Veritas #4 Sharpening Angles?

[Peter Daniels]

I’ve read the instructions. And searched. But don’t know that the answers Ive found are the best.

Is anyone sharpening a Veritas #4 to something other than the suggested 30°/35° angles?
Veritas recommends a 30° primary bevel w/ a 35° secondary bevel. And I’ve done that. But I’d swear no matter how carefully I work w/ this thing, I’m still getting better shavings off my battered old Stanley #4.

I’m considering putting the time into just making the Veritas match the Stanley’s 25°. But since that’ll take some time at the diamond stones, I’d like to know what’s best before I stand there for too long.

Thanks.
-Peter

[Derek Cohen]

I have a Veritas Custom #4. Is yours a Custom version, or the original, Bailey-like version?

Assuming it is the Custom version, the only issue I can imagine you have - other than a blade not sharpened well enough - is that the cutting angle is too high. This could happen if you have a 50+ degree frog along with a 35 -degree bevel. The cutting angle remains 50 degrees but a 35 degree bevel may limit penetration unless the edge is sharp.

30-32 degrees is the sweet spot for most bevel down plane blades. 25 degrees will not hold an edge for long.

Regards from Perth

Derek

[David Bassett]

With a bevel down plane your cutting angle is set by the frog, not the bevel angle. IIRC Stanley always used 45-degree frogs. Do you have the standard 45-degree frog in your Lee Valley plane? (The customs can be ordered with a range of angles.)

The bevel angle does provide clearance in the plane's cut. 35-degrees should be enough, but probably doesn't give you a lot of margin. Maybe try 31 or 32 -degree micro bevel with your 30-degree primary.

(BTW- I'd normally defer to Derek when he says a 25-degree bevel angle would be fragile, but this time I completely agree with him too. Are you sure you're measuring these angles accurately?)

If my assumption that you have a standard 45-degree frog are correct, it really seems like you should be having success. That brings it back to sharpening your edges. Your Stanley, if an original blade, would be some version of HCS. A Veritas plane is likely to have PM-V11. I really don't see much difference when sharpening either (on ceramic waterstones), but many have reported PM-V11, while not hard, is not as easy to sharpen as HCS. I guess it depends on the sharpening media. Your solution maybe as simple as a little more time and care when sharpening.

[Peter Daniels]

Good info. Thank you both.
Yep. It’s the basic, not the custom. The bed angle is at 45°.

The MKII honing guide micro bevel has sort of 4 settings. For years I’ve always just gone w/ the micro bevel knob in that recommended 12 o’clock position, then moved it to the 6 o’clock for that last micro bevel.
Any guesses on what the other two positions of that micro bevel knob might be? Lesser or more than the 6 o’clock position?
I’ll futz w/ it tomorrow and see what I can learn.
Also- should I even use the micro bevel on this plane? Or just go factory 30 primary and 35 secondary?

Fall always means more time at my little bench. And if that’s a canary in my own coal mine- it’s a good sign. A sign of a bit more free time. A bit more creativity. And a willingness to learn.
Thanks for you help.

-PD

[Tyler Bancroft]

I found it took me a while to start getting good results with my Veritas 4. Once I got used to it, it performs great (and IMHO, the ergonomics of the Veritas "classic" 4/4.5/5.25/6 are better than any other plane on the market). Assuming you've checked the usual suspects (cap iron set sufficiently back from the edge, mouth size okay, etc.), I'd do two things. First, I'd disassemble the plane and give it a good cleaning and oiling. Make sure the knob below the frog that locks its position is cinched down tight. Second, I'd check the squareness and angle of your bevel very carefully. I've always had trouble getting good results with the MKII (and if you look online, you'll see I have company). I get better results sharpening freehand or with the cheap Eclipse clone side-clamping honing guide. In particular, I'd check to make sure the bevel angle is consistent across the width of the blade.

What sort of results are you getting?

[Warren Mickley]

I’ve read the instructions. And searched. But don’t know that the answers Ive found are the best.

Is anyone sharpening a Veritas #4 to something other than the suggested 30°/35° angles?
Veritas recommends a 30° primary bevel w/ a 35° secondary bevel. And I’ve done that. But I’d swear no matter how carefully I work w/ this thing, I’m still getting better shavings off my battered old Stanley #4.

I’m considering putting the time into just making the Veritas match the Stanley’s 25°. But since that’ll take some time at the diamond stones, I’d like to know what’s best before I stand there for too long.

Thanks.
-Peter

I read the instructions as well. I think they were written by someone with very little experience. I recommend sharpening at a 30 degree angle, not 35. Unless your plane iron is really crappy, I think you will get results similar to what you are getting with your older plane, which you do sharpen at 30 degrees.

[Jim Koepke]

Also- should I even use the micro bevel on this plane? Or just go factory 30 primary and 35 secondary?

This seems confusing, isn't a "micro bevel" a secondary bevel?

My suggestion is to first get the plane to work without worrying about secondary bevels or any other "tricks."

Get the blade sharp with a single bevel and get it to work.

There are a few tests to indicate the blade is sharp. One safe test is to push the blade straight into a piece of paper. If the blade is sharp, it will cut instead of deflecting the paper. If you have to slide the edge across the edge to cut the paper, you are close to sharp. This is close enough for some work.

If your 35º bevel is off a few degrees in the wrong direction it will not have enough relief angle and will not produce a shaving.

