I recently bought a Stanley #151 spoke shave, but it is missing the
blade and the cap iron. Anyone have suggestions for finding
replacements? (An unscrupulous eBayer sold it as being in "excellent
condition"; photo was poor and I didn't think to ask about all the
parts being there![&@#%&!] I'm in negotiations, but in case I choose
to keep it I'd like to fix it.)
Dan
[email protected] (Dan Cullimore) wrote in message news:<[email protected]>...
> I recently bought a Stanley #151 spoke shave, but it is missing the
> blade and the cap iron. Anyone have suggestions for finding
> replacements?
You might want to try calling Lori in Parts at Stanley Works at
800-262-2161. (I don't know if that number is still current, but it's
the last one I've got.) She tends to go above-and-beyond in getting
parts to needy galoots.
Chuck Vance
"J G" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:<[email protected]>...
> I am but a humble deciple of the ways of the NeaderDude
Modest to a fault. :-) In case some others following this thread
don't know it, JG is none other than Johnny Spokeshave. He used to
travel the country holding workshops for building your own wooden
spokeshave. He worked with Ron Hock to design irons for the things,
and he even sent me (free) my first spokeshave kit.
> > Why do you say that?
>
> Because they simplay kick ass. There is no way, NO WAY you are going to get
> the same quality cut from a "stanley type"spokeshave as you would from a
> traditional low-angle spokeshave especially on endgrain.
Listen to what he is saying. I thought my old #53 was pretty good
until I made my own wooden low-angle. Then LV came out with their
metal low-angle and because of the flexibility you have in setting the
thing up, it functions even better than my wooden shaves. (It's not
as pretty, but now they have a kit so you can make your own body to go
with their iron.)
Chuck Vance
Just say (tmPL) Shaves -- they're not just for spokes anymore.
[email protected] (Dan Cullimore) wrote in message news:<[email protected]>...
> Andy: Could you identify the issue, (or especially anything about
> tuning up this "rubbish")?
The #151 just isn't a high quality piece. The main problem is poor fit
between the mouth and cap iron, so there's a lack of rigidity in
holding the iron (do shaves have blades or irons ?) and that leads to
chatter. I've never seen the point in the knuckle-ripper screws
either. I adjust them by laying them face down on a sheet or two of
paper and gauging depth by finger pressure on the back of the iron.
The irons are also poor. A new Hock is a good idea here (or they're
not a bad place to learn blade making and heat treatment)
There are several things to do with a #151:
- Throw it away. Like many people, I've collected loads of this
pattern but never use them. I much prefer the #63 / #64 Stanley
spokeshaves (flat and curved base). These are smaller (sometimes
described as the "child's model") but they also have a simpler design
that's less affected by lack of rigidity. I also like wooden
spokeshaves, because of the different geometry, and this includes the
modern Lee Valley version. I've also got an old #53 - don't know much
about these, haven't really used it yet - but it looks promising.
- Get a decent one. The things are only a few bucks on eBay. It's
really just not worth chasing after fixing a bad one. I also have
examples with the commonplace broken handles. Although I have welded
them to repair them, this is definitely as cast-iron welding practice,
not as an economically sensible repair. I just want to improve my
skills for fixing all those #10s 8-)
- Fix it. The Brian Boggs' piece made me laugh - he basically throws
away everything except the handle and the clamp screw, and he reworks
the handles pretty extensively. I'm sure it's a good tool when he's
done, but it surely has to be easier to get a decent #151 pattern one
from Lee Valley.
> I'd like to read the piece. I'm
> considering Tom's suggestion about a Hock blade, but I'd like to get
> (or make) a cap iron.
Making a cap iron is very simple metalworking. The article described
using a woodworking bandsaw for cutting out brass. Personally I'd not
do that - hacksawing by hand is less work than cleaning brass chips
out of my woodworking kit.
The only complex part was using epoxy to build up the bed of the main
body part. Those who shoot target rifles will be familiar with this
process.
On 22 Jun 2004 21:54:00 -0700, [email protected] (Dan Cullimore)
wrote:
>I recently bought a Stanley #151 spoke shave, but it is missing the
>blade and the cap iron. Anyone have suggestions for finding
>replacements?
A #151 is rubbish anyway, As described in Fine Woodworking a while
back, the blades won't hold an edge and the cap iron isn't accurate
enough to hold it down well. Brian Boggs described how to improve the
mouth and bedding with epoxy, then make a brass cap iron.
But this is clearly the seller's fault, so have them take it back and
give you a full refund. Mis-descriptions are one thing, but half of it
missing is quite another.
It may be rubbish, but there's been a lot of chairs made using them (and
blue handled Marples chisels too).
Just keep your tools sharp and work the wood.
FWIW, I'd send the junk back to the ebay seller and buy a complete spoke
shave.
"Andy Dingley" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> [email protected] (Dan Cullimore) wrote in message
news:<[email protected]>...
>
> > Andy: Could you identify the issue, (or especially anything about
> > tuning up this "rubbish")?
>
>snip
On Wed, 23 Jun 2004 23:37:30 +0100, Andy Dingley <[email protected]> wrote:
>A #151 is rubbish anyway, As described in Fine Woodworking a while
>back, the blades won't hold an edge and the cap iron isn't accurate
>enough to hold it down well. Brian Boggs described how to improve the
>mouth and bedding with epoxy, then make a brass cap iron.
>
<snip>
That sounds interesting. Is it in a book, web page, or a message in the archives? Give me a hint as where to start looking?
Tom Veatch
Wichita, KS USA
"patriarch [email protected]>" <<patriarch> wrote in message
> My question was, perhaps unclear. If you were to recommend a 'starter
> shave' of the LV group, what would it be, and why?
The metal bodied low angle shave, because it comes out of the box, just
about perfectly suitible for the task
> BTW, your plans for a spokeshave are squirreled away on my hard drive
> somewhere, for a future winter evenings' project. You can always use one
> more good one, right?
Need any blades?
I just happened to find 4 "new old stock" second generation, Cryo treated
Hock spokeshave irons whilst a box this afternoon.
I just know there is another dozen I lost years ago that is going to turn
up..... someday. sure wish I could find them, they weren't cheap!-(
--
J G (knuckle dragger)
> I still think the best deal for a 'new spokeshave user' is to get one (or
> more) from Lee Valley. No fiddling. Just clean off the protective goop,
> hone the blade, and go. Oh, and you can trust the seller.
just be sure it is the low angle one. Or better yet the wooken kit.
--
J G
(thewoodworkerformerlyknownhereasspokehave)
[email protected] (Dan Cullimore) wrote in
news:[email protected]:
> I recently bought a Stanley #151 spoke shave, but it is missing the
> blade and the cap iron. Anyone have suggestions for finding
> replacements? (An unscrupulous eBayer sold it as being in "excellent
> condition"; photo was poor and I didn't think to ask about all the
> parts being there![&@#%&!] I'm in negotiations, but in case I choose
> to keep it I'd like to fix it.)
>
> Dan
Pete Niederberger, [email protected], lotsa everything in Neander tools.
Patrick Leach, [email protected], www.supertool.com, everything Stanley,
and lots of everything else.
I've worked with both of these folks. They both have excellent
reputations.
Have fun with the shave!
Patriarch,
no affiliation, etc.....
"AArDvarK" <[email protected]> wrote in news:XbLCc.830$9j.753@fed1read01:
>
> Did you find out if they have an improved lever cap for it?
> And what are all the parts you ordered?
>
> Reason I ask is I have a resource for a #51 and a #151 for cheap.
>
> Alex
>
>
>
I still think the best deal for a 'new spokeshave user' is to get one (or
more) from Lee Valley. No fiddling. Just clean off the protective goop,
hone the blade, and go. Oh, and you can trust the seller.
Unless what you really want to do is restore an old tool...
Patriarch
"J G" <[email protected]> wrote in
news:[email protected]:
<snippage>
> just be sure it is the low angle one. Or better yet the wooken kit.
>
> --
> J G
> (thewoodworkerformerlyknownhereasspokehave)
I'm willing to learn from a master. Why do you say that?
Patriarch
"J G" <[email protected]> wrote in
news:[email protected]:
>
> "patriarch [email protected]>" <<patriarch> wrote in
> message news:[email protected]...
>> "J G" <[email protected]> wrote in
>> news:[email protected]:
>>
>> <snippage>
>> > just be sure it is the low angle one. Or better yet the wooken kit.
>> >
>> > --
>> > J G
>> > (thewoodworkerformerlyknownhereasspokehave)
>>
>> I'm willing to learn from a master.
>
> I am but a humble deciple of the ways of the NeaderDude
>
>> Why do you say that?
>
> Because they simplay kick ass. There is no way, NO WAY you are going
> to get the same quality cut from a "stanley type"spokeshave as you
> would from a traditional low-angle spokeshave especially on endgrain.
