I bought a Bedrock 608 flat side at an Auction recently and so far I have disassembled it and stripped the body. The frog is next to be stripped and I have a really nice tote to replace the one on it.
IMG_0012.jpg and stripped IMG_0007.JPG
[OP]
Contributor
I bought a Bedrock 608 flat side at an Auction recently and so far I have disassembled it and stripped the body. The frog is next to be stripped and I have a really nice tote to replace the one on it.
IMG_0012.jpg and stripped IMG_0007.JPG
Tom
Contributor
This is gonna be cool to follow.
When I started woodworking, I didn't know squat. I have progressed in 30 years - now I do know squat.
Contributor
Acknowledging the Bedrock design is an advance in performance compared to the Bailey design, my preference is still for the aesthetic of the round side over the flat top.
Looking forward to see how this one turns out Tom.
jtk
"A pessimist sees the difficulty in every opportunity; an optimist sees the opportunity in every difficulty."
- Sir Winston Churchill (1874-1965)
[OP]
Contributor
I really like the Keen Kutter K series planes. When Stanley decided to produce the flat top it changed the casting numbers on the round sided bedrocks to just a K and the number for the size. You cant tell the difference between frog from a 608 round side and a K 8. Sometimes the lever cap is different.
The Bedrock flat side is popular because one can move the frog without removing the blade. but the blade needs to be readjusted. But if the truth is known, the Stanley Bailey's frog can also be moved forward or backward without effecting the blade or it's setting.
The early baileys like the 11 and 12s were machined and the frog couldn't twist from side to side. The frog on a Bedrock has no lateral movement. On newer Baileys the opening in the front was looser so it could move laterally. that makes the blade harder to adjust side to side.
Tom
Contributor
Hi Tom,
Given the very nice work you do on planes, I am looking forward to seeing the progress.
Stew
Contributor
I have long needed a no7 or no8. I have a decent big old wooden plane but the body is so tall it is hard to stabilize. Thinner metal bodied planes allow you to reference the face by using the knuckles as a fence.Originally Posted by Tom Bussey
If this is for sale at the end of your restoration I’d be interested.
[OP]
Contributor
For those who are interested, I was going to grind the plane today, but I was informed by my wife that I was painting the hallway today. I was then going to do it this Thursday and was informed again I had made another comment for that day so now I hope to do it next Tuesday. I will post pictures of the process for all who wish to see them.
Thanks for the interest.
Tom
[OP]
Contributor
I wanted to show the 608 being ground bit I forgot the camera. I just got finished grinding a 4 1/2 so I thought I would show the steps because They are the same. Usually one machines the largest surface first, and then the sides. but in this case it has already been machined. I clamped the largest surface to my angle plates. Yow can see that two angle plates were used. The 608 was done the same way it is just that the angle plated were spaced farther apart. Then the first side that was ground was placed on the magnetic table and the second side was ground parallel to the first. Then the plane is flipped and the first side reground, usually only about 1 to 1 1/2 thousands will clean up every thing. Because the bottoms of the planes may or may not be flat, the clamps can distort the plane a little bit. This is my way of making the sides as parallel as possible and exactly the same thickness. It also gets rid of any possibility of any twist from clamping to the angle plate.
IMG_0053.JPG IMG_0054.JPG IMG_0057.JPG
Next the plane is clamped in a precision vise and the bottom is ground. And trust me a precision vise is not just any ordinary vise vary accurate vise. When I did the 608 I used two vises, just like the two angle plates.
IMG_0064.JPG IMG_0062.JPG IMG_0063.JPG
I spent just under 4 hours grinding this plane. I also had about 40 minutes travel tine and I wouldn't have spent the time to use a machine that is designed to do one thing which is to remove metal if I thought I could use sandpaper and a piece of glass to flatten it. I know every body thinks they can flatten a plane but iron doesn't sand like wood
Tom
Contributor
There are some that would be concerned that the frog bolted in place can distort the bottom somewhat. I find that flatness isn't so much a problem as smoothness. A polished surface is easier to push and doesn't rust as quick.
Looks good so far.
Member
5/8" square ought to fit off the saw with maybe a little minor tidy-up with a chisel.
Fundamental misunderstanding of the appliance, its purpose, and application.
Most "hand tool woodworkers" bring a machine mentality when crossing over to the 'dark side.' If you're lucky, you'll figure it out, but it'll probably take staying off forums to do so because until now every single post in this thread, except the one you are reading now, has missed the mark widely.
Last edited by Charles Edward; 03-21-2024 at 6:22 PM.
Member
We certainly were using planes at a high level centuries before there were people grinding soles by machine. So all that machinery is not necessary.
I haven't used sandpaper on wood or iron for over 45 years, but I did once level an iron plane with SiC grit on glass.
Later I used a marking gauge (wooden, not machined) to lay out a line 1/32 inch from the edge of a board, on both sides of the board and planed down to the line. I used the plane I had flattened. It took over 600 full shavings to remove 1/32 inch. Try that with one of your planes.
Contributor
I'm pretty sure you enjoy rehabbing old tools. I know I do. But knowing you have a big money machine like that to flatten the soles, I can't help but think to myself, "Why didn't you just buy a new Lie Neilsen? Or even a Holtey?" I kid, of course.
Contributor
Thanks for showing the process, Tom. I appreciate the pictures and enjoy watching the progress. Keep 'em coming.
[OP]
Contributor
The thickest place on the body is where the frog connects to the body. Do you even think you can distort a body by tightening a #12 screw with a screw driver? It is a wives tale and if you believe it I have a bridge I want to sell it is called the Brooklyn Bridge
As far as machine mentality, If I were to buy a Lie-Nielsen #8 for $550 I would read how I am going to love using it and congratulations on getting it, I love using my lie-Nielsen plane and they are the ones I reach for first. But let me do it and what kind of response do I get? Lie-Nielsen and Veritas planes are all finished on a surface grinder. You can't have it both ways.
Tom
Contributor
These debates always leave me shaking my head. Of course you don't need to surface grind a plane to make it perform well. People got along fine in the past. We didn't really need metal planes at all, people got along just fine with wooden ones. We didn't need to invent the car, people got around fine with horses and buggies. We didn't need the telephone, the mail worked just fine. The list goes on.
Progress moves ever forward. I appreciate the attention to precision that surface grinding gives to fine old user planes. I also appreciate folks who figure out (or were taught) to take a block of wood and a tapered iron and use it to make wood smooth, flat, and lustrous. They're all impressive skills that I admire. They are just different paths to a similar goal. To make useful items, that often times are beautiful.
Thanks for the pictures Tom, my experience with surface grinders is limited to making a gauge block as the final exam for my industrial arts class 50 years ago. (I got a B. I was within 2 tenths off in width and length, but my thickness was half a thou short- still kinda miffed about it after all of these years).
DC
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote