Friends,
Do any of you have any experience or knowledge of the Clifton 450 multiplane?
I want to make my own moldings for carving. I now have a half set of Hollow and Rounds, and have been reading up on their use in making moldings. Some suggest the use of a plough plane to make the fillets (flat cuts) on hand made moldings. Others suggest the use of a plough plane to make cuts where you want the hollows and rounds to go. Hollows and rounds tend to wander if the grain is not straight. There are two ways of making them stay in the desired path. One is to start at the far end and make a small cut, and then slowly work your way back to the “near” end of the board, which is the opposite of what you would intuitively do. This gives the plane a track to move in. Another way is to use a plow plane to make a cut and use the Hollow to follow it. With the Rounds, you have to make two paths for it to travel along.
Besides a plow plane can be used to set the depth of a hollow or a round when making a molding with hand planes.
I want a “user”, not a collector’s plane. One possibility is to buy a Lee Valley small plough plane. That would work,and Lee Valley makes quality planes.
I am not up for finding, fettling and learning to use a Stanley #55.
Another possibility is the Clifton 450 multiplane. I have scoured the internet looking for info on its characteristics. I found one. It was not super positive or super negative. He said that it works well if you have very straight grain and no knots, and can be used by people willing to work hard to make a few feet of molding.
The Clifton would also give me the ability to do beads, which I want to have. I could buy some beading planes.
But before I make a move, I would like to hear any experience that you have with the Clifton 450 multiplane, or with making moldings by hand.
Thank you.
Mel
Measure your output in smiles per board foot.
Replies
Mel, take your heart pills then look at the Clifton and the extra cutters from Joel at Tools for working wood. I have never seen one for sale used. You don't need a#55 . You need a #45 Stanley, a#405 Record or a Clifton multiplane as they are all #45's.
Your best option is to spend $250+ for a clean, complete #45 that has a bunch of beading cutter sizes. If you really want to do reeding with multiple beads, the special cutter set has 1/8" to 1/4" beads 2, 3, 4, 5 per cutter, Go look at Pat Leach's Superior works-blood and gore- Stanley listing. Paddy
Edited 2/5/2009 12:47 pm ET by PADDYDAHAT
Paddy,
You are an Irishman but you are a good guy anyway. :-)
Thank you very much for the info on alternatives for the Clifton. Are you saying that a clean Stanley #45 or a clean Record 405 should go for somewhere around $250 with the complete set of cutters that originally came with them, or is the $250 only for the plane itself?I am not knowledgeable in old planes. I will look on EBay, and check with some of the sellers of old tools. I read an article by Chris Schwartz in which he said he got a Stanley 45 but a nicker or something like that was not in the best of shape, but he was able to remedy that, and after that it was OK. I feel like a babe in the woods when it comes to buying old tools. I suppose the only way to learn is to do some research and then get some experience. Obviously I want a real "user", with all the parts there and no major restorations needed. Maybe Patrick Leach has one or two for sale. Anyway, I will await your advice on whether the $250 should be just for the plane or for the plane and the complete set of cutters. I thank you from the bottom of my boggety boggety boggety shoe (if you remember the old rock and roll song)Mel the Wop, but a friend of Irishmen everywhereMeasure your output in smiles per board foot.
Hey Mel the Wop (I can say that!),
I have several 45's--two Stanleys and a Craftsman tagged-made-by-Sargent. You want to try one out for a month or so to see if it will do what you want it to? The two Stanleys are complete with blades, the Craftsman isn't.
Let me know.
T.Z.
Godfather Tony,
I will send you a private message.
When Italians get down to business, it should be in secret.
Mel the WopMeasure your output in smiles per board foot.
Mel, I have recently seen -both Epray and Leach- #45's from $225 to $275 that were complete,at least 85% plating, no pitting, maybe some rust dust, solid tote and knob,good fence rosewood with the later micro-adjust and all the cutters.
A#45 with the knob wood threaded on a threaded post of the casting of the fence is very old , or with the post on the main body is very very very old and should be avoided as a user. Places of risk for cracks or welded repairs are the casting that holds the cutter adjusting screw, the tote casting and the fence casting.
A box is a waste as it is a PITA to put away-like playing tetras-make a bigger box. The instruction sheet may still be had IIRC from Stanley or Astragal press that will demonstrate making compound mouldings using several cutters. Once you do a few compounds the light will come on and you will do your own.
You only get to drop a combination plane on a concrete floor ONCE.
I like the #405 better than the #45 but the #45 is fine as a user. I save the #55 and the Clifton for special work.
All the best, Paddy
AH PADDY,
so you do have the Clifton.
What is your take on the Clifton?
Why do you save it for special work?
In what ways is it better or worse than a 45 or 405?If you could have a good user Stanley 45 or a Clifton, which would it be?Thank you. You are training me. I am an apt student, but I have a long way to go.
MelMeasure your output in smiles per board foot.
"Now down to business. You suggested a moving fillister plane. I don't need to cut rabbets, but to cut grooves inside of the molding I am making. I have a Stanley 78 that I bought new in 1968. I have a few others that I can use to cut rabbets. I thought that a plow plane could cut the grooves that would set the depths for the hollows and rounds. I don't see how you can do that with a moving fillister."
You're correct, but it's usually rare that one's working on a flat molding. Remember that in the case of crown molding especially, what you see for sale in the store is modern modling, intended to get the absolute maximum out of the thinnest stock possible. Typical period molding, of the type that would've been made with hollows and rounds, was triangular in shape. Occasionally, one will see a triangular piece of secondary wood on the back of the modling, with a flat piece of 7/8" primary stock on the front. When placed in a molding sticking board, the surface (before it's cut) still presents an angled surface from the front of the sticking board to the back.
This is not exclusively true, there are examples, particularly from the William and Mary period, where a wide, almost flat piece of molding with a large astragal in the middle is applied to the top of a case piece, but even here, the more typical arrangement is molding that flares outward as one nears the top of the piece, and molding on the bottom of the case piece flares outward at the bottom. All of these can be made with a moving fillister and hollows and rounds.
From the standpoint of a Stanley 45, I would stay away from e-bay. Both the Clifton and Stanely 45s are complicated tools with many parts, and it's not at all uncommon to get e-bay planes that are missing some of these parts, or where parts have been "matched up" from later or earlier planes that don't fit correctly, or where parts on the main body have been welded after it was dropped on the floor. All of these problems are difficult to discern from photographs, and unless you know and trust the seller, you may wind up with a plane that doesn't work as it should.