>
I agree that the LV spkeshaves are good things. I own the Low Angle, and
the pair of wooden handled jewels that Robin introduced last winter. They
were also on the benches at the College of the Redwoods, when we visited
the shop in February, for the winter student show. 'I' like them, but I am
in NO WAY an expert in things Neander. A wanna-be neophyte, as it were.
My question was, perhaps unclear. If you were to recommend a 'starter
shave' of the LV group, what would it be, and why?
BTW, your plans for a spokeshave are squirreled away on my hard drive
somewhere, for a future winter evenings' project. You can always use one
more good one, right?
Patriarch
[email protected] (Dan Cullimore) wrote in
news:[email protected]:
> patriarch <<patriarch>[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:<[email protected]>...
>>
>> Oh, and you can trust the seller.
>>
>>
> Hey, Patriarch--I just realized you were talking about trusting
> LV...DOH! And that I forgot to sign my last post--DOH DOH!!
> I really DID need a rant!
>
> Dan
Feel better now? Good! ;-)
That NEVER happens to me. Nope. never. Well, not very often. No more
than once or twice a month.
Patriarch
"patriarch [email protected]>" <<patriarch> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> "J G" <[email protected]> wrote in
> news:[email protected]:
>
> <snippage>
> > just be sure it is the low angle one. Or better yet the wooken kit.
> >
> > --
> > J G
> > (thewoodworkerformerlyknownhereasspokehave)
>
> I'm willing to learn from a master.
I am but a humble deciple of the ways of the NeaderDude
> Why do you say that?
Because they simplay kick ass. There is no way, NO WAY you are going to get
the same quality cut from a "stanley type"spokeshave as you would from a
traditional low-angle spokeshave especially on endgrain.
try it you'll like it:
http://www.leevalley.com/wood/page.asp?SID=&ccurrency=2&page=44834&category=1,49601
http://www.leevalley.com/wood/page.asp?SID=&ccurrency=&page=49710&category=1,49601
--
J G
NeanderShill
Andy Dingley <[email protected]> wrote in message news:<[email protected]>...
> On 22 Jun 2004 21:54:00 -0700, [email protected] (Dan Cullimore)
> wrote:
>
> >
> A #151 is rubbish anyway, As described in Fine Woodworking a while
> back, the blades won't hold an edge and the cap iron isn't accurate
> enough to hold it down well. Brian Boggs described how to improve the
> mouth and bedding with epoxy, then make a brass cap iron.
>
>
Andy: Could you identify the issue, (or especially anything about
tuning up this "rubbish")? I'd like to read the piece. I'm
considering Tom's suggestion about a Hock blade, but I'd like to get
(or make) a cap iron.
Thanks, Dan
Lowell: Why I won't send it back: I didn't pay much for it; I don't
trust the seller for the refund ("once burned..."), and especially not
the full shipping (which was more than the tool!); I like a challenge,
and Stanley is sending the parts as I type (Conan is right about that
Lori--she IS good). (The seller did offer a refund, but I'm still PO'd
by the way she set the auction. I won't return it, but will be honest
in my feedback. I've said my piece to the seller.)
Andy: Thanks for the useful critique, and the heads up about the FWW
issue. Having never used a spoke shave I'll just have to see about
how much rubbish I have when/if I get it working.
Joe: Thanks for the citation info.
Tom: Thanks for the generous offer and other info.
All: I really appreciate the critical and experienced perspectives on
what shaves are worth having and why. I've thought of making my own,
and will probably do so in the next few weeks, but thought it would be
good to try a ready-made first, thus the eBay bid; I was surprised I
won. I have also thought of making my own blade(s), but don't quite
have the shop space or time just yet. I'm also more interested in
building a boat.
patriarch <<patriarch>[email protected]> wrote in message news:<[email protected]>...
> "AArDvarK" <[email protected]> wrote in news:XbLCc.830$9j.753@fed1read01:
>
> >
> > Did you find out if they have an improved lever cap for it?
> > And what are all the parts you ordered?
> >
> > Reason I ask is I have a resource for a #51 and a #151 for cheap.
> >
> > Alex
> >
> >
> >
>
> I still think the best deal for a 'new spokeshave user' is to get one (or
> more) from Lee Valley. No fiddling. Just clean off the protective goop,
> hone the blade, and go. Oh, and you can trust the seller.
>
> Unless what you really want to do is restore an old tool...
