To Rob Lee - Veritas and new planes?

[Robert Trotter]

Hi Rob. I'm a newbie to the forum. Hope this is OK.

I am looking at buying some new planes. And have been reading around on the net about planes. What would be really great is to have some planes with all the great Veritas inovations with the LN looks and finish. Are there any plans for special editions or grade up version in the works?

If so are they coming up soon or quite a while off. ie. is it worth waiting before spending my money? What kinds of planes? Smoothers or LA jacks etc? Any hints?

[Kevin Blunt]

Robert,

There has been some talk around these boards to this kind of effect. I don't think that Rob Lee will spit out too much information though. He hasn't said too much in the past to my knowledge. one thing is for sure though. If there is anything special coming up, it will be great quality and beautiful to look at and work with I'm sure.

Kevin

[Mike Wenzloff]

Hi Robert--while Rob has unleashed the designers to come up with new hand tools, I cannot imagine they will use a truly classical style such as what TLN does. It's not their style of doing things.

Their fit and finish is equal to LN, depending on what one means by that.

But there are new tools they are coming up with as we exchange forum messages--but release dates and specifics are a mystery until Rob stars dropping hints.

Take care, Mike

[Robert Trotter]

Oh well. Thanks for the info.

[Rob Lee]

Hi Rob. I'm a newbie to the forum. Hope this is OK.

I am looking at buying some new planes. And have been reading around on the net about planes. What would be really great is to have some planes with all the great Veritas inovations with the LN looks and finish. Are there any plans for special editions or grade up version in the works?

If so are they coming up soon or quite a while off. ie. is it worth waiting before spending my money? What kinds of planes? Smoothers or LA jacks etc? Any hints?

Hi Robert -

We are looking at a high end series of planes... but can't even begin to discuss dates, designs, or even models (though the first is underway right now).

As far as "finish" in the current line goes - we'll only put (your) money into the functional bits...if it doesn't affect performance, we're not spending extra on it... that's part of the value proposition of our current line.

For "looks" - if one actually design for balance, center of gravity, or specific mass/blade width ratios, then there's just not a lot of options as to where some of that material ends up. Our planes are all designed from the ground up... rarely will they end up looking like the tools Traut, Bailey, et al came up with...

The high end series (once it get's rolling) will have aesthetics as a a major component of the design - but still only as far as it does not conflict with ergonomics or performance. Did I say these are going to cost alot more???

LV will also be doing some repro work peripheral to the plane line - but those models will be badged differently...not Veritas. Sort of a "Classic Reprints" series.... but tools. Those are on the go too....

Cheers -

Rob

[Robert Trotter]

Hi Rob, Thanks for the reply.

Sorry if it sounded (looked??) like I was saying the veritas planes don't have a good finish or looks. I should say that I haven't seen any in person, just on the internet. And they look quite good in the quality depeartment and from all the reviews are good. I hope people understand what I was trying to say in comparing to LN. (without writing a complete essay)

The high end series (once it get's rolling) will have aesthetics as a a major component of the design - but still only as far as it does not conflict with ergonomics or performance. Did I say these are going to cost alot more???

I like all the inovations Veritas has done and actually like the medium shoulder plane and LA plane looks. I think you understand about the aesthetics of LN planes and the percieved quality, and it seems that from what you have said that Veritas is looking at catering for the those who love the functionality of your planes (read from reviews etc. I haven't tried yet. I would love to try them out though ) but also crave for greater aesthetics. Once you get this line up I think you will be taking the lead.

Anyway it seems that it could be some time off so I will look at what is on the market now. Hopefully, if I save REAL hard I'll have a bit of dosh to give you in the future.

PS. If you would like a beginners opinion of the new planes I would be happy to test them for you.

[Rob Lee]

Hi Robert -

No sweat... I'm the guy that said our traditional (bevel-down) down planes were the "East German swimmers of the woodworking pool"....

The Veritas/LN comparisons are inevitable - but when you look closely at the lines - there isn't a single plane that overlaps...each of our planes is different from what Stanley/LN made/make - with specific reasoning supporting the differences. If we wanted too -we could just as easily make those planes as well... though we really wouldn't do so as Veritas.... our mandate there is to add innovation...

The premium line won't be a compromise at all - just new designs with produced within a different envelope... price wise, probably double or so our current pricing - I don't expect to add more utility though, but the cost differences will all be visible in end product....

Cheers -

Rob

[Mike Wenzloff]

No sweat... I'm the guy that said our traditional (bevel-down) down planes were the "East German swimmers of the woodworking pool"...Cheers - Rob

Ah, a face only a mother could love eh...Actually, Rob, they aren't that bad.

Take care, Mike
duckin' and a runnin'

P.S.
This issue of LV style and traditional style is like my fondness for 20th century Modern furniture as well as much of the then concurrent Art Deco furniture. Some people like it, some don't. But [nearly] everyone has an opinion about it...

[Robert Trotter]

Hi Rob,

Lots of Robs here

Just slipping sideways a little. Noting what you just said ,

but when you look closely at the lines - there isn't a single plane that overlaps...each of our planes is different from what Stanley/LN made/make - with specific reasoning supporting the differences.

Are there specific reasons for choosing the Veritas #4 or #4 1/2 over the BU smoother or the other way around? ie. Whay woulod you choose one over the other style?

[Mark Sweigart]

Veritas #4 or #4 1/2 over the BU smoother or the other way around?

