Here is another probably over analyzed question that I hope someone can provide some input on.
I’ve got a bunch of planes, and the Bedrocks especially, take a good tune and really excel. I’m curious as to whether an infill smoother, Spiers, Norris, Sheppard ect., provides any cutting advantage. Seems like the weight would make it more docile to push, but is there any improvement in the performance.
The look of an infill is spectacular, and I’d imagine that factor along would inspire better work, but the price is quite high. Is the purchase of an infill user plane justifiable on grounds of better performance though?
Steve
Replies
Steve,
Don't have any experience with infill planes, so I really can't say. Suggest you post this question over on Traditional Tools where you'll find a lot of folks who have used both.
http://host65.ipowerweb.com/~traditi2/forum/index.php
It's interesting to note that Garrett Hack, in The Handplane Book, writes "Bedrocks were the best bench planes Stanley or any of its competitors ever made." (p.47) Then, in a section titled The Ultimate Smoothing Plane, he says (speaking of Norris and other infills) "British smoothers represent the highest evolution of smoothing planes and some of the most beautiful tools ever produced." (p.167) Seems even Mr. Hack is uncertain as to which is better - sort of like having to choose between steak or lobster.
Shepherd has been running sales throughout the summer, including both their finished planes and kits.
http://www.shepherdtool.com/
If you watch Ebay, you'll find that Shepherd and others often offer their planes as "Buy Now" items at very good prices. (Not an infill, but I see that Knight has a coffin smoother there for $105 and ask $165 for it on their web site.) http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=3240397503&category=13874
As far as justifying the price of a tool purchase, my answer is yes. Find any excuse, er justification, you can dream up. (Perhaps this should be a new section of the forum, sort of a data base of reasons why we just got to have it.)
Jeff
"It's interesting to note that Garrett Hack, in The Handplane Book, writes "Bedrocks were the best bench planes Stanley or any of its competitors ever made." (p.47) Then, in a section titled The Ultimate Smoothing Plane, he says (speaking of Norris and other infills) "British smoothers represent the highest evolution of smoothing planes and some of the most beautiful tools ever produced." (p.167) Seems even Mr. Hack is uncertain as to which is better - sort of like having to choose between steak or lobster."
I think he was refering to the Bedrock being superior to any Bailey pattern planes produced by othe companies.
Steve,
You can buy kits to build an infill plane. It would cost a lot less, and be a good project. If I wasn't so busy, I might think about it myself. One guy who works with me has a Norris(I've never used it), and he really loves it. So much so in fact, he won't bring it to work. He uses my Bedrocks.
Dave,
I like the Sheperd site, with the step by step of building a smoother. Looks satisfying.
The guy you work with that has the Norris, does he complain about the functionality of the Bedrocks? I guess if I had a Norris, I'd hesitate to use it all the time too, but shish, that'd be hard to resist. Take care,
Steve
No, he doesn't complain at all. In fact, I have some standard Bailey's also, and he always grabs a Bedrock.
Jeff,
Its nice to know that Mr. Hack gives compliments to both planes. I almost got a Sheperd off Ebay about a month ago. It was a shoulder plane not a smoother, but that close encounter kind of "whet the wistle" so to speak.
Those infill kits look like they ought to be a lot of fun to put together. Wonder if anybody here has tried one.
Thanks for the link too. I'll check it out when I get a little more time. Your closing thought cracked me up, thanks. I often wonder what the cash flow for my woodworking hobby/business would look like if I ran out of "reasons" to buy new tools. Take care,
Steve
Jeff,
Thanks for your link to the Traditional Tools forum. I signed up, and was promptly treated to Ben and Doug from Shepherd Tools, sponsering a thread. They have some really good deals right now. Their new saws are creating a buzz over there too. Its great to live in the middle of nowhere, and still be able to be "plugged into" the woodworking scene that is certainly absent here.
Steve
Steve,
I've used and tuned Cliftons for the past year or so... they do an excellent job. I even beveled the back of an iron on the #3 smoother by 10 deg to get a 55 deg pitch for better smoothing on curly stuff.
