I've recently been revamping my plane complement.
I have become a bevel-up Zealot! Many of my standard Stanley style
planes have been you know what bay'd for fresh cash for bevel ups.
This all grew out of my obtaining a second Veritas low angle block,
with optional 38 and 50 degree irons and the ball and tail kit,
creating a bevel-up #3 smoother.
Why do I like bevel up planes? I keep all of the planes set up with
a stock iron, and keep a sharp 25, 38, and 50 degree iron in a leather
pouch. Since all of my Veritas bevel-up bench planes use the same
irons, I can totally revamp a plane, with a blade from a single
wallet, in 15 seconds! I have a second wallet for the block plane
irons.
Swap the blade, set the side stops, and instantly adjust the throat
opening! Awesome results! Put it back to the "default" in only 15
seconds more! After messing with cutting angles, chip breaker
settings and frog settings, I now know why so many woodworkers keep so
many bevel down planes around, all set up and ready to for specialty
functions.
Tonight, I set up a new BU #7 jointer and #5 jack. The things cut
like butter out of the box, and even better with a 4000/8000 touch!
Why do I need my bevel down planes? Anyone care to comment?
Bonehenge (B A R R Y) wrote:
> Why do I need my bevel down planes? Anyone care to comment?
They're harder to camber (if you go for cambered irons), and due to the
lack of chipbreaker they don't spit shavings out quite as easily,
especially on the smooth planes.
However, I think I've pretty much decided that I'll be getting the
jointer and smoother to match my jack.
Chris
Lowell Holmes wrote:
> Actually, they don't need a camber as such. You can achieve the same effect
> by honing a small radius on the corners of the iron.
Not quite the same effect.
There is a school of thought (David Charlesworth, Chris Schwarz, etc.)
that uses cambered irons when edge-jointing, so that you can use the
position of the plane on the board to control how much material is being
removed on each side. You can't do this with radiused irons. (That
said, I currently use a radiused iron on my BU jack.)
Also, I'm told that if you want to set up the jack for heavy stock
removal, a blade with radiused edges will be harder to push than a
cambered blade would be since it's removing more material. I haven't
tried this myself, but it makes some sense.
Chris
On Fri, 28 Mar 2008 18:54:08 GMT, "Lowell Holmes"
<[email protected]> wrote:
> You can achieve the same effect
>by honing a small radius on the corners of the iron.
This is exactly what I do, as I haven't gotten good at cambering.
"jbd in Denver" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Chris Friesen <[email protected]> wrote in
> news:[email protected]:
>
>> Lowell Holmes wrote:
>>
>>> Actually, they don't need a camber as such. You can achieve the same
>>> effect by honing a small radius on the corners of the iron.
>>
>> Not quite the same effect.
>> Chris
>
> Yep, Chris is right... A cambered iron was traditionally standard
> practice.
> And in my opinion, is crucial to accurate plane work.
I have cambered irons on my bedrocks and my LN 4 1/2, so I know what the
camber does for you. My bedrock collection includes a 604, 605, and a 607.
I also have a nice 5 1/2 Bailey that doesn't get used much these days.
The radius on the corners allows you to smooth with the BU plane.
It does not have the same effect as the camber on the 607 for planing a
square edge. The BU jack plane does a better job on squaring a board. It
also does a great job when flattening a board.
I stand by my previous post. :-)
Chris Friesen <[email protected]> wrote in
news:[email protected]:
> Lowell Holmes wrote:
>
>> Actually, they don't need a camber as such. You can achieve the same
>> effect by honing a small radius on the corners of the iron.
>
> Not quite the same effect.
> Chris
Yep, Chris is right... A cambered iron was traditionally standard practice.
And in my opinion, is crucial to accurate plane work.
- jbd
--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com
Chris Friesen wrote:
>
>
> They're harder to camber (if you go for cambered irons),
I can see that.
> and due to the
> lack of chipbreaker they don't spit shavings out quite as easily,
> especially on the smooth planes.
I haven't seen evidence to support that in my use. So far, I find that
my BU smoother jams up less than my LN chip breaker equipped Stanley,
and my Veritas #4-1/2 bevel down plane. I figured this was because
there is so much room around the blade.
"B A R R Y" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Chris Friesen wrote:
>>
>>
>> They're harder to camber (if you go for cambered irons),
>
>SNIP
Actually, they don't need a camber as such. You can achieve the same effect
by honing a small radius on the corners of the iron. It takes about 5
minutes and you can smooth with no tracks. My LN 4 1/2 is cambered, so I
know what the purpose is.
Place a 3/4" thick board next to a stone that is vertical on its side. Place
the iron on the board with the corner of the bevel against the stone and
about 5 or 6 swipes per corner will do the job. I did this on my Veritas BU
jack 38 degree iron. I didn't corner the 25 nor the 50 degree irons. The BU
jack will smooth as good as the 4 1/2 and it does a fairly good job of
jointing. I have produced rub glue joints with it. :-)