Replies

1. 
   RLMillard | Jul 24, 2002 12:58am | #1

   I do not have any experience with the Veritas or Clifton Planes. I do own a LN No. 4 ½ with the 50-degree frog, which is an outstanding tool. It will plane the toughest of woods without any tearout. I have attached a photo taken of some shavings from that plane. These were planed off an inlaid sideboard leg, (note the sand shaded bellflower) as you can see it did an excellent job. This is normally a job that you would resort to a scraper for, but a plane is always better.

   Despite its high cost, you can’t go wrong with the LN No. 4 ½, with the 50-Degree frog, which is the key to its performance

   
1. 
   JKuszewski | Jul 26, 2002 10:09pm | #14

   I have the L-N 4.5 with the 45degree frog. How much difference

   do you see when switching to the 50degree? Is it worth the $75?

   Any disadvantages to switching (like, is it significantly harder

   to push?)

   And regarding the original question, I originally bought a Clifton

   #4. It arrived in surprisingly poor fettle: The sole was bowed

   up more than a millimeter, and for some reason, the iron had so

   much side-to-side play in it that it took two people to adjust the

   depth--one to hold the iron in place, and the other to set the lever

   cap. The people I bought it from (earlier this year) said that

   they'd noticed Clifton's latest batch had had problems. I returned

   it and bought the L-N 4.5. Maybe I got unlucky, but I'll never bother

   with Clifton again.

1. 
   RLMillard | Jul 26, 2002 11:42pm | #15

   JJK

   I can’t say if there are any differences between the 4 ½ with the high angle or without, as it relates to how hard it is to push, since I have only used the high angle frog version. I can say that I am completely sold on the idea of a higher pitch. I know from my own use that a higher pitch with all other things being equal (sharpness, flatness, and secure bedding etc.) results in much less tearout or will eliminate it altogether. I think you could approximate this without having to purchase a new frog, by giving your current iron a 5-degree back bevel, which in effect raises the bed angle to 50 degrees. You will have to grind your primary bevel at 5 degrees lower than normal to offset this back bevel. I have done this to my standard Bailey planes for quite some time, with excellent results.

2. 
   jeffn7 | Jul 24, 2002 02:17am | #2

   LN mfgs to tighter tolerances than clifton or veritas... for what that's worth. All of these planes are top shelf, and all will produce great results and last a lifetime (several). The differences among the 3 fall are subject to the law of diminishing returns. My preference is the veritas line, great hand tools at a value prices.

3. 
   harpsami | Jul 24, 2002 04:15am | #3

   Virtually any plane can be made to perform well, it is really just a matter of how much work you are willing to put in to get it up to snuff. I've given a couple of demos in the last month on plane prep and we've gotten some pretty sorry examples to cut nicely. Of the three you mention, I think that the LN planes come with the highest degree of fit and finish. I own a couple of Records and an old Clifton or two but they took a lot of work, lapping, frog seating, etc. before I was happy with the way they functioned. I had to sweat the LN too but it didn't take as long. Any of the brands you mentioned will do fine if you've got the time.

   There is a great book called "Planecraft" you might want to look into. It is an encyclopedic discourse on the use and care of planes. I think that it was originally published by Record in the 40's-50's but it has all the info you could want. "Sharpening" by Mr. Lee of Lee Valley tools is another great book on figuring bedding angles and tuning planes up.

4. 
   Danford_C_ | Jul 24, 2002 05:20am | #4

   Rand,

   FWIW, here's a link to a "review" I did on Clifton's #4 a little over a year ago on this forum:  http://forums.taunton.com/n/find/findRedir.asp?webtag=tp-knots&mg=EB559BEF-593C-4F44-9458-55BBAEA7EA49

   Dano

   "Form and Function are One" - Frank L. Wright
1. 
   eddiefromAustralia | Jul 24, 2002 03:06pm | #5

   Hi Dano/Harpsami,

   Followed the thread that you posted.  A lot of very good information.

   I have a LN copy of the Stanley 62 - excellent plane and far superior to alot of the Stanleys that I have owned.  But, once tuned, the Stanley planes improved somewhat, but alot of time taken in the tuning that would not pay for itself if I was charging hourly rates. Agree with the content of your post, Harpami - I am also trained to polish metal to optical flatness.