Patrick Leach will certainly know better, and may be able to provide you with a nice 45 that will perform well as a user. Another trustworthy dealer is Lee Richmond at The Best Things. You will need to call Lee to ask him if he has a 45 that would be suitable as a user that has all of the blades and parts and no repairs - I would specifically mention that you're not after a collector's item, just a user.
A less expensive alternative would certainly be a wooden plow, and I know that Lee has several sets of irons for sale on this site now, and I can guarantee that he has a relatively inexpensive wooden plow that would suit your needs. In my opinion, wooden plows are much easier to use than metal versions if all you're interested in is plowing grooves. If you're interested in molding profiles, I would personally advise you to get a plow and wooden planes with the molding profiles you want to cut - you'll get a far better surface than with a Stanely 45 or 55, because they don't have fully-supported soles and mouths in front/behind the cutter, so unless you take very light shavings and have very well-behaved grain, you'll likely get a lot of tear-out.
D,
Thank you. I understand.One small point. There are three reasons I want to make flat grooves while making moldings:
1) to give the hollows and rounds a path to follow
2) to set the depth for the hollows and rounds
3) for the "fillets", which are narrow flats within a complex molding. I believe you thought that I wanted to make wide flat areas in the molding. Not at all. The flat strips would be an eighth or a quarter wide. I know Lee Richmond from meetings of our local woodworking guild, and I have exchanged emails with Patick Leach, so I have some good contacts. Thank you very much for your advice. I learned a lot from you.
MelMeasure your output in smiles per board foot.
Mel,
Welcome to the world where every plane isn't a smooth plane. It's kinda liberating, isn't it?
If you want to stack laminate different profiles deal combinations of fixed profiles, that's fine. It's more fun to be able to design and make exactly the right moulding for each project.
To see how they used to make incredible mouldings, you need to go back and look at their tool kits. I've uploaded the section of Richard Neve's 1736 builder's dictionary at the bottom and you won't find a moving fillister or a Stanley 45 on his list. Not just because they didn't exist yet but because it's easier to make a lot of mouldings without them.
I believe Don McConnell is the first person to decipher Thomas Sheraton's instructions for making cornice mouldings in generations. At least I haven't heard of anyone talking or writing about this. Don has a DVD due out soon on the process and I'm pretty excited about it. I think it's probably the most revolutionary information on woodworking to come around in my woodworking career.
Sheraton explains the process of working cornice mouldings on the spring. Before shaping the moulding it's necessary to fill in the back and do all your layout. You strike the critical and defining gauge lines on the face of the stock:
View Image
Shape your moulding stock to the proper shape and work the moulding upside down. Your gauge lines were the first cuts and you follow the marking gauge by entering the lines with snipes bill planes:
View Image
After a couple passes with the snipes bills you can finish of the defining rabbets with rabbet planes and work to your layout:
View Image
Here's Sheraton's cornice moulding Don makes in the DVD:
View Image
Don't forget to check out Richard Neve's list of necessary planes.
Larry,
What a great response on making moldings! Thank you.
I ordered Don's DVD when you told me about it. Can't wait to get it. Knots is a very interesting place. You ask a question and you get a lot of friends giving you their experience and advice. Up until your response, I was not sure as to what path to take. I am now. I will not get the multi-plane. I will study Don's DVD and Richard Neve's list, and see what I need.As of yesterday, I have flattened the backs of 9 of the 19 Hollows and rounds. Still a lot of work to do to get them ready for use. I am excited about the roads that they will open up. Fred Wilbur and Dick Onians turned me on to carved moldings. Ray Pine recommended the use of hollows and rounds to make the moldings. Now you have put the candle on the cake with superb info on what else is necessary to aid the hollows and rounds to make moldings. Once again, I am in your debt.
Thank you very much.
MelMeasure your output in smiles per board foot.
Mel,There's a second DVD Don did on mouldings. There were a couple final editing changes that needed to be made and they're in the process of being done. That DVD should go out for pressing soon and then it'll only be a few weeks until it's released.Don's first DVD is certainly worth watching but the information I posted about is in the second DVD.
Mel, first ponder why a fella with a very clean flat top #604 Stanley Bedrock with a Hock iron and chip breaker(Ebay+Hock @$160) would buy a LN #4($350 or bronze $385) or a Clifton #4($300)? When you figure that out you will have the truth.
As for me, back in the day I was futzing with 4 or 5 EBay for parts buys(nothing over $25), some with no cutters, no rods, missing knob,one de-electroplated down to the copper wash sub coat, welded adjuster or no cam rest. I did assemble a great user and have a lifetime supply of spare cutters,thumb screws, spurs etc.(you know that Stanley NEVER used standard threads on anything EVER!) that are available at $25 a pair sometimes.
So being a young upper middle management puke that just got a very nice bonus I decided to see if a brand new Clifton was worth $499 and $195 for the special cutters, after all at the last bonus I picked up their bench planes NIB in a distressed sale ranging from $145 to $187 for #'s 3,5,6,7 and I was very pleased with the fit, finish and performance. I was correct, the Clifton was dead nuts true, so much so that I have trouble sliding the perhaps not so true Record hollow/round or nosing bottoms onto the rods.
To answer your questions, I reserve the Clifton and the best #55
(-one of the last made, one cutter box with 4 rows that I picked up in shiny NIB condition with the wire tag still on the depth control shoe that advised the craftsman that the holes in the shoe were for him to attach a wood shoe of his liking and all cutters were still coated with factory grease-)
for final cuts in hardwoods that I don't want to try to reset* and these cutters are pristine as they don't get used for run of the mill work.
The #45 is very good, the #405 has a very slight edge in fit and finish-appeal? and it is unfair to judge the Clifton as it has very few miles on it ?? what will it look like in 20 years? I don't know but it is made very well, good cutters, good plating and machining.
In todays market I would buy a clean/complete #45 for up to $350. A #405 up to $375 and a Clifton for no more than $475, extra cutters $250 max. The current new Clifton price is $1,450 or $1784 if you get the $334 extra cutters.
Good luck, Paddy
* It is next to impossible to knock down a complex molding set up on these planes (not simple rabbet or plow etc.) and come back later and set it up again precisely matching the previous cut, particularly asymmetrical mouldings using the vertical adjustment on the #55(I don't do those too often).
