About a year ago I bought this unhandled 7 1/2″ infill smoother on eBay. It was cheap and I thought it might make a good project. <!—-><!—-><!—->
The good points were that it was dovetailed and very solid. There was no name that I could find, but inside was a stamped “5” (which might just represent the fifth plane made by the craftsman). The tapered Mathieson blade fit created a tight mouth, but before anyone considers this a possible clue to identification, the cap iron is a Ward.<!—-><!—->
On the other side the infills were in poor condition. The rear infill looked original, and I supect it is Rosewood. It was intact but a bit sorry. I though it a bit low and that it failed to support the blade properly. I did hone the blade and tried the plane out, but it did a poor job in spite of the tight mouth. Reason? The blade rocked on the bed. The front infill had been repaired with a top section of stained pine glued to a remnant of the original. All-in-all, there was no reason why I should not replace it all. <!—-><!—->
I had a beautiful chunk of Tasmanian Blackwood for just this job. <!—-><!—->
The other areas for replacement include the iron. The Mathieson is out, and in comes a 3/16″ cast steel parallel Something-or-other (it has a stamp that looks a lot like Mathieson, but instead says “Warranted” where the Mathieson name goes, and “Cast Steel” underneath). It started life at 2 1/4″ wide, and I have ground it to 2″. The lever cap was very scratched and the screw was a steel bolt. Finally, the screws pinning the infill will be replaced with brass screws and filed flush with the sides. <!—-><!—->
The question is what shape should the infill take? Should I build something traditional, or something a tad different (with an emphasis on user friendly). I like the coffin shape, but I do not see the point of the squarish rear that just does not look comfortable and, indeed, seems to encourage one to push forwards and not downwards. My thoughts run to a rounded rear for comfort, angled at 45 degrees for downforce, and a third higher to support the iron fully. I cannot alter the bed angle, as much as I would like to increase the cutting angle, since this would mean re-siting the lever cap. So it will remain at 45 degrees (and, if needs be, the iron will have a backbevel). <!—-><!—->
So what about the shape? Below is what I have in mind. There are five images. The first is the original plane. The second is another unhandled infill smoother, one that I have included as a basis for the modification. The third image is the modification. Note that it is not extreme, just a different (I have not seen one like this, but I cannot imagine why – it just seems logical). And just to show you where I am up to, the fourth image is of the fitted rear infill rear for final shaping. The fifth image is my attempt to make a knurled skew replacement for lever cap. The cap infill is Jarrah but will likely be replaced with Tasmanian Blackwood.<!—-> <!—->
Comments please.<!—-><!—->
Regards from Perth<!—-><!—->
Derek <!—-><!—->
Edited 4/3/2006 12:02 pm ET by derekcohen
Replies
Derek, interesting project.
I reckon you are on the right track-that of not going averboard with a radical makeover . If it has a handsome figured Australian wood with nice colour then a shaped form at the rear to suit the clasping hand will set it off even more. But that is the "easy" part-what of the front? I havr yet to see a Norris type that has a front tote that is either good looking or comfortable to hold. This may be Malcolm territory....
The cap has come on well, but I would make the screw as short as possible-which raises another question-why did they make them so long?
Send it over for a review when finished (;)(;)
Derek
Nice project. I've wondered once or twice about doing the same. There's a doerupper currently on the Bay (although for quite a high price).
I guess you could fit a closed tote, which would give you a much better grip, moving the pressure zone higher and further back. You could also fit a Scottish coved front bun, which wouldn't look out of place.
It's always struck me that the long iron gets in the way with these configurations. You could be really radical and fit a short iron (Terry Gordon, Ron Hock), although you might run out of mouth (but then, you could always open up the mouth).
Ultimately, what you do depends on how true to the original you want to be!
Keep us informed?
Malcolm
Basically the iron is long so the user can get a full 2-1/2" of sharpening out of it before tossing it out. They could be a little shorter (cause 2-1/2" is quite a bit), but you don't want them too short.I agree with others here Derek. You have the opportunity to do something a little more radical so I say "Go for it". Even reshape the metal sides a bit if you're able to.
Handplane Central
A further development: it turns out that this infill smoother is almost definitely made by Spiers. In fact I would go so far as to say that the evidence is very compelling.
The lever cap and toe are numbered in keeping with Spiers' planes. The lever cap is the exact same shape (front and rear) as Spier planes. And the screw pinning dates back to early Spiers planes.
The screw pinning is probably because the steel sides are not parallel (since it is coffin shaped).
So, do I shape the infill as a sign of respect to Spiers, or do I do my own thing? At the moment I am inclined to do the former. What are your thoughts?
Lastly, the parallel iron has now been identified as a Sorby.