   As a question, Dano, from your experience, do you agree with the earlier statement that: "the differences among the 3 [Clifton, Lee-Nielsen, Veritas] are subject to the law of diminishing returns."

   Regards,

   Eddie

   Edited 7/24/2002 8:08:51 AM ET by eddie

1. 
   Danford_C_ | Jul 24, 2002 04:43pm | #6

   Eddie,

   In a word; no.  I don't view tools as "investments".

   But, once tuned, the Stanley planes improved somewhat, but alot (sic) of time taken in the tuning that would not pay for itself if I was charging hourly rates.

   The above statement by you does confuse me, though.  In my mind the initial fettling of a hand plane is the equivalent to setting up a new table saw or other piece of new equipment, are you saying that you would charge your clients for assembly time?

   Dano"Form and Function are One" - Frank L. Wright

1. 
   eddiefromAustralia | Jul 24, 2002 05:07pm | #7

   Hi Dano,

   You may have misinterpreted my previous post.  Sorry for confusion - I can see how you read things the way you did - not my intention

   Let me try again:

   Did you find any noticeable difference in the operation of the 3 listed higher quality planes - or were they much of a muchness?

   With regards to charging for setup time- of course not - all I was saying is that some newer planes take ages to fettle.

   I recently had to take a 2mm toe-to-heel bow, from the base of a No7 jointer, with the mouth being the highest point of the bow.  This took a few hours.  Towards the end, I was feeling that my money would have been better spent on a higher quality plane instead of wasting the time on this much fettling.  That's all I was saying. 

   Anyway, look forward to hearing your impressions of the performance difference between the three planes.

   Eddie

1. 
   Danford_C_ | Jul 24, 2002 06:02pm | #8

   Eddie,

   Ah......Thanks for the clarification.

   As to the question about "performance".  Again, in a word; no.  Though I confess to not having tried the Vertias but, I doubt that it would be any different.

   Over the years, I've consumed considerable bandwidth here on this subject and in the above link I provided you will note that I again touched on "performance" in that discussion.  In one of my postings within that discussion I went into cutting geometry of planes and the various pitches (Common, York, and Middle).

   In short, it is the person that is behind the tool that makes the difference, not the tool itself.  There is not a man alive or dead that can discern whether a craftsman used a Stanley or a Lie-Nielsen on a piece.

   There is no doubt in my mind that L-N planes are fine tools but, in my experience they "perform" no better than my Stanleys or Clifton.  Personally, I can't justify their cost for the same end result.

   I am always amused by the "mystique" that seems to be perpetuated here surrounding the use of handplanes, they are very basic tools and one of the first tools that a student or apprentice learns to use.  Used to be that dimensioning stock by hand was "grunt" work performed by a newly "hired" apprentice.

   Dano

   "Form and Function are One" - Frank L. Wright

2. 
   Purds | Jul 25, 2002 08:19am | #9

   "I am always amused by the "mystique" that seems to be perpetuated here surrounding the use of handplanes, they are very basic tools and one of the first tools that a student or apprentice learns to use.  Used to be that dimensioning stock by hand was "grunt" work performed by a newly "hired" apprentice."

   Dano:

   I think the fascination with hand planes precisely stems from the fact that the skill of hand planing "used to be" done by apprentices, and many of us on this board have never been apprentices.

   Look at it this way: New tablesaws are not that hard to tune and use (also true of many other power tools) but hand planes are a mystery to many novices/beginners, including me. I tuned my sole hand plane using an AWW article, and the thing cut very nicely once set up. I was pretty full of myself, especially after getting compliments from a buddy who can't seem to tune his sole hand plane at all.

   However, my plane is itself a piece of junk ($15 sears gift), and after just a few uses the paper-thin blade developed two nicks from edge work on pine! So, obviously, I need to jump up to a real plane, but now which plane? Oodles of choices (both makers and types), and I am not sure what I will need it most for--the pine was a window trim in a new office I build from one side of a two-car garage, and I needed to shave an uneven amount off one end of a board for the window casing. But, for the next plane use, who knows...I see Bailey/Stanley #5's at a flea market every weekend for $40, but would that be a good start or not? I am trying to read up to determine, but I think the heart of the questions here are should one buy at $150-plus hand plane or not (or a $250-plus one). Or, should I just buy a good blade for the sears?