Paddy,
You have invested a lot of time in passing your hard-earned wisdom to me. I appreciate it. I will let you know what happens.
Thank you.
MelMeasure your output in smiles per board foot.
"Another way is to use a plow plane to make a cut and use the Hollow to follow it. With the Rounds, you have to make two paths for it to travel along."
Mel - Just a note, but Hollows and Rounds are differently named than almost any other wooden molding plane. A "Hollow" is the plane with a concave semi-circle cut into the sole, a "round" is a plane with a convex sole. In other words, the planes are named for their appearance, not the molding they produce.
In regards to a plow plane, if the only thing you want it for is for grooves, then you'd be better off, in my opinion, with either the Veritas small plow, or a wooden plow with a set of irons. Both are a lot less cash than the Clifton, which is essentially an exact copy of a Stanley #45, and is expensive. 45s can be had for relatively little, even with all of the standard cutters in near unused condition. What makes the difference is the age (older is more collectable, and thus, more expensive), and the surface condition of the plane. One with all of its original nickel plating can be quite expensive. One that is perfectly usable, but has 10% or more of its nickel flaked off, will bring far less on the market, usually in the $200 range, with all parts and a re-print manual.
However, I think you will find as you get into this is that a plow is not generally the right tool - what you want is a "moving fillister" that allows you to cut a series of steps in the wood blank. The Hollows will follow the sharp arris of the top or bottom of one of these steps, and a Round will follow the inside corner of one of these rabbets.
You can make rabbets with a lot of handtools, but a moving fillister is ideal, because you can just adjust the fence to give you different widths to the bottom of the rabbet. The Lee Valley "skew rabbet" planes have provisions for making them into moving fillisters by addition of a wooden fence, you can do something similar with the Lie-Nielsen 10-1/4 bench rabbet plane, and the Lie-Nielsen skew block planes also work well for this purpose.
d,
Thank you for that excellent response. I did confuse the hollow and the round there for a second. Sorry about that. Now down to business. You suggested a moving fillister plane. I don't need to cut rabbets, but to cut grooves inside of the molding I am making. I have a Stanley 78 that I bought new in 1968. I have a few others that I can use to cut rabbets. I thought that a plow plane could cut the grooves that would set the depths for the hollows and rounds. I don't see how you can do that with a moving fillister. I could just use a narrow flat cutter on a plow plane or a multiplane or a Stanley 45. If I want a wider flat groove to "waste" material before using a hollow or round, I would just use a wider flat plane blade with it. Given that the fillister won't solve my issue, I could go with the Lee Valley small plow plane or a Stanley 45 or a Record 405 or even a Clifton 450, assuming I could get one at a reasonable price. I hear that the stanley 45, the record 405 and the Clifton 450 are essentially the same plane. The Clifton comes with fewer irons, and is more expensive. And it is important for me to get a "working user" plane, since I don't want to get into finding parts and repairing an old plane. I suppose I could learn more about that, but at this point, I'd rather get something I can use without repairs. Given all of this, what is your recommendation, and where would you look to buy one? EBay, or go directly to Patrick Leach or one of the major sellers, or ....... I await your wisdom, Master.
Thank you very very much.
Apprentice MelMeasure your output in smiles per board foot.
Bon giorno Mel,
I recently picked up a Clifton Multiplane on ebay for 500 bucks American...although it is new and shiney, I'm not impressed that it is any better or much better than a good condition Stanley #45...I certainly do not think it's worth $1500 and would have been really depressed if in a moment of weakness/idiocy I had done such a thing as purchase it new...it certainly does a good job with moldings so I guess if you have the extra dinero and can find one for about the same price it might be worth it..if money is really tight, go with the #45
Neil
Neil,
Have you actually used the Clifton to make moldings?
What are the problems you have noticed with it?
Would you rather have a good Stanley 45 for $300 or a new Clifton for $500? You have the latter. Now that you have it, do you think you would have been just as happy with a good Stanley 45?I appreciate your advice.
Thank you,
MelMeasure your output in smiles per board foot.
Actually Mel, I have a fairly nice Stanley #45 that I have used to make moldings and both the Stanley and the Clifton work fine...as to the question about which one I would rather have I guess I would take the Stanley if it was in very good or fine condition although, so far the Clifton is working well...when I bought it I thought it was going to be an improvement over the Stanley since it was newer and very expensive new ($1500)...hard to pass up a brand new plane for 1/3 the cost...anyway, there is not enough difference between the two to get really excited about..I do agree with the comment that the castings on the Clifton seem a bit crude when compared to the Stanley.
As to moldings, I have not taken a purist approach and just about every molding I've made, I've combined complex molders, H&R's and the Stanley (or recently, the Clifton) to come up with some design...if you haven't seen it, there is a great video on creating moldings by Don....Don...well, now I'm having a senior moment..Larry Williams partner..on making moldings with hollows and rounds....he makes it look easy but I have not found it to be...I'm sure it's like everything else in woodworking...practice, experience, practice...
Unique moldings are very enjoyable and you can impress your family...remember, above all, have fun!
Neil
Neil,
You are a straight shooter. Thanks for letting me know how you make moldings, and how the Clifton and Stanley multi planes have worked for you. That is the best kind of information - based on personal experience. I have ordered Don's old DVD and will order his new one which is due for release soon. Can't wait to give this a try. Maybe then we can trade some photos on moldings that we have made.
Thank you.
MelMeasure your output in smiles per board foot.
Mel,
You gave me really good advice on getting started in carving and on carving tools...I'm only happy to return the favor..although judging from your pics of some of your carvings, my moldings are not yet to the level you've achieved.
Neil
Neil,
You have learned the secret to success. Flattery will open doors. Thank you.
MelMeasure your output in smiles per board foot.
"One small point. There are three reasons I want to make flat grooves while making moldings:1) to give the hollows and rounds a path to follow2) to set the depth for the hollows and rounds3) for the "fillets", which are narrow flats within a complex molding.
I believe you thought that I wanted to make wide flat areas in the molding. Not at all. The flat strips would be an eighth or a quarter wide."
