Veritas Bevel Down planes… older style

[Dan Kraakenes]

Anybody using the ’’older’’ Veritas Bevel down planes?
The ones with the movable frog, in size 4, 4 1/2, 5 1/4, 6.

What is your opinion on them?

I am considering trying some BD planes, and since I absolutely do not like the Stanley handles, I am considering these, because of the larger handles and more clearence around them. Allready own Veritas BUS and BUJ and also wondering how handle sizes compares?

Things I dont like:
Uses older bent chipbreaker instead of newer thick ones.
Lever cap screw dont have the wide plate on end of screw, like on the BU and most other Veritas planes.

Other then that I have not found much info on them.
I like the Norris adjuster.
Is the movable frog a problem, with the small gap behind mouth?
Are they top heavy? Would the 4 1/2 be a better smoother, since its wider?

[Tony Wilkins]

I have a 5 1/4. It’s ok. I’m not a huge fan of the Norris adjuster. Mine has the newer chip breaker. Don’t currently have an LV Bu plane so I can’t compare handle size. Check out Derek’s website (inthewoodshop.com). He has lots of insight in his reviews of LV planes.

[Dan Kraakenes]

Was also wondering how the frog attaches to the body.


I found a poor picture of it.
Two screws holds Frog on body. You losen them, and one screw moves Frog back and forth.

Wouldnt that mean most of the force is pushed against this screw?

I am trying to find faults because I like the concept…
Just find very little info/pictures/videos on them.

F98006E2-76FB-4CE5-8EBB-71F5866C9CA8.jpeg

[Tony Wilkins]

Was also wondering how the frog attaches to the body.


I found a poor picture of it.
Two screws holds Frog on body. You losen them, and one screw moves Frog back and forth.

Wouldnt that mean most of the force is pushed against this screw?

I am trying to find faults because I like the concept…
Just find very little info/pictures/videos on them.

F98006E2-76FB-4CE5-8EBB-71F5866C9CA8.jpeg

hoping to be able to go out to shop today. I’ll try and remember to take a picture for you.

[Tony Wilkins]

Was wrong on the chip breaker…
IMG_0752.jpeg

here is the frog…
IMG_0750.jpg
IMG_0751.jpg

[Justin Allen]

I have the 5 1/4W, although I don't use it much (and I don't have it in front of me).

If I remember correctly, the handle is part of the frog assembly, so the handle force goes directly into the frog and the screws keep the body from sliding back (and closing up the mouth while planing). I haven't had the frog move while planing.

It's a fine plane, but the handles aren't like the BU planes. there is a "strap" that connects the frog to the top of the handle as well.

I would say I prefer the Stanley layout a little better.

[Dan Kraakenes]

Except the ’’strap’’ on top, the grips are upright like the BU planes, but not in same angle or thickness?

So ’’mechanically’’ there is nothing inheritly wrong with it?
Not top heavy or wobbly when using?

Frog does not move under heavy use and it seems like a strong concept? It just looks like two screws are pining it down to the body, while the back and forth adjustment screw is reciving all the force of the cut, with some help from friction. I have not found good photos of how it looks under frog.

I am considering the #6 or 5 1/4 to be first one of the Line, in case I go for it.

I like dedicated tools, and kept the BUJ & BUS, but sold the LAJ, as there was just something ’’off’’.

Also have the Shooting Plane.

[steven c newman]

I tend to prefer handles like this one...
Millers Falls No. 9, fancy wood .JPG
Although...my hands also like..
replated, wide bodies, rear.JPG
No. 410c....No. 5-1/2c.....No. 15....and a No. 4-1/2c, Type 11....

Old school, but..they work.

[Justin Allen]

Except the ’’strap’’ on top, the grips are upright like the BU planes, but not in same angle or thickness?

So ’’mechanically’’ there is nothing inheritly wrong with it?
Not top heavy or wobbly when using?

Frog does not move under heavy use and it seems like a strong concept? It just looks like two screws are pining it down to the body, while the back and forth adjustment screw is reciving all the force of the cut, with some help from friction. I have not found good photos of how it looks under frog.

I am considering the #6 or 5 1/4 to be first one of the Line, in case I go for it.

I like dedicated tools, and kept the BUJ & BUS, but sold the LAJ, as there was just something ’’off’’.

Also have the Shooting Plane.

It's been a few months since I've used it (not because I've been avoiding it, just been doing more home projects).

I remember the grip being pretty comfortable, definitely more upright like the BU planes. The strap makes slight contact with the 1st knuckle of the index finger when 4-finger gripping on my sausage fingers. I don't grip it like that though in use.

I would say the design is sound. I didn't notice any balance or instability issues. I did have the blade retract (not the frog) under a heavy planing session (deep cuts), but after tightening it up and taking lighter cuts it stayed in place. I'm pretty sure it was my setup fault. I just have to tighten the lever cap and chip breaker a little more than I'm used to.

I typically use a 6 as my first prep plane (and a lot of the time the only plane when I just need a "good enough" edge and surface). I bought the 5.25 to take to more gnarly/questionable wood, I just haven't had any of that.

I know it's subjective, but i would vote fore plane and would have no reservation buying the "older" LV one.