Record smoother

"Kevin" <[email protected]> wrote

: Greetings to all,
: First post...
: I'm putting together a little shop in my basement, and I have a
: limited amount of cash to spend. So, in an effort to save come coin, I go
: for the #4 Record smoother from LV. I put the rosewood handles on it and
: sharpend the blade and it performs quite poorly (my Clifton # 5 is a mucho
: better plane). Would a Hock blade and chip breaker on the Record improve
it
: to a useable state? Am I throwing away good money at this point? Should I
: just bite the bullet and spring for the Clifton # 4, or an old Stanley?

On my web site - 'Planing Notes' - 'Coping With Gnarly Grain' is
photographic evidence that excellent results can be obtained with a fully
tuned perfectly standard Stanley #4 - That's what the site currently says,
though I think I should have written that the results came from the cheapest
Record (ie the SP4), whose sole is also illustrated on the site.

I greatly doubt whether a change of chipbreaker will make the slightest
improvement.

Jeff G
--
Jeff Gorman, West Yorkshire, UK
Email address is username@ISP
username is amgron
ISP is clara.co.uk
Website www.amgron.clara.net

Kevin wrote:
> for the #4 Record smoother from LV. I put the rosewood handles on it and
> sharpend the blade and it performs quite poorly (my Clifton # 5 is a mucho

Are you really sure you've sharpened and tuned it correctly?
Or are you using it for a really challenging task? I've got
a Record #4 (about 5-6 years old) and (after proper tuning),
it works great.

--
************************************
Chris Merrill
[email protected]
(remove the ZZZ to contact me)
************************************

Jeff Gorman wrote:
>
> I greatly doubt whether a change of chipbreaker will make the slightest
> improvement.
>
>
>
>

What about replacing the blade with a Hock blade?

I've been under the mind set that a lot better furniture was made with
the old Stanleys then I'll ever make. But a lot of people have
reccommended the change over.

Kevin

You already know Lee Valley. Get their brand. Nice machining, and you get a
thick A2 blade to boot. I've got their junior jack, and it's lovely.
Low angle looks a promising addition if you're going to fiddle (fettle) to
try and keep the Record.

Else, grind a crown on your blade and open the throat a bit and use it as a
scrub/jack.

"Kevin" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:BJZnb.41802$mZ5.235924@attbi_s54...
> Greetings to all,
> First post...
> I'm putting together a little shop in my basement, and I have a
> limited amount of cash to spend. So, in an effort to save come coin, I go
> for the #4 Record smoother from LV. I put the rosewood handles on it and
> sharpend the blade and it performs quite poorly (my Clifton # 5 is a mucho
> better plane). Would a Hock blade and chip breaker on the Record improve
it
> to a useable state? Am I throwing away good money at this point? Should I
> just bite the bullet and spring for the Clifton # 4, or an old Stanley?
>
> Any thoughts on this greatly appreciated.
>
> kmbATtwogeeks.org
>
>

I've put Hock irons and Clifton breakers in old Stanley's, both Baileys and
Bedrock's. I think the improvement is dramatic. I've never used a L-N #4,
but my 604 Bedrock is remarkable. (I also use a Knight smoother which is
just as good.)

I have an iron and breaker that I use in both a 607 Bedrock and a #6 Bailey.
The #6 Bailey is about as good as the 607. :-) The #6 is a W.W.II vintage
and has a lot of mass. The plane is very stiff and not much chatter is ever
manifest.

I will say that a SW iron in an old Bailey does a good job if the breaker is
good. I've never had much luck in re-working old Stanley breakers. They seem
to be too flimsy to straighten and hone to fit the iron properly.

"Jeff Gorman" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>
> "Kevin" <[email protected]> wrote
>
> : Greetings to all,
> : First post...
> : I'm putting together a little shop in my basement, and I have a
> : limited amount of cash to spend. So, in an effort to save come coin, I
go
> : for the #4 Record smoother from LV. I put the rosewood handles on it and
> : sharpend the blade and it performs quite poorly (my Clifton # 5 is a
mucho
> : better plane). Would a Hock blade and chip breaker on the Record improve
> it
> : to a useable state? Am I throwing away good money at this point? Should
I
> : just bite the bullet and spring for the Clifton # 4, or an old Stanley?
>
> On my web site - 'Planing Notes' - 'Coping With Gnarly Grain' is
> photographic evidence that excellent results can be obtained with a fully
> tuned perfectly standard Stanley #4 - That's what the site currently says,
> though I think I should have written that the results came from the
cheapest
> Record (ie the SP4), whose sole is also illustrated on the site.
>
> I greatly doubt whether a change of chipbreaker will make the slightest
> improvement.
>
> Jeff G
> --
> Jeff Gorman, West Yorkshire, UK
> Email address is username@ISP
> username is amgron
> ISP is clara.co.uk
> Website www.amgron.clara.net
>
>
>

"Kevin" <[email protected]> wrote in
news:BJZnb.41802$mZ5.235924@attbi_s54:

> Greetings to all,
> First post...
> I'm putting together a little shop in my basement, and I have
> a
> limited amount of cash to spend. So, in an effort to save come coin, I
> go for the #4 Record smoother from LV. I put the rosewood handles on
> it and sharpend the blade and it performs quite poorly (my Clifton # 5
> is a mucho better plane). Would a Hock blade and chip breaker on the
> Record improve it to a useable state? Am I throwing away good money at
> this point? Should I just bite the bullet and spring for the Clifton #
> 4, or an old Stanley?
>
> Any thoughts on this greatly appreciated.
>
> kmbATtwogeeks.org
>
>

Greetings... If funds allow.. you won't go wrong with the Clifton, I have
the #3 and love it..you could get a Steve Knight smoother or make one of
your own...just buy the iron..and make the plane... the Hock iron and
chipbreaker will improve the plane, as would a general tune-up, I have a
newish Record #5 that I tuned up and its my main user for general
stuff...

hope this helps...