   Purds

3. 
   BenM | Jul 25, 2002 02:38pm | #10

   Since you already know how to tune a plane, get a flea market Bailey.  With the $100+ saved buy a new Hock blade (there are other brands as well) and the combo will be as good as the $300 planes.  The advantage of an L-N or Clifton is that they work right out of the box with almost no tuning required.

4. 
   Danford_C_ | Jul 25, 2002 05:16pm | #11

   Purds,

   First, let me make clear that I was not knocking those who do not know how to use hand planes or are novice to their use.  My comments were in regard to those who do use them but seem to think that one has to use a Lie-Nielsen or Clifton in order to get any satisfaction at all.  They go on and on about their planes but offer no help what so ever in how to fettle, set up, and use a plane.  Sort of a "holier than thou" kind of attitude; if you catch my drift...This leaves the wrong impression about a very basic skill and a lot of folks won't even attempt to develop this skill as a result.

   There was a fella a couple of years ago that posted that he acquired one of his grandfathers Stanleys and wanted information on it and it's use.  To make a long story short he e-mailed me with some more questions and I ended up "teaching" him how to fettle and how to use it via a few e-mails.  Last I heard he has a several bench and specialty planes and they are now apart of his regular operations.  So, the point I was trying to make is that they are not difficult at all to use.

   Any who, in regards to your Sears; perhaps all it needs is an iron.  Stanley was the OEM at one time.  Pre War Stanleys, Keen Kutters, Miller Falls, are all good planes.  As to which type of plane first, I would recommend a #5 jack and a regular angle block plane with adjustable mouth.

   The #5 is truly the "jack of all planes", set up with a straight bezel with slightly radiused corners it can be used as a smoother, a jointer on shorter stock, for light thicknessing, and shooting....very versatile.  I suggest the regular angle block for it's flexibility as well.  It can be used on end grain and by simply honing the iron at 30° a higher angle of attack is achieved and makes it ideal for face grain touch up and trimming, I reach for my regular angle block far more often than the low angle block.

   Personally, I prefer Pre War Stanleys and that's what nearly all of my planes are.  What one chooses to buy is really their own decision to make.  If you read the discussion that I provided the link to you will find that I purchased the Clifton primarily out of curiosity, not out of need.  If you are thinking of getting a Clifton or L-N thinking that you will get better results, you won't.  Out of all the tools that we use in our trade, hand tools are the most "personal", IMHO, and the motivating factors that prompts a buying decision of one brand over another reflects that.  Bear in mind that Clifton and Lie-Nielsen have based all their planes on Stanleys' Bailey and/or Bedrock design, this includes the cutting geometry.  The exceptions would be the L-N #4 1/2 in that the frog is available in both a York and Middle pitch and their #140 skew block which has a fence unlike the Stanley #140.

   If I were forced to make a recommendation to you, it would be to replace the iron first with a Stanley iron (by the way what number is the Sears?) or to bump around in some antique shops and get yourself a Stanley #5 and a #9 1/2 block (regular angle w/adj mouth).  In the meantime here's a link that I think you'll find most interesting:  http://www.supertool.com/StanleyBG/stan0.htm

   Dano

   "Form and Function are One" - Frank L. Wright

   Edited 7/25/2002 10:20:53 AM ET by Danford C. Jennings

2. 
   jeffn7 | Jul 26, 2002 06:01am | #13

   Danford,

   to further clarify, my comment about "diminishing returns" was simply an attempt to say that the differences among these planes are minimal in their out-of-the-box form, and in the hands of someone who knows how to use them, the quality of the work product would be very close.

5. 
   IronDog | Jul 26, 2002 03:34am | #12

   Rand,

   I love the veritas planes.

   Simple as that. I have posted on it before.

   I have LN but no Clifton.

   To me the Veritas are a great value, very well engineered and innovative to boot.

   Good Luck in your decision.

   tom