are a big step up from the from the original blades. The Veritas PMV11 blades are even better for edge retention and require less prep to be ready to use - you will need to polish the back of the Hock blades, it's nothing crazy like with some of the original factory blades, but it's a step you'll want to perform.

Both Veritas and Hock chip breakers are also way better than the the original ones, and only require minimal tuning (I like to sharpen the front edge of my chip breakers - they aren't always as acute as I'd like out of the box). I don't think you'll notice any difference in performance between either the Veritas or Hock chip breakers. I have not yet run into a plane where I actually had to to open the mouth with a file to accept the thicker Hock or Veritas blades.

A word on sharpening - PMV11 is tough to sharpen, and since I do all my sharpening by hand, I really try hard not to let it get very dull. Any of the higher quality replacement blades (Veritas, Hock, LN, Woodriver etc.) will be more work to sharpen by hand than the original blades, so keep that in mind.

[Warren Mickley]

The Hock and Veritas cap irons have too shallow an angle to be really effective for tearout. I talked to Ron Hock about this some years ago and he said you could bend the Hock cap iron in a vise to get a steeper angle. The suggestion that Bailey design cap irons are ineffective is preposterous.

[fritz eng]

More than happy with IBC/Pinnacle blades from Canada in addition to Hock and Veritas.

[Laurent Marshall]

The Hock and Veritas cap irons have too shallow an angle to be really effective for tearout. I talked to Ron Hock about this some years ago and he said you could bend the Hock cap iron in a vise to get a steeper angle. The suggestion that Bailey design cap irons are ineffective is preposterous.

I don't think Bailey style cap irons are ineffective, I just find them to be more work to tune up. The shallow angle on Hock or Veritas cap irons is typical of older non-Bailey planes - you'll see a very similar bevel angle on cap irons in woodies and infill planes, and a few outliers like Ohio Tool's Bailey-style planes. To make them work, rather than bending them, you sharpen a very small micro-bevel at a slightly steeper angle to the leading edge of the chip breaker. Then you set it up so that it's as close as possible to the cutting edge of the iron. Setting up one of these cap irons this way is quick and easy, and works great with no need to bend anything, and it's easily reversible if you over do it.

Some stock bailey chip breakers work great with no work, others really don't, they're not really all that consistent - unlike a Hock or Veritas chip breaker.

[Jim Koepke]

Some stock bailey chip breakers work great with no work, others really don't, they're not really all that consistent

Many of them have been used and/or abused for more than a century. They likely are not like they were when new.

jtk

[Laurent Marshall]

Many of them have been used and/or abused for more than a century. They likely are not like they were when new.

jtk

Oh for sure! I had a chance to look at an older Stanley #6 (pre-WWI) that had some pretty amazing wear on the blade and chip breaker. The iron had been sharpened down to about a 1/4" of the slot slot for the cap iron screw, and the leading edge and face of the cap iron was visibly worn back into a bit of concave shape from all the shavings going by. The plane also had a previous owner's initials marked on the sides, so my assumption is that it was used by a professional tradesman. Other than the wear on the iron and chip breaker, the rest of the plane was in good shape, and had that look tools get after being used hard for a long time, but also well looked after.

A much more common problem is to see stock cap irons bent by excessive pressure from the lever cap, which can cause the chip breaker to not have good contact with the back of the iron.

[jesse ross]

What are your go-to files to widen holes in cap irons when necessary? I’m trying to replace the stock a2 iron in a LN#4 with a hock blade. The thinner hock blade + LN chip breaker rock a little on the blade adjustment button due to the button’s pyramid shape. If I could file the hole on the chip breaker a bit I think the blade would bed nicely but my Nicholson files won’t make a dent in the chip breaker.

[Laurent Marshall]

What are your go-to files to widen holes in cap irons when necessary? I’m trying to replace the stock a2 iron in a LN#4 with a hock blade. The thinner hock blade + LN chip breaker rock a little on the blade adjustment button due to the button’s pyramid shape. If I could file the hole on the chip breaker a bit I think the blade would bed nicely but my Nicholson files won’t make a dent in the chip breaker.