Mel - Larry's pictures may give you some idea of why you can use a fillister and rabbet planes to make fillets and tracks for hollows and rounds. Though what he shows has a little more cant to the stock and little less of an edge at the bottom than I usually work, you can see how it's possible to cut a step rabbet in the lower portion of the molding, use that step to cut the next one halfway up the slope, etc... By doing this, you've hogged out most of the waste with a fillister (or a rabbet plane - either will work for the purpose) into what amounts to a stair-step pattern. It's into the corner of these stair-steps that a round will fit and track (and the peaks of the stairs for hollows). It's also possible to use a plow for this purpose, but I can tell you that I don't because it's not as easy to use as a fillister. I have both, by the way, so it'd be no problem to pick up either.
FYI - It's usually not necessary to flatten the backs of molding plane irons the way one would a bench plane. In fact, it may be detrimental to the performance of the plane, depending on how much you take off, because it may open the mouth of the plane more than you want. I've a ton of wooden planes, many with the irons as last sharpened by a craftsman in the 19th century - none of them have flat backs. Instead, one sees a very small, very shallow back-bevel on the iron, probably put there with a slipstone. If you think about it, this makes a lot of sense - it's far less work, gets the iron sharp, and a lot of craftsmen did not have a flat reference surface on which to flatten sharpening stones.
d,
Thank you for telling me that I don't need to flatten the backs of the Hollows and Rounds. I have done half of them. I hope I haven't done too much damage. I will see how they work with and without the flattened backs. Oh well. There isn't much written about this. I also see what you mean about the moving fillister.
Thank you very much.
MelMeasure your output in smiles per board foot.
"Thank you for telling me that I don't need to flatten the backs of the Hollows and Rounds. I have done half of them. I hope I haven't done too much damage. I will see how they work with and without the flattened backs. Oh well. There isn't much written about this."
Mel - no worries, it's doubtful you've done anything other than make the planes unattractive to a collector. If the original condition of the irons is the way I've seen them (with a small back-bevel to ensure that the iron meets at a sharp point and is thus sharp), it's often easier to grind or hone the primary bevel back a bit than to take a lot of steel off of the back of the iron. I do this with diamond hone, which can be purchased from Woodcraft in 3 sizes. These are really wonderful for the purpose, and are far quicker, in my experience, than either oil or water slipstones. I've also talked to fellow WWs that have very good luck with the ceramic Spyderco files and slips, though I've not tried them myself.
David,
I contacted Ray Pine who gave me the historical background on sharpening Hollows and Rounds. It turns out that there are two schools of thought. One of them flattens the back. I looked at the planes that I had and had not flattened the backs of the irons on. I don't see much, if any difference in the mouth opening. Actually, if you put a back bevel on, you increase the size of the mouth. Anyway, I have now done them all. The sizes from 2 to about 12 were easy. 14, 16 and 18 did require more work. But they all look good now. I bought these things to USE, not to collect. I have one of the three DMT hones and may get the other two. I also have the Spyderco ceramics. They don't remove much. They are only for the finest honing.I will keep you posted. I really appreciate your help. And it is great to know someone else interested in this stuff.Now a question for you. Larry Williams wrote of the need for a Snipe's beak plane for use in making moldings. Are you familiar with this? with its function? I have searched the web. Not much info available. Thank you.
MelMeasure your output in smiles per board foot.
I think you did the right thing in flattening the irons, Mel. Keeping them flat by maintaining them each time you sharpen will make your sharpening quicker and more dependable. When the iron on a molding plane gets dull, you'll have problems and those problems can damage the plane's mouth. I have a guess as to why so many older plane irons are dubbed but it's only a guess. While it's based on the evidence I've seen, I'm not going to hijack your thread by tossing it out here.I'll stay out of your search for snipes bill information except to point out that from Moxon (1680) through Neve (1736) and up to Sheraton they're mentioned in conjunction with hollows and rounds. When Sheraton wrote about using them, he started out by saying he'd explain the whole process of making cornice mouldings because of the "bungling" efforts of workmen he'd watched made him sure there was a need.
Larry,
Thank you for your reassurance on flattening the backs of the Hollows and Rounds. As far as snipe's bill planes go, I have done a number of Google searches, expecially in Google Books, and I found two references, but neither provided any information or explanation. So I am awaiting Don's first DVD, and then will get the second. Your photo showed Don using that plane. I can see that it is laying a track for another plane to follow. I have done an initial set of searches on the places that sell old tools and haven't found anything in the way of snipe's bill planes. If folks buy the DVD and can't find the tools to do the work, some will be disappointed. But I saw a photo of a pair of these planes in your website, but it doesn't show up in your catalog of planes. If you make these, would you send me a private message with the price, the wait time, etc? Is there anything you can say here in the thread about the use of the snipe's bill plane? Such as, do you need a pair for some reason? Are they used to start fillets or for other reasons as well? Any info would be nice. You are filled with good info on wood planes of early design. But then again, you have been researching it for a while, as well as building them.Thank you for your reassurance on the back flattening.
MelMeasure your output in smiles per board foot.
Mel,
Try Googling snipes bill hand plane. You'll get several references to it one of which is Garrett Hacks' The Handplane Book. Might want to try Stanley #98 & #99 too.
As to a place where these folks are, uh, here on Knots is certainly a good place to start. :-)
Regards,
Bob @ Kidderville Acres
A Woodworkers mind should be the sharpest tool in the shop!
Edited 2/8/2009 6:48 am ET by KiddervilleAcres
Edited 2/8/2009 6:49 am ET by KiddervilleAcres
Bob,
"As to a place where these folks are, uh, here on Knots is certainly a good place to start. :-)"I DON"T THINK SO! If they are here, they are VERY quiet. I have come across Larry WIlliams and David Keller and one more whose name escapes me at this senior moment. Possibly Knots if full of folks who make their own moldings using hand planes, but if so, they are a quiet bunch. I have ordered the first DVD by Don McConnell on using Hollows and Rounds to make moldings. That should get me going. His second one will be out soon, and that goes into more complex moldings. THis is going to be fun.
MelMeasure your output in smiles per board foot.