>
> Patriarch
Alex: Did not think to ask about an improved lever cap (cap iron?),
so I'll take whatever they send (I asked for the blade and cap iron;
adjustment screws came with the body, as did a cap screw).
Patriarch: Can't get one from LV for what I paid. I also like the
challenge/education of restoring old tools (to a limit I don't think
this shave will exceed).
BTW--Why do you think I can trust this seller? She was already
deceptive about the tool (or about her qualifications for assessing
it's condition), and in e-mails has given me no reason to trust her
further--she had the audacity to as much as call me stupid for
trusting her judgment, even while (finally) admitting she is "no
expert." To my mind, stating a thing is in "excellent condition"
presumes the capacity of making such a judgment, as well as being an
explicit statement about (in this case) the tool's usefulness. This
person clearly had no regard for her lack of knowledge, for the
unusable condition of the tool was obvious to anyone with even the
slightest knowledge of it's use; or she had no concern for me as a
buyer, because, after all she did name it correctly (how many
non-woodworkers would know this?--not many!) and thus knew something
about it's use. In short, she was deliberately deceptive. If the
person with a claim to make is not qualified to make it the only
honest thing to do is admit one's ignorance. I frequently see an item
offered at auction about which the seller admits to not knowing even
what it is, much less what it's condition or usability might be. The
market then decides how to trust the seller based on honest
disclosure, not falsely perpetrated expertise. Here involved is a
principle of integrity. She has lost me as a customer.
Good God, I think I needed a rant--sorry, Patriarch :}
patriarch <<patriarch>[email protected]> wrote in message news:<[email protected]>...
>
> Oh, and you can trust the seller.
>
>
Hey, Patriarch--I just realized you were talking about trusting LV...DOH!
And that I forgot to sign my last post--DOH DOH!!
I really DID need a rant!
Dan
"J G" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:<D1mDc.29399>
>
> Need any blades?
> I just happened to find 4 "new old stock" second generation, Cryo treated
> Hock spokeshave irons whilst a box this afternoon.
>
> I just know there is another dozen I lost years ago that is going to turn
> up..... someday. sure wish I could find them, they weren't cheap!-(
What kinda $ you talking J.G.? My e-mail works if you wanna use it.
Dan
Andy Dingley wrote:
> - Throw it away. Like many people, I've collected loads of this
> pattern but never use them. I much prefer the #63 / #64 Stanley
> spokeshaves (flat and curved base). These are smaller (sometimes
> described as the "child's model") but they also have a simpler design
> that's less affected by lack of rigidity. I also like wooden
> spokeshaves, because of the different geometry, and this includes the
> modern Lee Valley version. I've also got an old #53 - don't know much
> about these, haven't really used it yet - but it looks promising.
The #53 is a decent shave. It's got the adjustable mouth
(toe-piece, really), so it can be set for fine work. It was my first
"favorite" shave (before I made a couple of Guntershaves and got my
hands on the two Lee Valley shaves).
> - Get a decent one. The things are only a few bucks on eBay. It's
> really just not worth chasing after fixing a bad one. I also have
> examples with the commonplace broken handles. Although I have welded
> them to repair them, this is definitely as cast-iron welding practice,
> not as an economically sensible repair. I just want to improve my
> skills for fixing all those #10s 8-)
>
> - Fix it. The Brian Boggs' piece made me laugh - he basically throws
> away everything except the handle and the clamp screw, and he reworks
> the handles pretty extensively. I'm sure it's a good tool when he's
> done, but it surely has to be easier to get a decent #151 pattern one
> from Lee Valley.
Yep. They've already done all the work, plus you get a nice beefy
iron. They also provide you with shims for closing up the mouth.
Personally, if I had it to do over again, I'd buy the LV low-angle
and #151 and pass on the other metal shaves.
Chuck Vance
> Alex: Did not think to ask about an improved lever cap (cap iron?),
> so I'll take whatever they send (I asked for the blade and cap iron;
> adjustment screws came with the body, as did a cap screw).
Lever cap. It was mensioned earlier as being poor quality design as
well as the cap iron mainly. BTW Museum of woodworking tools
has new Hock blades for the 151, both A2cryo and HC steels:
http://www.toolsforworkingwood.com/ click "planes". It might
be designed to be more compatible with the original cap iron,
but I would communicate with them and ask.
