Does any one has any opinion about the Lie-Nelsen No. 8 and No. 7 jointer plane. I am deciding between a No. 7 with york pitch frog and the heavier No. 8. Presently I have a Record No. 7 and Record No. 8 jointer plane. Both planes are fitted with better blades, a Clifton and a L-N replacement respectively. Both planes work well when I use it for edge jointing and also for flattening stock of wood after using a scrub plane. I am at this stage where I would like to get a better quality plane and I recon that L-N No. 7 and No. 8 would be a suitable choice. What I have in mine is a L-N No. 51/2 with york pitch frog and either a No. 7 with york pitch or a No. 8. Would appreciate some suggestions. Also anyone with an idea or comment on a fore plane (No. 6)? Thanks
Epo
Replies
Epo
I've been working with the L-N#7 for quite some time now, having upgraded from a Stanley #7. You don't mention what types of stock you're working with, so it's kinda hard to advise re the suitability of the York pitch frog with the #7. Personally, I've used mine on some fairly wild stuff, and it's coped admirably with just the standard pitch frog. One upgrade that I can't recommend highly enough it their improved chip breaker; it makes a hellova difference. I do have the York pitch frog, but to date I've used it almost exclusively in my #4 1/2 smoother. When I bought them, my thinking was that I could use the York pitch in the #7 as and when required, but what I've found is that its combination of mass, blade stiffness and excellent blade support let it plough through the most stubborn figure, figure that my Stanley #7 would simply bounce off of..
Still, if you're getting the #5 1/2 too, that option's always open to you; changing the frogs doesn't take much more than 5 minutes. One thing I can guarantee... you won't be disappointed with either of them....
Mike Wallace
Stay safe....Have fun
Thanks to Alan & Mike for your comments.
At least I'll have some assurance that the L-N No. 7 would be an improvement to the Stanley No.7 . As for the type of work and wood I use: so far all my works are done by hand tools save for using a power chop saw. I've been building carcass and boxes with dovetails joints. The wood I use are recycled wood ( Mainly from thrown away furnitures and also from old houses) . They are mainly tropical hard wood such as Teak, Ramin, Kapor and other commonly used in the Far East ( Malaysia & Singapore). I also find reclcyed Pine wood from broken furnitures. Recently, I got hold of a lot of fairly wild grain Ash wood from doors from a certain hotel. It find it a bit harder going working with my Stanley No. 7 but the Record No. 8 seem better due to the mass. Also I find I get a still get tear out when I smoothen it with My L-N 4 1/2 with high pitch frog. I find that I had to set this smoother to a fine cut in order to avoid tear out.
Just another question. I actually has bought a 45 degree spare frog when I bought My L-N 4 1/2. If I remembered correctly, there is no extra charges if I get the high pitch frog for the L-N No. 7. Should I get a L-N No. 7 with a standard or high pitch frog in my case?
Epo
You'll need to check with LN, but if I recall correctly, the frogs on the No. 7 and the 4.5 are fully interchangable.Alan
http://www.alanturnerfurnituremaker.com
Epo...
I'm not gonna tell you that the York pitch frog is a bad thing; god knows it's transformed the finish quality of my work... but I canna help feeling that with a #7, you really won't need it. The only time I've seen it in trouble was when grain switches direction; the simple cure being to turn the board around to compensate. Committing yourself to a high angle jointer is almost guaranteed to give you fore-arms like Popeye; the standard frog gives a pretty good workout, the additional 5 deg will create the workout from hell... Unless you're planning to work almost exclusively with grain that has a reputation for being wild, I reckon the one you have will be enough; simply rotate it into any compatible plane as / when required. Better to set the throats as fine as possible, experiment with blade camber and ensure all your planes have the improved chip-breakers; satisfaction guaranteed...Mike Wallace
Stay safe....Have fun
My reaction to your questions is that a No. 7, at 2 3/8" blade width, is a better choice in terms of sharpening jigs. I would shy away from the york pitch as it will increase the effort required to push it, and if you need the higher pitch, it can be achieved with a very slight back bevel. I have the 607, from the 20's, and it has the 45 deg. frog, of course, and I have not had trouble with it.
Alan
http://www.alanturnerfurnituremaker.com
Well one factor is if you get the 7 with a york pitch, later you can get other LNs that can use the same frog (4.5 or 5.5 jack planes that you order with the regular pitch) switching as the demand calls for.
Ive got a LN 7 and find it useful. In my experience, the 1/4 inch blade width increase and the extra length wouldnt be that noticable.
epo,
At last you've heard the voice of reason. Mike has it right: there's small chance you will need a york pitch on your jointer. With a good sharp iron, light cuts, and a little (and I really mean a little) skill you'll wonder why you ever considered it.
My only jointer is a Record. I spent some time tuning it and I got a Clifton iron and back iron. It has yet to fail me in any job whatever. The after-market parts made it markedly better, but even with its standard equipment it never failed me--and yes, I plane mean, nasty, ugly wood with it (for you Arlo fans).
What a delightful choice you have! You apparently can afford any Lie-Nielsen you choose. I would say to get either the #7 or #8, and don't spend real money on any bells and whistles unless and until you really, truly need them.
Alan
Thanks very much for all the comments. I will probably settle for a L-N No.7 with a regular frog or may be a No.8 in this case. I am aware that these tools can make wooking with wood easier than the regular tools but it still can't really replace the skill needed to use them to get better result on the work. Will be working with my tuned No. 7 and No. 8 a little longer before I move to the L-N replacement. Thanks
Epo
So, where's "the 8X10 color glossy with the circles and arrows on the back of each one....."
napie,
All twenty-seven 8"x10" color glossy photographs with the circles and arrows and a paragraph on the back of each one explaining what each one was to be used as evidence against us are still with Officer Obie.
How was that for not going and listening to it?
Alan
Man that was good! I use that line in a lot of business meetings and it is so funny to see the under 30's blank stare, then some old guy like me starts to laugh. Guess I belong on the group "W" bench.
And remember, justice is blind.
napie,
I don't think I belong on the group w bench--even though they were having fun playing with the pencils, and even though I got good and drunk the night before because I wanted to look and feel my best...
The under-thirties haven't a clue. I feel sorry for them, even though I'm so old I heard Arlo do that song at the Ash Grove in Hollywood. Man, does that date me!
Alan
"I was brung down, hung down, hung up and all kinds of mean nasty ugly things sittin' there on the group w bench...."
About ten years ago I sat only 6' away from Arlo as he sang to a tiny roomfull of people the old fav's including an updated version of the story of Alice, her husband Ray, and Fatcha the dog. God what a memorable eve that was.
I remember my dad saying something to ME about under 30’s being clueless a couple of decades ago….. My God, I’m my father!!!!
At our age, we all belong on the group “W” bench. Hey, that may just be a great political slogan this year….??? Just looking forward to a “Thanksgiving dinner that can’t be beat”.
napie,
If my rememberer isn't out of order, it was Mark Twain who said: "When I was fourteen I was embarrassed by my father's stupidity; when I was twenty-one I was amazed at what he'd learned in seven years."
I saw Arlo several times in the late '80s and early '90s. He was working on an updated Restaurant and I got to hear a few versions of it; he also did some limited updates on the old version to incorporate his observations of RR. Great stuff.
When I was in graduate school I loved seeing Arlo, and others, in all the smallish clubs that are sprinkled around Southern California. But I cherish the memory of seeing Arlo and Pete Seeger together at the Greek Theater. Classic stuff.
Alan
Good morning America, how are you?
I think I can still play it on my box - but I sure can't sing it anymore._________________________________
Michael in San Jose
"In all affairs it's a healthy thing now and then to hang a question mark on the things you have long taken for granted." Bertrand Russell
Michael,
Ah, yes. Steve Goodman's classic as sung by Arlo--and everybody else. Each of the little (on talent) folksy-bluesy groups I played with did that song at one time or another. It was a great rehearsal piece because everyone knew how it's supposed to go.
Right now I'm surrounded by four of my five git-fiddles ('guitars' for the uninitiated) my mountain dulcimer, quite a few harmonicas, a couple tambourines, tin whistles... It's a sad reminder:
Six or seven years ago I was walking home from the grocery, stubbed my toe on a piece of sidewalk that had heaved up, and took a flier. In the words of the ER doctor, I splintered my left wrist. I haven't yet been able to recover quite enough mobility to be able to play much--but I keep plugging away at it.
Alas.
If someday I'm convinced I'll never be able to play again, does anyone want to buy my Larivee'? It's a great axe.
Alan
Sorry to hear about your wrist.
I am a self taught Travis style picker and feel really good when I can pick up a sound, even simple stuff._________________________________
Michael in San Jose
"In all affairs it's a healthy thing now and then to hang a question mark on the things you have long taken for granted." Bertrand Russell
I agree with s4s. The blade for the #7 is exactly the same as the #41/2 and #51/2. If you get the #7, you could do the occasional sharpening session on all your cutters. If the blade you're working with goes dull, you can pop in a fresh one without breaking stride.
I agree. A L-N No. 7 will be my choice since the blade is the same with the No. 4 half and No. 5 half.
One more question to all. Would it be better to have one with "corrugated sole". Would there be any added advantage? Any one with experience working with plane with corrugated sole?
Epo
Epo..
If you've been doing the prep work on the board with hand tools, strictly speaking you shouldn't need a corrigated sole, the corrigations should be in the board already.
Let me explain...Starting with a rough sawn board, the ideal tool for initial prep (as I've recently discovered) is a proper scrub plane. It'll cut through the mill marks in no time and allow rapid stock removal to cut down the worst of any irregularities. The scrub will leave deep scallop shaped marks on the board; the ideal surface for a course set jack with a medium camber on the blade. Use this to start to flatten the board, working both along and across the grain, checking with winding sticks for twist as you go, gradually cutting down any high areas. Next... hit it with the jointer. Ideally, the blade should have a very fine camber. It'll ride the small ridges left by the jack plane, gradually cutting them down to leave a flat twist free board, with minor irregularities in the surface... best dealt with using your smoother....Mike Wallace
Stay safe....Have fun
Epo,
I am by no means a plane expert but, from what I understand, having a corrugated sole has two potential advantages.
1) When lapping the sole to make it truly flat (there is much debate about how flat is flat enough), with a corrugated sole, you will have less material to remove, making lapping easier. This is likely not to matter too much with Lie-Nielsen because the plane will likely be very flat already (again, I'll leave the 'how flat is flat' debate to others).
2) With a corrugated sole, there is less friction pushing it along the stock. As one poster above mentioned, if you're flattening with a scrub, then jack, then jointer, you will have tiny ridges/valleys for the plane to ride on (or, at least, I think that was his point, sorry if I'm misquoting). In any event, if the sole of the plane is lubricated, friction should not, at least in my experience, be much of a problem.
So, if you're a fanatic for fettling and use feeler guages to determine the flatness of your plane from head to toe, maybe a corrugated sole will help you get where you want to go faster. Other than that, there is probably not that much practical value to a corrugated sole IMHO.
Matt
Thanks, for the points on corrugated sole.
I just want to try give my Stanley No. 7 and my Record No. 8 another go in tuning before I go ahead with getting the L-N tools. So far I have a Clifton replacement blade for my No. 7 and a L-N A2 eplacement blade for my No. 8. I am going to reflatten the soles from the 2 jointers.
Can anyone with the experience and opportunity to use a tuned Stanley or Record jointer and a L-N No. 7 or No. 8. How much different would a tuned jointer compared to a L-N no. 7? Would appreciate if some one can share his experience. Thanks
Oep
epo,
How dare you hijack our hijack!