Regards from Perth
Derek
On the question of whether to restore or customize. Why don't you do both?By that I mean do a few mockups of the traditional shape and a couple of your ideas. Stand back and look at them from different angles and see what you like the best. The fit of the parts doesn't need to be close or even put in with anything stronger than "Plasticine" or hot melt glue. The wood can be any scrap that's easy to cut and shape. A cheap coat of brown / black paint from a spray can will approximate the colour of the final version. If your still undecided, we'd be happy to vote on it if you put up pictures.Thinking of the earlier post about the comfort of the front bun got me thinking that maybe some kind of small horn might do, along the lines of a wood plane. (Could even use real horn or antler if your inclined.) I've attached a link to one but I think a bit smaller would be better.http://www.leevalley.com/wood/page.aspx?c=2&p=46935&cat=1,41182
Dont know about the horn, but that combination bed/pushing area under the iron seems to cover Derek's concerns about the useability of the traditional shape.
Dave
Very well could be a Spiers. The numbering under the infill (where it only benefits the maker) is indicative of a production plane. In my experience, most Spiers planes were made in batches of 6 (though there were larger batches as well. The numbers 1 to 6 are much more prevalent however in Spiers planes).If it were my plane, and I suspected it was a Spiers, then I would probably restore it as a Spiers. The problem though is its not my plane, its yours. Only you can make the choice of how to go about things. Sorry that's not much of an answer but I guess I'm saying that it's really up to personal tastes.By the way are you sure the infill is Brazilian rosewood?
Handplane Central
CR
I am now inclined to restore the plane in the spirit of an original Spiers. That is, retain the shape of an original Spiers infill (but continue with my intention of using Tasmanian Blackwood), and find or make a thumbscrew more in keeping with that of Spiers (not my too modern looking infill version). I am going to pin the lever cap with peened steel, but will replace the steel screws with filed brass screws (to contrast with the steel side and match the brass lever cap).
This plane is never going to be "original", and already has several replacement parts (blade, cap iron, infills), so I do not feel this is a desecration.
I would appreciate your opinions.
Regards from Perth
Derek
Australian blackwood works for me - especially if it's darker than usual. One of my ancestors used blackwood to make his planes, as did quite a few other Aussie planemakers over the years. The piece you have looks quite nice.Never been big on the contrasting screws/pins thing myself but it should look quite nice. Take care screwing the brass ones in though.
Handplane Central
Here is an update on my infill project.
Things have got a little out of hand. This is the story of discovery of a Spiers infill smoother that lurked beneath the cloak of a common craftsman-made plane. It is not yet over - hopefully this weekend (although I have said this before!).
You can read the commentary here:
http://www.wkfinetools.com/restore/inFillSmoother/index.aspThe discussion and contributions have been made on the Old Tools forum.
Below are images of (1) the original plane (2) the Spiers upon which I have modelled the renovation, and (3) the current state of play (awaiting riveting).
Regards from Perth
Derek
Its looking good, Derek. I like the long spur on the tote.
Handplane Central
I have finally finished the Spiers infill smoother. It is not a restoration, for that would suggest that I returned the plane to its original state. What I have instead done is use a little Artist's Licence to create something to which I hope Stewart Spiers would give his nod of approval. All I really had was the original Spiers dovetailed steel body and lever cap. I constructed a new level cap screw and new infills, and added a 3/16" parallel Sorby iron (reduced from 2 1/4" to 2"). The bed is 47 degrees.
Below are pictures of the original plane, a single image of the completed plane, and a combo of different angles.
Thanks for looking.
Regards from Perth
Derek
Nice!
Pretty baroque curve on that tote. Derek!
Did you say blackwood? Is there any finish on the wood?
I keep looking for a cheap fixer-upper, but they seem to go for silly prices on the Bay. Probably your fault! Everyone's looking for cheapies to restore.
Malcolmhttp://www.macpherson.co.nz
Derek, what finish have you on the wood? Is there any re-inforcing rod in the rear tote, do you think it will be strong enough across the grain there without?Philip Marcou
The finish is BLO (2 coats) then wax (initially applied with 0000 steel wool, then again with a cloth). It has a nice, silky feel. The pictures don't do justice to the Tasmanian Blackwood. It has a grain that ripples and alters colour as the wood is moved. This is lost in a still picture.
The tote does not have a reinforcing rod, but we are talking about very hard and dense Jarrah here. I really do not expect this to break in the next 100 years or so! (Based on a few other Jarrah totes and saw handles made in the past). The design I have basically followed is the one used by Spier originally.
Regards from Perth
Derek
..........."but we are talking about very dense and hard Jarrah here".
O.K, O.K, I'll take your word for it- I'm not familiar with these woods from the outback(;).
"grain that ripples and alters colour"- there is a word for that condition-CHITOYENCY-I got it from my store of useless information,can't find it in a dictionary or wordfinder, so maybe a learned Knothead can come up with the origin of this word?
Philip Marcou
P ) Pronunciation Key (sh-toint)
adj. Having a changeable luster.n. A chatoyant stone or gemstone, such as the cat's-eye.[French, present participle of chatoyer, to shimmer like cats' eyes, from chat, cat, from Vulgar Latin *cattus, perhaps of African origin.]cha·toyan·cy n.
Thanks-who said this is not the best forum?Philip Marcou
Philip
Chatoyance! Yes - I actually called it that when describing it to my wife. She thought I was calling her a rude name and hit me over the head with the rolling pin. Then I really saw chatoyance!! :)
Regards from Perth
Derek
This forum post is now archived. Commenting has been disabled