> Patriarch: Can't get one from LV for what I paid. I also like the
> challenge/education of restoring old tools (to a limit I don't think
> this shave will exceed).
semi-OT:
I just bought an old rip-cut hand saw, $10, 7 tpi/ppi with teeth
having alternating hights and only slightly side-to-side. I think it's
a rip because of the angle of the handle, as cutting at a 60º angle
rather than a cross-cut @45º. Right now the handle has been stripped
with heavy gauge steel wool and finished with fine steel wool, and
is drying a new coat of spar varnish, I will put on another 3 coats,
sanding each one until the last. The blade was coated with dried old
sap, so it wasn't even rusty at all. It's been scrubbed and has absorbed
3 coats of wd-40. The old spring steel is awesome for a generic saw,
1/32" thick and you can't find them made in the USA this good.
> BTW--Why do you think I can trust this seller? She was already
> deceptive about the tool (or about her qualifications for assessing
> it's condition), and in e-mails has given me no reason to trust her
> further--she had the audacity to as much as call me stupid for
> trusting her judgment, even while (finally) admitting she is "no
> expert." To my mind, stating a thing is in "excellent condition"
> presumes the capacity of making such a judgment, as well as being an
> explicit statement about (in this case) the tool's usefulness. This
> person clearly had no regard for her lack of knowledge, for the
> unusable condition of the tool was obvious to anyone with even the
> slightest knowledge of it's use; or she had no concern for me as a
> buyer, because, after all she did name it correctly (how many
> non-woodworkers would know this?--not many!) and thus knew something
> about it's use. In short, she was deliberately deceptive. If the
> person with a claim to make is not qualified to make it the only
> honest thing to do is admit one's ignorance. I frequently see an item
> offered at auction about which the seller admits to not knowing even
> what it is, much less what it's condition or usability might be. The
> market then decides how to trust the seller based on honest
> disclosure, not falsely perpetrated expertise. Here involved is a
> principle of integrity. She has lost me as a customer.
No shit man! Goog thinking!
Alex
> Good God, I think I needed a rant--sorry, Patriarch :}
On Wed, 23 Jun 2004 23:10:17 -0500, Joe Wells <[email protected]> wrote:
>FWW #158, Oct 2002. Probably available at your local library.
Thanks, Joe. That issue is still available from Taunton as a "back issue". Got one on its way to my mailbox. That's probably faster
(and considering fuel prices, probably about as cheap) than me fighting downtown traffic to get to the library. Besides, some of the
other articles look interesting, also.
Tom Veatch
Wichita, KS USA
"Dan Cullimore" wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> "J G" wrote in message
> >
> > Need any blades?
> > I just happened to find 4 "new old stock" second generation, Cryo
treated
> > Hock spokeshave irons whilst a box this afternoon.
> >
> > I just know there is another dozen I lost years ago that is going to
turn
> > up..... someday. sure wish I could find them, they weren't cheap!-(
>
> What kinda $ you talking J.G.?
Oh say $25 plus shipping.
On Thu, 24 Jun 2004 02:07:41 +0000, Tom Veatch wrote:
> On Wed, 23 Jun 2004 23:37:30 +0100, Andy Dingley <[email protected]>
> wrote:
>
>
>>A #151 is rubbish anyway, As described in Fine Woodworking a while back,
>>the blades won't hold an edge and the cap iron isn't accurate enough to
>>hold it down well. Brian Boggs described how to improve the mouth and
>>bedding with epoxy, then make a brass cap iron.
>>
> <snip>
>
> That sounds interesting. Is it in a book, web page, or a message in the
> archives? Give me a hint as where to start looking?
FWW #158, Oct 2002. Probably available at your local library.
--
Joe Wells
On 22 Jun 2004 21:54:00 -0700, [email protected] (Dan Cullimore) wrote:
>I recently bought a Stanley #151 spoke shave, but it is missing the
>blade and the cap iron. Anyone have suggestions for finding
>replacements? (An unscrupulous eBayer sold it as being in "excellent
>condition"; photo was poor and I didn't think to ask about all the
>parts being there![&@#%&!] I'm in negotiations, but in case I choose
>to keep it I'd like to fix it.)
>
>Dan
Dan,
Since you need a blade anyway, you might give some thought to replacing with a Hock blade. If you don't want to do that, I may have
a stock Stanley blade still laying around from when I put in the Hock. If you go with the Hock, be aware that it is thicker than the
stock blade and may require a little filing on the bed to make room for the extra thickness. That is not all bad since most of those
shaves could use a little smoothing and flattening on the bed anyway.
If you want me to check around for that extra blade drop me an email. The reply-to address is good.
Tom Veatch
Wichita, KS USA