Mel,The snipes bill planes work from a gauge line. They'll track right in one but you need a good gauge line. The problem lies in that making mouldings takes a little time. Not a lot but a little. Commercial demand and mass production made that time significant because commercial furniture makers were making thousands of each piece of furniture. For one-off work hand made mouldings are the most efficient, if you're making thousands of each piece a moulding machine is the efficient way to go.I'm not sure why but snipes bill profiles changed in the 19th Century and that change seems to have taken place pretty early. 19th Century snipes bill planes have a comparatively large flat where you really need a fine point to enter the gauge line. Between that and the practice of making mouldings by hand becoming more specialized relatively few snipes bill planes were made in the 19th and 20th Centuries though they remained in most of the catalogs. Tool collectors will tell you snipes bill planes are an uncommon profile and very difficult to find in pairs. Frankly, what I have written about this has sold far more snipes bill planes for Pat Leach, Lee Richmond and Martin Donnelly than we've been able to produce.In our company there are just three old men making planes and most of the work is done by hand. Only two of us make the side escapement planes and we're swamped. Making the planes isn't an insurmountable issue. We've tried to break down the barriers for people. We've taught workshops, done DVDs, got the special tools and iron blanks available through Lie-Nielsen. Still, we take more orders for side escapement planes than we can produce. We lost a lot of production time last year doing DVDs, traveling to teach workshops, remodeling and moving into a new workshop, and trying to set up to be able to sell beech plane billets for those who want to make their own planes.I think there's a market for the planes out there, they're really the only answer for people making one-off furniture to really manipulate and control their designs. I could buy a $7,000 double spindle tilting head shaper and $50,000 of tooling and not have the capability I have with a basic set of moulding planes. You can make eight or ten feet of moulding by hand quicker than you can set up a machine. I remember 30 years ago standing in my shop in utter frustration when I realized my tooling was controlling my designs and I couldn't make what I wanted no matter how much money I invested in a machine and tooling. I was vaguely aware of the capability of hollows and rounds and that's what started me on this journey, Mel. I've spent 30 years trying to flailing away trying to punch my way out of that bag.A couple years ago, Don walked in one morning and said he'd been re-reading Sheraton again. He thought he might now understand part of it and he told me about the concept of working from gauge lines with a snipes bill. I actually tried it before Don. We had a set of snipes bills all tuned and ready to go. After just one attempt all those constraints I've felt for 30 years vanished.I don't think you'll find the information you're looking for except in Sheraton's book and hints in other old literature like Neve's dictionary. I've never seen it and wouldn't know where else to look. Don has studied the old woodworking literature more than anyone I know of and he doesn't know of any other source. Take Sheraton's gift and run with it, Mel. Don explains it well in the DVD.Making the mouldings is now pretty simple. The next problem is how do you use those mouldings. I think those from the classical orders are the most effective but where are they used and why. How do they work? The profiles are only the vocabulary of design, where do I turn to get the grammar? The best thing I've seen is an article in FWW that sort of explains how to manipulate design with profile choices. I'm trying to work my way through C. Howard Walker's book, _Theory of Mouldings_, but it's a garbled mess. There's not much else out there. Making the mouldings is now incredibly simple for me. Sheraton and having some good working tools has that covered. The hard part is knowing how to manipulate visual weight, scale, proportion, texture and the other design elements with those mouldings. Screw a brochure on using snipes bills, that's easy. Help me use these elements as design tools as well as we can use our planes.Don and I are teaching a workshop on making a pair of snipes bill planes at Marc Adams School this year. That workshop may well be the last one where we travel to teach. We need to focus on the business and getting orders filled. We've been away from plane making too much in the last couple years with teaching and making DVDs. I had surgery for cancer in December and that came as a warning that I may not have much time to get all those orders filled. I hate to go to the effort of putting together all the stuff for a workshop we'll only do once but that's where it's at.
Edited 2/8/2009 10:09 am by lwilliams
Larry,
That was a very informative message. I believe that my next step is to watch Don's two DVDs. First one is on its way. I will order the second as soon as it is available. I have a few good books on classical architecture and how moldings fit in. That is a good start.
I am very happy that your business is doing well. Congratulations. Your research has paid off.
I am sorry to hear of your health problem. Work at it. Beat it. You are in my prayers. I believe I wont be asking any more questions until after I study Don's DVDs.
I will post some photos of my progress.
Have fun.
MelMeasure your output in smiles per board foot.
"Actually, if you put a back bevel on, you increase the size of the mouth."
True, but of course this isn't permanent the way really thinning down the iron would be. But what I was referring to is really microscopic, unless the previous craftsman was really ham-fisted. It's really not that you're going to ruin a blade by flattening the back (unless the iron was really, really dubbed and you took off an enormous amount of the back trying to flatten it), it's just a ton of work that's not necessary.
BTW - Most of the time, I hear these planes referred to as "snipe's bills", not "snipes beaks", though there may well be historical references that name them that.
Larry's already given you a pretty good response regarding the snipe's bills, and I've seen them used to sink "quirks" (a cut-in on the back side of a profile, usually seen in small ogees - a lot of small ogee planes are really quirked ogees).
But, what I use them for is to clean off the back side of a highly curved profile. A lot of times one finds that the front side of an ogee is cut with the grain and is quite smooth, while the back side is not quite as nice. A snipe's bill plane allows a very close approach to the back side of a highly curved surface. A related plane is a side-snipe plane, which looks a bit like a side rabbet except with the characteristic ogee-shaped bed. There are certain situations (primarily, in my experience, when working next to a fillet) where the side snipe can be used for a similar purpose as the snipe's bill.
David,
Great info on the snipe's bill.
Thank you. It really is good to hear from someone with real experience.
Keep the info coming.I got the idea from Larry's response with the photos, that the snipe's bill is used also to set the place for a fillet. I might be wrong. Do you know anything about that. In other words, suppose you want a small fillet (1/8 to 1/4") somewhere inside a molding, how do you get that flat in there? How do you get it to be very straight?
I was thinking -- the table saw or the router table, which isn't very galootish. MelMeasure your output in smiles per board foot.
What Larry's showing is what I heard Don theorizing on the video "Molding Planes: The Basics". However, all I can say is that I haven't used a snipe bill for that purpose, though it would seem pretty logical. As for getting the quirk straight, I presume that a marking-gauge line, if sufficiently deep, would provide enough of a track to start the snipe's bill. Sounds like a good thing to try in the shop tonight - I'll let you know how it works out.
David,
Can't wait to hear how your snipe's bill works out.
I am jealous.
I wrote to Patrick Leach yesterday. He responded today, saying that he sold his last pair of snipe's bill planes a few days ago. He said that they are more for experienced people and I need to get some basic work done with my Hollows andpw Rounds before I start with the snipe's bills. He too said they are for making quirks. YOu know, there is nothing written up on making moldings with Hollows and Rounds and snipes bills, etc. I did find one very basic article in FWW but only on H&Rs. I will try to write a pamphlet based on my first year's adventures and learning experiences. No sense gaining a bunch of knowledge without a mechanism to pass it on. But there may only be one other person in the universe who wants to know this stuff. Let me know how things come out.