DCH

On Thu, 30 Oct 2003 01:22:41 GMT, "Kevin" <[email protected]> wrote:

>I have a limited amount of cash to spend.

>I put the rosewood handles on it

Anyone see a bit of a conflict here ?


Do some Googling. This isn't an FAQ, it's a beaten-to-death question.

Jeff Gorman's web site will teach you how to tune it and use it.

Original Stanley irons work fine, they just don't do it for so long.
Save your money until you need to spend it. Equally, don't buy new
planes when you have to count their cost. eBay is full of the things.

And a modern Record is one of the dumber ways to waste money,
especially if you then fit it with fuzzy dice. Read before spend.

--
Smert' spamionam

Jeff Gorman wrote:

> I greatly doubt whether a change of chipbreaker will make the slightest
> improvement.

That reminds me, Jeff...

I'm playing with a #4 right now, getting the hang of this whole hand plane
thing (and yes, I've printed out most of your web site, bound it on my comb
binding machine, and I have a copy out in the shop... thanks for putting
all of that together! :)

I've come to the conclusion that the factor which determines how far I can
set the cap iron from the edge is a question of mechanics. If I set it
1/32" or less away, then I can't adjust the blade projection down far
enough to ever take a shaving. I'm screwing on that knob until it feels
like something will break soon, and still no projection.

I have to move the cap iron out to almost 1/16" back from the edge before I
gain enough leverage with the adjustment lever to *comfortably* move the
blade far enough to project. Running like that, I can vary it from whispy
thin to shavings almost 1/16" thick in poplar, so the adjustment side of it
"feels right."

It's just that having it that far back feels like the wrong thing to do. Is
there something else I need to fiddle with in order to make that work out
right? I already considered that I might be trying to shove the blade into
something, and that's not the problem. It's just that the actuating lever
is at the end of its travel and no projection.

That's probably clear as mud. I can try to explain better some time when
I'm less exhausted if you can't understand what I'm blathering about.

--
Michael McIntyre ---- Silvan <[email protected]>
Linux fanatic, and certified Geek; registered Linux user #243621
http://www.geocities.com/Paris/Rue/5407/

I replaced a standard blade and chipbreaker on a new (1999) Stanely No. 4
with a Hock blade and Clifton Sta-Set chip breaker. The improvement was
marked and made the tool quite useable (after the normal sole flattening,
etc.). On the other hand, I've had some great luck and some not-so-great
luck on E-Bay. Its a crapshpoot in my judgement.

Give it a try; if you decide to bite the bullet later, the blade and
chipbreaker will still be useful.

-JBB
.
"Kevin" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:BJZnb.41802$mZ5.235924@attbi_s54...
> Greetings to all,
> First post...
> I'm putting together a little shop in my basement, and I have a
> limited amount of cash to spend. So, in an effort to save come coin, I go
> for the #4 Record smoother from LV. I put the rosewood handles on it and
> sharpend the blade and it performs quite poorly (my Clifton # 5 is a mucho
> better plane). Would a Hock blade and chip breaker on the Record improve
it
> to a useable state? Am I throwing away good money at this point? Should I
> just bite the bullet and spring for the Clifton # 4, or an old Stanley?
>
> Any thoughts on this greatly appreciated.
>
> kmbATtwogeeks.org
>
>

"Chris Merrill" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:33%[email protected]...
> Kevin wrote:
> > for the #4 Record smoother from LV. I put the rosewood handles on it and
> > sharpend the blade and it performs quite poorly (my Clifton # 5 is a
mucho
>
> Are you really sure you've sharpened and tuned it correctly?

Good question. I seem to have no problems fettling and shapening the Clifton
# 5. Perhpas the low quality Record takes a bit more know-how then I have.
Thanks.

> Or are you using it for a really challenging task? I've got
> a Record #4 (about 5-6 years old) and (after proper tuning),
> it works great.
>
> --
> ************************************
> Chris Merrill
> [email protected]
> (remove the ZZZ to contact me)
> ************************************
>

Jeff Gorman wrote:
> On my web site - 'Planing Notes' - 'Coping With Gnarly Grain' is
> photographic evidence that excellent results can be obtained with a fully
> tuned perfectly standard Stanley #4 - That's what the site currently says,
> though I think I should have written that the results came from the cheapest
> Record (ie the SP4), whose sole is also illustrated on the site.

Good article!

BTW, thanks for all the great resources on your website. Your article on
sharpening carbide has made be brave enough to try it on a blade that is
in desperate need of cleaning & sharpening...I'm looking forward to it :>


--
************************************
Chris Merrill
[email protected]
(remove the ZZZ to contact me)
************************************