Basically, from my understanding, there are 4 options by LV. Bevel down 4 and 4 1/2, and bevel-up 4 and 4 1/2 (one is sold as a bevel up smoother, and the other as a low angle smoother).

4 vs. 4 1/2 is simply a size/weight difference. The 4 1/2 is a bit larger and heavier. Some people like this, others don't.

As for bevel-up vs. bevel down, there are some differences. The bevel-up gives you the option to switch out blades, hence changing the cutting angle. This can give you some versatility. For example, the low angle smoother has flat sides, so it can be used as a shooting plane. So if you have 2 blades, you can have one with a low cutting angle for end grain, and a more normal cutting angle for smoothing. You could also install a blade with a high cutting angle, for gnarly grain. The tradeoff of this versatility is that the blade dulls more quickly on a bevel-up plane and will need to be sharpened more often. For a more technical description as to why, look here: http://www.traditionaltools.us/cms/i...iewtopic&t=153

mark

[Rob Lee]

Hi Robert -

Short answer - the wood can't tell the difference between the planes...

Yes, there are differences in mass, centre-of-gravity, and features such as ease of blade changing and adjustment.

It also depends on how many planes you want to own.... the 4 1/2 (or 4) is a good general application plane - well suited to most domestic woods. If you can bring yourself to use backbevels - it can do all of the same high angle work that a bevel-up plane can. Our bevel-down planes have a frog adjustment that allows you to vary the mouth opening without changing the blade depth (or even having to remove it). Really, it was designed to encourage back-bevels.

The bevel-up planes were designed for rapid blade swapping, and have a very low centre of gravity ... the feel is different. The BU Smooth is very much a single purpose plane. The LA smooth is a versatile shooter and smoother, specifically designed to be held on its side as well (the lever cap sides are designed as finger rests...)...

Either plane, with equally sharp blades having the same effective cut angle will produce equivalent finishes on the wood...

Cheers -

Rob

[Robert Trotter]

Thanks Rob.

Maybe I should start new thread as we are diverging from the original topic but as we are here...

What do you think of the following comments:-

If say you had an LA jack and an LA smoother. With these two planes in your tool box, is there a case where the LA smoother would be better for shooting?
Any shooting would be better done with the LA jack would it not?

So if this is so then the LA jack and the BU smoother might be a better pair as from what I have read, the BU smoother is just little bit better for smoothing. The low cetre of gravity sounds highly beneficial.

Is the BU smoother good for smoothing (final finishing) of edges and narrower stock, or it really for wide plat surfaces?

[Rob Lee]

Hi Robert -

A lot of the answer here is dependant on your preferences and skills - but here goes...

I wouldn't use the BUS for narrow edges... too much mass, too wide...it is really designed for flat surfaces.

Always consider how the plane you want to use registers on the material being cut - and what kind of result you want. Just cleaning up an edge - you can use a shorter plane, but one that gives you good feedback as to roll... if you're preparing an edge for gluing - you want to choose for a true cut, so would look for a longer plane. The rule of thumb I've always used (and I have no idea where it came from) is to use a plane 1/3-1/4 the length of the surface if jointing.... it works for me. My preference is to use the smallest plane I can, for whatever I'm doing... (which is mostly typing, these days ... )

For shooting - it again depends on the material and thickness. If you were making small boxes - the LA smoother would be just fine. Wider material - go with the Jack... The Jack will be comfortably able to shoot anything the smaller plane can...

The best advice I can give you is to go slowly... learn the planes you have - and identify what functions under what circumstances you have difficulty with... and then look for the solution. You don't need many planes - you just need the right ones for you... and we can't relly tell you which those are going to be!

Buy slowly, and buy well.... none of the manufacturers are going anywhere....

Cheers -

Rob

[Alice Frampton]

My preference is to use the smallest plane I can, for whatever I'm doing... (which is mostly typing, these days ... )

Finger planes and possibly a thumb plane for the space bar...?

[Robert Trotter]

G'day Rob, and thanks for the great reply.

While I suppose a lot uf us who are just setting up with decent tools would love to know that our choices are spot on and sometimes would like to believe that there is a best solution and someone can tell you what it is...But in reality this is just not possible. It's all feel and opinion and what you are going to be doing. Your summary is a good one for us...

"The best advice I can give you is to go slowly... learn the planes you have - and identify what functions under what circumstances you have difficulty with... and then look for the solution. You don't need many planes - you just need the right ones for you... and we can't really tell you which those are going to be!"

Your comments have been REALLY helpful.

I think that your summing up of the BU smoother's use will be very informitive for others like myself. I have read alot and have been really intreagued by the BU smoother and was thinking of getting one now as a first smoother. But having an idea of my imediate projects, (not a lot of large surfaces) I think it would be better to go a little lighter and narrower to give me better feel of the wood and control as I develop my skills. This will get me started, still work well, and give me an idea of what I need in the future as you suggested. And if I end up doing more and more large surfaces then there is always later. ( Yeeehaaaaaa..... Down the slope we go. )


Maybe one of those little beauties on page 89 of that sharpening book by a guy by the initials LL would help when finishing off all that typing.



Your comments about using the shortest plane you can get away with are interesting,

The rule of thumb I've always used (and I have no idea where it came from) is to use a plane 1/3-1/4 the length of the surface if jointing

So if say, you were jointing then a jack sized plane would be OK for up to about 4 feet?