A lot of my work is on soft woods. My plane blades are mostly sharpened at 25º. They may wear faster but I do not mind sharpening plus in many cases there is a spare sharp blade or another plane at hand.

A single bevel at 30º should be fine.

Once you get the plane working, then you can experiment with the micro bevels and such.

jtk

[Tyler Bancroft]

This seems confusing, isn't a "micro bevel" a secondary bevel?

If I'm following the OP correctly, he's referring to the micro-bevel feature of the MKII honing guide – it lets you select a primary honing angle, and then rotate a knob to add an extra degree or two.

[Jim Koepke]

If I'm following the OP correctly, he's referring to the micro-bevel feature of the MKII honing guide – it lets you select a primary honing angle, and then rotate a knob to add an extra degree or two.

My point is to get things going with a single bevel.

A micro bevel or secondary bevel seems like a work saver until it grows to be the only bevel. That is when instead of staying with a single bevel people have to grind a new lower angle bevel and start all over.

Most of the time it is rare for my blades to have to be put to the grinder.

Free handing a bevel only gets tough with very thick blades.

jtk

[Peter Daniels]

Good information Tyler. Thanks.
I took it all apart, cleaned it up. And sharpened it (again) per Veritas’ instructions. What kind of problems have you had w/ the MK guide?
A quick search of the Eclipse style guide makes them look so much more simple than the MK, which appeals to me. As usual- many of the “features” of an item are more lures than benefits.

The plane is re-assembled, snug and tight as it should be. It’s being used more lately to cut miters w/ a donkey’s ear shooting board. It’s fine. Does the job w/o too much chatter.
I think part of my issue is that I would overadjust the blade adjust knob. I would turn it like it’s a Stanley knob, not the more precise Veritas style.
Now I’m really trying to carefully move the blade forward in teeny increments. If I’m hoping to make thin end grain shavings- I want the mouth of the plane closed right? So that there’s not much room between the blade and the front of the soul?

Shooting miters on end grain is asking a lot of a plane. And I suppose there are better plane (lower angle block planes right?) options for the task but like to use most things for a wide variety of problems. The bench is cluttered enough w/ tools that are only used for some things. (Curse you Lee Valley and that overpriced Skew Rabblet plane… that I love. Which gets used now and then, but is perfect when it’s needed)

But when I pick up the old Stanley #4 for that same end grain miter shooting- it’s smoother. No matter how carefully I creep that Veritas blade forward.

Thanks for your responses and considerations w/ this.

[David Bassett]

... Shooting miters on end grain is asking a lot of a plane. ....

It seems to me shooting end grain doesn't have many of the complications you might face with edge or face grain. You will be perpendicular to the fibers and won't be seeing any contrary grain.

I'm trying to reason this out, to see if I understand, but also so I can articulate it. The chip-breaker, the mouth size, and high angles (with the frog or a back-bevel) are all techniques to control tear-out in contrary grain. I don't see how end grain is affected by anything but sharp. You should be able to (within reason) open the mouth, move the chip-breaker back, and not affect the cut on end grain. Have you tried just end grain without the shooting board? Without the shooting board you can skew the plane, which lowers the effective cutting angle, and maybe see a difference. You could also use different parts of the blade, (left, right, center,) to see if any works better than the others. Anyway, the experiment might provide insight into what's going on with your planes.

[Peter Daniels]

I think the experimentation is a great suggestion. But hadn’t considered some of your suggestions.
You’re thinking perhaps to open the mouth more, and move the chip breaker back? So that there’s a bit more blade shown between the breaker and the leading sharp edge? Huh… In a few hundred years I don’t think moving the breaker back would have occurred to me.

Several hurdles in between right now and when I’m next standing at my bench- but thank you.
I’ll give it a try.
-PD

[Jason White]

Is the back of the blade flat?

[David Bassett]

... You’re thinking perhaps to open the mouth more, and move the chip breaker back? So that there’s a bit more blade shown between the breaker and the leading sharp edge? ...

"within reason"!

If you have the chip breaker tight, say less than 1/32", it will effectively control tear-out and produce a better (than torn-out) surface. But it will be a little harder to push and a little less "bright" on cooperative grain because the extra pressure that limits tear-out also resists cutting. Since you don't need this effect on end-grain, relaxing that pressure by setting to maybe as much as a "fat" 1/16" might help. (But at something huge, e.g. 1/4", who knows what else might start happening.)

Likewise with the mouth. Don't go crazy, just give it a little extra room to make sure it doesn't choke on the shaving.

BTW- looking at the shavings can be informative! When you get a good shaving from your #4, how does it differ from what you get from your Veritas? If the Veritas is twice as thick, or something, it may just be an adjustment issue caused by the less familiar controls.

[steven c newman]

I seem to recall at least one plane maker that would stamp right on the iron...what angle to sharpen THEIR irons to.....25 degrees. Just a single, simple, easy to sharpen bevel.

K.I.S.,S.

I keep the frog co-plannar with the ramp at the back of the mouth...otherwise, things will chatter. I USE the chipbreaker, set 1mm back from the edge of the iron.

have never had to "close up" a mouth....change a angle, ad more than that single bevel.....as on a bevel down plane, that is also a "wear bevel" acting as clearance behind the edge.

bevel up planes? I treat them as simply over-grown block planes...nothing more. I do use a WR #62....rarely.....not as much as I use a Stanley No. 60-1/2.

There WAS a person that used to talk about how to add FOUR bevels to an iron? My question with that would be .....WHY?