MelMeasure your output in smiles per board foot.
"But there may only be one other person in the universe who wants to know this stuff. "
I can guarantee that's not the case. Clark and Williams was at one point several years behind on hollows and rounds sets. I don't know too many people that would pony up $2400 without the desire to use them.
David,Where are all of those people who are interested in making moldings with handplanes? Where do they hang out? Where can they be found on the web? I have searched and searched and searched, and I can't find much at all.What are some ways of finding some of these folks?
MelMeasure your output in smiles per board foot.
MP90164 W. I. Walker, York This is a nice as found pair of snipe bills. They have the typical chips in the boxing at the front and rear but this is a lightly used set. The boxing on the right plane is pulling down from the dry air here and if you want to use it you would need to clamp this back in. A nice honest pair. G+ $95
View Image
At The Best Things.
http://www.thebestthings.com/molding.htm
Might be more on that page. First ones I came to. But always call Lee Richmond if you don't find what you are looking for. He's got more than a few planes that are not listed at any given time.
Take care, Mike
Well Mike, there you go. There's the problem. Lee says this is as nice a pair as he's seen. Put anything straight against the boxing of the one he shows the blind side of. That boxing is out of place. The boxing is damaged in other places. I look at those planes and see a huge amount of work.Don tuned one of my 19th Century pair of hollows and rounds to loan a customer. These were simple planes, much simpler than the snipes bills. To get them working right took Don a couple days. I could make a pair in that time.There's no reason a lot of the plane makers and other tool makers out there can't be making these things. Yeah, they're labor intensive and take some skill but it can be done. There's a market. I think the problem is that there's a bigger market for mantle jewelry made of googaboola wood and titanium or what ever the fad metal is today. People don't seem to have to problem paying thousands for tools made of parts of endangered timbers or animals and shiny exotic metals. These tools never touch wood and if they manage to actually take a shaving, the shaving is the final product to me examined with a micrometer. Between the charm bracelet tools and gimmicks, there's just not much being done. Where's all this innovation I keep hearing about? Why can't today's woodworkers have tools equal to those commonly available 200 years ago? I know you don't much care for me Mike but I think your tapered hand saws are some of the very few bright spots out there.Mike, you keep pushing your pal Philly. He's a nice guy, I like him personally, and I wish him a lot of luck. I just wish he'd get of his rear-end and make some functional tools. Tell him to stop with the googaboola and gimmicks. That plane you got him to start making is a chamfer plane, not a "mini panel raiser." It creates an edge treatment for a table or something. You know, on the British forum he basically said some of what's in my DVD was over his head. Wow, that was revealing. It's real simple, basic and critical stuff and he needs to do his homework.Maybe it doesn't matter. Maybe Mel is the rare exception who's actually trying to make more than virtual noise on a woodworking forum.
Hi Larry.
First on-topic. While I posted the first entry on Lee's pages I saw, a quick phone call will sort out whether there are issues or it is a camera/photo taking oddity. I know I bought one molding plane from Lee that I called on first because the whole sole appeared warped. It was in fact dead perfect. As in all things, call first before assuming. Might just be they are wonky. Might not.
Larry, I have no animosity towards you. At one point I would have said that I neither like nor dislike you--I usually form such hard and fast opinions after being in the presence of someone for a time. I have a few friends that bug the crap out of others because of their on-line personas and written words on various forums. After getting to know them in person, I quite like them, quirks and all. Being that I have now had opportunity to actually meet you at Berea, my leaning is towards liking you as a person.
As for the "pushing" comment? Probably uncalled for. It's those kind of statements that tend to make me reserve judgement on the person as a whole, all the while thinking it an asinine thing to pen on the writer's part. That is, if you meant it in the spirit of our first email discussion. If not, it has an unfortunate negative connotation.
The first planes I commissioned Phil to make was a pair of planes. One a dovetail plane, the other what he has termed a mini-panel raiser. The originals were head-on photos from an MJD auction. I bid on both, lost both and so asked Phil to make them for me. Next was the miter plane.
Do I recommend Phil? Yes, maybe more than I recommend y'all because of backlog (same goes for myself--I recommend other saw makers and vintage routes quite often). And I recommend a few of the on-line vintage tool dealers. Of those vintage resellers, I probably recommend Richmond the most simply because I have been a happy customer for many years. I also recommend Andrew quite often, and somewhat Tony.
As to Phil's direction? Well, whereas I have my thoughts about direction too, I think Phil should do what it is that pays the bills. If that is where he is headed, why the heck should I try to alter that course? In that regard, you might very well have more influence in that than I would.
fwiw, here is the picture from the MJD auction:
View Image
I do not know whether the one on the left is originally an edge treatment plane for a table or what not. I guess neither do you. However...a raised panel is but an edge treatment, eh? And I do know it works wonderfully for rasied panels at the scale of work for which it is made.
Take care, Mike
"Well Mike, there you go. There's the problem. Lee says this is as nice a pair as he's seen."
Larry - just for the record, what Lee said in his listing is the pair of planes are a nice as found pair, the "as found" comment meaning that they haven't been messed with. Lee is one of the most scrupulously honest tool dealers I know of, a fact that in some cases works to his disadvantage, as he'll describe every defect of an antique tool, and make them sound a whole lot worse than they are.
Mel - As for people interested in making moldings by wooden planes, there are quite a few out there on the net, just not on Knots. Except for our little crew bandying back and forth different subjects, Knots is generally a power tool forum. This is also true on SawMill Creek, where I post fairly often. There's a "currently viewing" counter that's telling - the General Woodworking and Power Tool forum typically has 350 or so viewing during a weekend day, and about 50 viewing the "Neanderthal" forum.
What Larry says is, of course, completely correct - there are many tasks in the workshop where a handtool in skilled hands is far more efficient and accurate than a power tool method, but you'll have a hard time convincing your average woodworker of that. Moreover, many people just simply don't want (or can't) put the muscle into handtool working. A lot of techniques just don't require it, but some do - 4-squaring a 25" wide, 6/4 Mahogany plank as I did yesterday is a workout (but it beats the heck out of ripping it into 12" widths so it'll fit the planer).