I'm pretty sure the LN chip breakers are hardened steel, probably something not unlike the blade itself. You'll likely have a hard time filing it with anything, you might have better luck with the right Dremel attachment.

What's your rational to put a Hock blade in an LN plane? My expectation would be that the LN blade is just as good as Hock, certainly not any worse. They're both excellent quality steel.

[Warren Mickley]

I would call the Lie Nielsen irons substandard. I have been to many Lie Nielsen events over the last dozen years; their irons leave a surface that is not as clean as what I get with original Bailey irons. I have watched LN representatives sharpen irons and put them fresh in the plane and seen the result.

Ron Hock says his O1 irons yield a better edge than A2. I can't see why he would be confused.

[Laurent Marshall]

I would call the Lie Nielsen irons substandard. I have been to many Lie Nielsen events over the last dozen years; their irons leave a surface that is not as clean as what I get with original Bailey irons. I have watched LN representatives sharpen irons and put them fresh in the plane and seen the result.

Ron Hock says his O1 irons yield a better edge than A2. I can't see why he would be confused.

I've had a chance to try out LN planes at their factory store, the irons certainly passed muster as far as I was concerned at first brush. There's a big debate out there about the merits of A2 steel, some people love it, others don't. That said, LN and a couple other manufacturers seem to be really committed to A2 steel, although I don't really understand the rationale.

I really like Hock's O1 steel and Veritas' PMV11 - I've got the most experience with those and they work for me. The original Bailey irons are ok, they dull more quickly, but they have the merit of being very easy to sharpen to a keen edge. I would give A2 a chance if I had a reason to buy a new plane, but I don't.

[Scott Winners]

A bit late to the party, but I can add for future search button users:

Local to me vintage Bailey irons tend to be badly pitted when found in antique shops. I like the factory irons just fine when I can rehab them. I work both hard and soft wood, I like A2 pretty well when honed to 30-35 degrees, I have chipping issues with A2 when honed to 25 degrees.

I did replace the iron in my #4 Bailey with Veritas O1, managed to keep the factory chip breaker. I am ecstatic with it. I did have to open the mouth of the plane body a tiny little bit, could only fit a four inch file in there and hand to spend some time on it, but it is done now.

I do not yet own any PMV-11 but the folks that have it like it.

[Charles Guest]

I would call the Lie Nielsen irons substandard. I have been to many Lie Nielsen events over the last dozen years; their irons leave a surface that is not as clean as what I get with original Bailey irons. I have watched LN representatives sharpen irons and put them fresh in the plane and seen the result.

Ron Hock says his O1 irons yield a better edge than A2. I can't see why he would be confused.

Yeah, boy. Those Lie-Nielsen planes are real garbage:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gIRTAPxGoRY

[Rafael Herrera]

Yeah, boy. Those Lie-Nielsen planes are real garbage:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gIRTAPxGoRY

You can't tell the finish out of those irons from a video. The complaint I've seen posted here and other forums is that those A2 irons chip, leaving a surface that needs to be sanded or scraped. My one and only A2 iron is on a new Stanley 9 1/2 block plane I use for endgrain, when it chips it leaves a line on the surface.

[michael langman]

I've had a chance to try out LN planes at their factory store, the irons certainly passed muster as far as I was concerned at first brush. There's a big debate out there about the merits of A2 steel, some people love it, others don't. That said, LN and a couple other manufacturers seem to be really committed to A2 steel, although I don't really understand the rationale.

I really like Hock's O1 steel and Veritas' PMV11 - I've got the most experience with those and they work for me. The original Bailey irons are ok, they dull more quickly, but they have the merit of being very easy to sharpen to a keen edge. I would give A2 a chance if I had a reason to buy a new plane, but I don't.

A2 does not warp in heat treat like O1. Their commitment to A2 is for less labor costs.

[Curt Putnam]

Yeah, boy. Those Lie-Nielsen planes are real garbage:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gIRTAPxGoRY

Wow! That was a mesmerizing video. Thank you for the link.