But seriously folks...
As I think I said several posts ago, my only jointer choice at home is my Record #7; but I have played with Lie-Nielsens at a friends' house and at shows and shops.
In my very limited experience those Lie-Nieson jointers were clearly superior to my Record, even with its Clifton iron and back iron. No contest: the L-N is a better.
But of course everyone already knows a LN is a better plane than a Record or recent vintage Stanley. That's not the issue. It seems to me the real question is: "are the Lie-Nielsen planes superior enough to justify the price difference."
Sorry. I cannot answer that question. I have no idea what the value of a Lie-Nielsen jointer is To You. That, after all, is what you're asking. But in the end you're the only one who can answer.
I can give my answer as it pertains to me: its value to me is not so much greater than the value of my Record to justify the difference in price. Or to put it more coarsely: a LN is worth more to me, but not three-hundred dollars more!
But again, you're the only one that can answer the question as it applies to you.
Alan
Thanks Alan,
You are right the L-N No. 7 is costly and better than a tuned Record or Stanley no. 7 jointer. In other words a L-N no. 7 is a better tool. How much better on a scale of 1 to 10. If it is 9 to 1 then it probably easier to make a decision.
Any way, I in the process of flattening the sole of my Stanley No. 7. Still quite a long way to go. I discovered the area behind the mouth is higher then the front.
If any of you have any other opinions or experience with the L-N jointer planes or other made plane, I am ready to learn more.
Epo
I am going out on a limb on this one and was going to stay out of it. I own a Bedrock 607 jointer and a Bailey #8C. I'd love to sell them both and buy a Lie Nielsen but I don;t really need a LN to flatten a panel. It is not that critical and even if you flatten that panel it will move or change its dimensions with moisture absorption and loss.
I have flattened so many panels dead flat ony to come back the following morning and find it moved 1/64" which is well within the tolerances of my Bedrock and Bailey jointer anyhow.
Real wood moves so flattening the sole on a jointer is a moot point as far as I am concerned unless you really enjoy flattening soles ( I do flatten the soles on my planes but do it for my own satisfaction of fettling).
Personally, I'd put my money towards a good smoother that allows me to skip the sanding stage like a LN 4 1/2 or 5 1/2
Ducking and Running,
Dan Clermont in Burnaby
how much better is a real difficult question to answer; as "better" is such a subjective term...Talking purely from my own experience, I've found that the quality of my workmanship has improved in leaps and bounds, primarily through the ability to trust the tool. Irrespective of the species I'm working on, I've yet to see the L-N #7 fail to perform... the few times I've seen it chatter have been through continuing to work beyond the point where the blade needs to be re-honed; my fault, not the tools. Similarly with tear-out... I haven't noticed that the grain has switched direction; my fault, not the tools. Being able to trust the tools ability to cope lets me focus entirely on the job... something I never had when working with the Stanley. In order to qualify that, I'd best say that although I had tuned and flattened the Stanley, I didn't bother upgrading the blade; by the time I'd had enough of it simply bouncing off difficult grain, I figured there was no sense in throwing more good money after bed. Better to cut my losses and buy from a manufacturer I already had faith in. I've frequently repeated that decision, and although it's been expensive, I've yet to regret it. The differences between the two are (to my mind) pretty stark... ductile iron ensuring long term survivability, really comfortable wooden handles rather than phenolic blister generators, a bedrock frog rather than standard Bailey, an adjuster with minimal backlash rather than twirl the knob for a week before the blade thinks about moving, a serious chunk of A2 cryo hardened fighting steel, a lifetime guarantee and last, but by no means least, a tool that's capable of getting the job done straight outa the box. My one regret... simply that I didn't buy it in the first place.Mike Wallace
Stay safe....Have fun
This forum post is now archived. Commenting has been disabled