David,My remarks weren't intended to reflect on Lee Richmond or anyone else. I've dealt with him and he's okay. I was talking about some planes I bought that were in good shape and that I "tuned" up early in my efforts to work with these. I thought they worked okay but now, with more knowledge and experience, it took Don two days to get them working right and I couldn't have done it any faster. Can many of the good condition old planes be tuned and be a joy to use? You bet! Tuning the old ones and getting them working really right, is often a much bigger job than making one from scratch.Early on in this thread Noviceneil said Don makes this look easy in the DVD. Neil said he hadn't had the same experience. Well, if the planes are working right, it is easy. That's the hard thing to learn and starting with no frame of reference makes it even more difficult. Well tuned planes should function effortlessly and like an extension of your hand. One of the discussions Don and I had about his second video is about one scene where he's taking a pass with a plane. In that pass you can hear the edge fail and the plane quit functioning right. During filming, Don stopped and resharpened but the DVD doesn't show the interruption and goes right to the next pass with the plane. We talked about whether there should be some mention of that tell-tale sound and the subsequent sharpening but decided not to delay things with another editing change. Maybe we made the wrong decision.
Larry,
"starting with no frame of reference makes it even more difficult."That is the most important statement ever made on Knots.
It is the essence of "early learning".
I see it all the time in teaching folks how to sharpen plane irons and chisels and carving tools. Early learning is the hardest because you have no references, as you noted. But we all have to go through it to get to the exciting stuff. We have to buy some things without knowing what we will know later. We have to use the tools before we know what "finely tuned" means, and what performance can be expected from the tool. Two years ago, I decided to learn how to use an angle grinder with a chain-saw blade. I read the website of the guy who makes them, and I studied it, and I called him and asked questions. Finally he said, "Just do it. You know enough to get started." Wow, the first minute taught me a lot -- and what I learned was not what I expected. The first two hours were enlightening. At first I was only worried about safety. THen I became interested in doing the simple stuff effectively. Then I wanted to do it efficiently. Then I got into the more complex stuff, etc etc etc. It took a year. Now I can tell easily when the saw is starting to dull, and when the wood will give me problems, and I can hear differences in performance and I can see what is happening from things like the stream of chips.So what does all of this have to do with Hollows and Rounds and Snipe's Bill planes? I believe what will happen will be identical, except that I am not as concerned about safety as I was with the chain saw. In buying a set of snipe's bill planes, I will be dependent on the veracity of the seller, so going to someone like Lee, who I have known for a few years, is a good thing. Then I will get into the issue of "how do I sharpen this pair of planes". Then I will get into how do I use these things in conjunction with a knifed like. How do I feel the cut and get it to an even depth and at the right angle?Hopefully soon after that, I will stop thinking so much about the plane itself, and focus completely on the task at hand. When the tool becomes an extention of the arm, hand and mind, one has mastered the tool, and the tool becomes "a tool". I remember teaching my three kids how to drive. I feared for them in this Northern Virginia driving environment. I knew they had to go through that "early learning" rite of passage, and I would have loved to buy some magic dust and have them skip it and go directly to full competence.As the decades have past, I have come to enjoy going through the early learning passage on new tools, such as digital cameras and hand planes (the metal type). Now the wood ones that are not flat on the bottom. This "early learning" issue is an interesting one on Knots. Most newbies ask a question and get 25 different answers. They haven't got the background to know which answer is appropriate. I used to worry about that. Now I accept it as an unavoidable part of life. Indeed, there is something magical about that early portion of learning -- where one says, "gee, I wonder how anyone can ever put a crowned bevel on a plane blade. I don't think I could ever do it". And a short while later, one does it while thinking not about the sharpening, but about the task that one is using the plane for.I have long wanted to to a thread on this thing of Early Learning of woodworking skills. But not now. I have been woodworking since 1968 but at 65, I am going through Early Learning in my morphing from a student of Norm (complete with plaid shirt) to a quasi-Neanderthal. I say quasi because, I will never be able to completely put away my chain saw. Indeed, I want to see if I can use it to cut a nice set of dovetails. :-)Have fun.
Mel
PS - I think I wrote this more for me than you. It has been sitting on the tip of my mind for a while.
Measure your output in smiles per board foot.
"My remarks weren't intended to reflect on Lee Richmond or anyone else. I've dealt with him and he's okay. I was talking about some planes I bought that were in good shape and that I "tuned" up early in my efforts to work with these."
Larry - I agree with you on this point. On Sawmill Creek, it's quite common for newbies to ask "Which handplane should I buy?", and a fair number of replies are always "get an old Stanley at a flea market and learn to tune it". In my opinion, this does a big disservice to a person with no familiarity with hand tools. Not that I don't think that learning to tune a plane (either a metal bench plane or a wooden molding plane) isn't a valuable skill, but it's not intuitively obvious either.
My thought is that someone new to handtools should have at least one example of a plane that's set up correctly when they get it, so they at least know how it should work. Then one can start tuning antiques, if so inclined.
Mike,
Thank you for that. I will write to Lee today. I know him from the local woodworkers guild. Thank you very much.
MelMeasure your output in smiles per board foot.
"I am not up for finding, fettling and learning to use a Stanley #55."
I might be wrong but I am under the impression that the Clifton is basically the same as this plane or a#45.....except that is is still being made.
What you want to do with it is another set of questions.
Philip,
Great to hear from you. It has been a while. Yesterday I did not know that a Clifton 450 is essentially a Stanley 45. You know that I am not well versed in hand planes, especially old one. I have explained a few times in this thread what function I am looking for. I want to make complex carved moldings. I now have a half set of Hollows and Rounds. To make them work well, a plough plane or a multi plane can be used to:
1) make a track for the Hollows and rounds to follow
2) serve as a depth marker for the Hollows and rounds
3) waste wood quickly where necessary before using hollows and rounds
4) make the narrow flat fillets which sometimes separate the rounded portions of a molding.I hope that explains it.
What advice would give me on what type of plane would be best to accomplish these things?
Thank you.
MelMeasure your output in smiles per board foot.
Philip,
I forgot to mention in my response to you that a Lee Valley small plough plane might be a good plane for what I explained that I want to do. I was thinking however, that I might be able make beads on the moldings as well as the other functions. The Lee Valley plane could not do that.
Any thoughts?
MelMeasure your output in smiles per board foot.