I finally pulled the plug and got a Shepherd smoother from Ben Knebel a few weeks ago. I haven't had much time with it but this i can say w/o hesitation, i could never have achieved with my cliftons what this plane will do. It is SO solid and leaves a polished finish. I was concerned about the "no adjuster" feature; but as a rank novice i got .002" shavings on my third try. These are nice planes and i don't think the norris adj. is necessary. (Please note, i've never had a norris plane in my hands.)
i also have a HNT Gordon smoother that has a 60 deg. angle. This worked out of the box; i haven't had time to hone the blade; but being 60 deg. takes more effort to push through the work. A beautiful plane; but doesn't have the heft of the Shepherd.
DLWHEEL,
The Shepherd sounds good! Their prices seem fair too. I wonder what the story is on their irons. Do you know if they make them themselves? They certainly look good on the web site.
You must be taming some really unruly grain. I guess I always though of York pitch as the last resort, never even considered 60! I'm not familier with the HNT Gordon, but I'm going to go search for some info now.
Steve
Steve,
I believe that they make their own irons. I am trying out their chariot plane, and the iron is quite substantial for that sized plane.
Kyle
You know Steve , you really have to ask yourself only one question. Are you willing to part with a substantial amount of cash for something that may or may not really improve your woodworkink skills? While it may be true that these planes excell at taking super thin shavings there is alot more to working wood than measuring your plane shavings to thousands of inches. If you have a good set of planes, especially finely tuned vintage planes, learn to use them and get comfortable withh the way they perform. Your money is probably better spent on some nice boards for a special project than an expensive tool that may not really improve your skills.
jp,
I know that you're probably right, but another way to look at it might be, (thanks BG for this idea) that fine tools inspire fine work. I used to use a Shopsmith exclusively, but when I upgraded my tools a little, the limitations of the Shopsmith became apparent. I wonder if tools that are the acme of their field would give rise to the highest quality work? I suppose it depends on the user ultimately, but two people with equal skills, and one with the best tools, one with inferior tools, will not produce equal work.
I've got a great set of planes, a few more then 80 by last count, and I love using them, but no Norris, and until I try one, I'll always wonder. Of course, $1000 buys a lot of walnut doesn't it? Have a good evening,
Steve
More to think about; you may want to read Lyn Mangiameli's article on high-angle smoothers at http://www.woodcentral.com/bparticles/haspc.shtml. The testing was done on some very difficult woods, and the infills did very well.
The only thing that I have to add is that if your 80 planes does not include a Gordon smoother, you are missing out. The high bed angle does make for more effort, but this combined with the low friction of the ironwood sole gives wonderful feedback--it is my favorite plane for finish work by far, and really shines in difficult grain.
/jvs
jvs,
Thanks for the link, I'll check it out.
I did a Google for HNT Gordon smoother last night, and came up with a very Japanese looking plane. Is that what you're thinking of? I've never even been tempted to try Japanese style tools or methods, so I know nothing about them. I think more research is in order.
Steve
Not sure the design is anything but Austrailian at this point. It is similar to Japanese planes in shape, but with a shorter toe and the addition of the cross handle. The Gordon site shows both pulling and pushing; both work for me in different situations, and it is nice to be able to switch directions without moving the workpiece or foot position. Can't say enough nice things about either the smoother or try plane, so I will just shut up now....
Good luck!
/jvs
i moved toward planes because i like the polish (1/2 lb. cut shellac) and wax finish on my projects. the planes leave a different kind of smooth finish that you can feel.
I was using 400 & 600 grit sandpaper for a final finish; and it was marble smooth; but just not the same as with a plane.
I am struggling with the surface left by planes on end grain, though. i'm not satisfied with how it looks just yet. Also, i still use 400 grit to knock the edge off.
One thing about planes; it is not nearly so "dirty" and i arrive at my final surface so much more quickly.
The Gordon's are Australian; i don't use the bar on my smoother, which is Kingwood; but i'm still getting used to it.
-David
The answer to the question you posed in your last sentence is quite simply, no.
If you have a stable of bedrock planes, I'd suggest not worrying about the possibility of the grass being greener in the infill pasture.
Make something.
Edited 9/5/2003 2:32:42 PM ET by CHASSTANFORD
CHASSTANFORD,
LOL on the last line! Perhaps its just the tool nut in me being expressed to even consider more planes? Well, I better get off here and take your advice.
Steve
This forum post is now archived. Commenting has been disabled