I have had a Record 405 multi plane from new 1969 the cliftons I have seen have been rather poor copies the the advice to seek an older second hand plane is good advice.
PS The multi plane was responsible for the invention of the router.
Bolts,
Thanks for the advice and the grin. I have had s router since 1968. I know routers. I am going backwards in time to see what I can do with handplanes. Thanks for the input on the Cliftons.
MelMeasure your output in smiles per board foot.
Derek,
Here is my situation. I bought a nice half set of hollows and rounds. I am in the process of flattening the backs. They were made in the early 1800s but were never used. I am about half done. More work than I expected.I bought them to make mouldings to carve. Making some of these shapes with a router is not possible. I have been studying how you use hollows and rounds. I have learned that one way to make the hollow or round stay in its intended line is to use a plough plane or something like it to make a narrow line for hollows, and two for rounds. The plough plane can also be used to set the depth to go to with a hollow or a round. The plough plane can be used to waste unwanted wood quickly before using the hollows and rounds, and finally a plough plane can be used to make the narrow flat fillets that are found in moldings.So I could get the Veritas small plough plane. Or an Stanley 45 or a Record 405 or or or or. There is a possibility I can get a Clifton 450 at a very good price, and I hear it is the same as a Stanley 45. The nice thing about the Clifton or the Stanley 45 or the Record 405 is that it could also be used to make beads for the moldings. Now, I don't know how well they work for that purpost. I read your writeup on the Lee Valley small plough plane. It sounds good.Now, knowing the functions I want out of a plane, do you have any thoughts that might be useful. I have heard that the #45 is good at making long slots, like a plough plane, but it is a pain to do much else with it. I have heard that they are finicky, and sometimes difficult to get parts for that actually fit. etc etc etcSo what do you think?
MelMeasure your output in smiles per board foot.
Hi Mel
For moldings, my preference is to either use H&R planes or dedicated molding planes. The #45 (I have the Stanley) is a good all-rounder, but its basic weakness lies with the absence of a mouth, which means that you can really only work on straight-grained timber.
The DVD (Traditional Molding Techniques: The basics) by Don McConnell is excellent and should be in your personal library.
Regards from Perth
Derek
Derek,
I have already ordered Don's DVD. Now I see that the lack of the mouth is what gives the multiplane its versatility and its limitations. The advice has been solidly against the need for such a tool. Larry just posted an EXCELLENT response on what is needed in addition to hollows and rounds. Thank you. I am now pointed in the right direction.
MelMeasure your output in smiles per board foot.
Mel
As far as I know when Record disappeared Clifton bought the rights to manufacture the Record 405 the castings seem crude in comparison to the original.The Record company produced a book called Planecraft dedicated to Record Planes it has very good Info on the 405 as per instructions a copy was available through Woodcraft check if still available .It is huge help in using the 405.
Regards From Melbourne AustraliaIn a breakfast of bacon and eggs the hen has a passing interest but the pig is fully commited
Bolts,
I see you are from Melbourne. I visited your fair city one time and had a great time. I got in late at night. When I woke up and left the hotel, I was in an Italian neighborhood. I am of Italian descent so I joined in some Italian conversations and had some good Italian food. I never expected to find anything like that. Pleasant surprise.
MelMeasure your output in smiles per board foot.
MEl
i am glad you enjoyed the visit due to post war migration and later migration Melbourne is a very cosmopolitan city with one of the largest mix of
ethnic groups who all get on together we are the second largest Greek City in the world after Athens.
.
In a breakfast of bacon and eggs the hen has a passing interest but the pig is fully commitedEdited 2/5/2009 10:19 pm ET by BoltsEdited 2/5/2009 10:21 pm ET by BoltsEdited 2/5/2009 10:37 pm ET by Bolts
Edited 2/5/2009 10:39 pm ET by Bolts
Mel:
The multi-plane (Stanley 45 or a clone) is one of those tools people either really like or really hate. I have a newer Record 405 which I bought off of eBay five or six years ago for $275. Personally, I would rather have my multi-plane than a dedicated plow plane.
The plane works well as a plow and rabbit plane. It cuts beads, reeds, and flutes reasonable well if the cutters are properly honed. I have used the tongue and groove cutters with good success. If you are fairly creative, you can make your own cutters to yield unique profiles. Where the plane is limited compared to the #55 or dedicated moulding planes is in how complex you can go with the cutter profiles. The plane also is not great shakes trying to do anything across the grain (though dadoes are fine if you knife the sides of the dado first to avoid chip out). It helps tremendously if the wood is fairly straight and tight grained.
Most of the guys I know who hate the plane had little patience to really learn how to best use it and didn't hone the cutters before putting them to wood. I also think they had unrealistic expectations regarding what the plane can do. That said, if your goal is complex mouldings, I think you would be better served with dedicated moulding planes as Larry has stated. Even using a variety of cutters, unless you are really skilled with the multi-plane, it is difficult to get consistent results swapping out cutters, adjusting the fence and depth gauge settings, and making multiple passes. Dedicated moulding planes require far fewer adjustments which translates into more reliable results.
Finally, you work for Woodcraft. Get yourself a copy of Planecraft. It is a cheap way for anybody to educate themselves on the capabilities of metal bodies planes.
Edited 2/6/2009 10:09 pm ET by gdblake
gd,
I have had a copy of Planecraft for a few years. I recommend it often. Great book, and will remain so for a long time.I fully agree with you on the multi-planes. Some love em, some hate em. Tony Z is going to let me borrow one of his to try out. I found a number of reputable places to buy a complete Stanley 45 for less than $250, and know one guy who has about 20 of them, all users, which are missing only things like the screwdriver, the box and the instructions. So I will surely get a multi plane in the next year, and I'll take my time with it. I keep my irons in excellent shape. Rob Cosman was in town a few months ago and said that no student had ever brought in a plane that was properly honed. I showed him my LN 5 1/2 and asked him to give it a try. He said it was properly sharpened and in excellent shape. I'll take his word for it. I will do the same for the multi plane when I get one. I am retired and am in no need to hurry with changing blades and settings, so I believe I'll do fine with it.Meanwhile, I am taking Larry's advice and getting Don's two DVDs on the subject of Hollows and Rounds. I have learned a lot from this thread. I appreciate everyone sending in their experiences with multi planes. Thank you for doing so.
MelMeasure your output in smiles per board foot.
This forum post is now archived. Commenting has been disabled