Kidney shaped hole
Welcome! / Forums / General Woodworking Discussions / Tools and Tool Maintenance/Restoration / Kidney shaped hole
- This topic has 7 replies, 4 voices, and was last updated 6 years, 2 months ago by Dave Ring.
-
AuthorPosts
-
27 February 2018 at 3:01 pm #485848
I have what Stanley #4 plane that I believe is a Type 16 . Why do some avoid the models with the kidney shaped hole in the lever cap?
I’m a newbie, but I’ve been paying attention. đ
According to this type study
the kidney hole was introduced with the type 16 (1933). I think there’s a consensus that post-WWII era planes are a no-go as far as quality. And some people like to go older. All of my Stanley planes are Type 11 (1910-1918) or older (happy accidental finds), and I love them. But I also have a Millers Falls #5 from the 1960s that works well, and it gets daily use as a bench worker.I say, if you’re happy with your tool, then who cares what other people think?
The kidney shaped hole is neither better or worse than a keyhole ahaped hole. (If it was a real advantage it would have been copied by Stanley’s many competitors, who copied every other feature of the Bailey pattern bench planes.)
On or about the time (ca. 1933) that Stanley introduced the kidney shaped lever cap hole they made a couple of other changes.
Most obviously they started Nickel plating the lever cap. While this looked pretty snazzy when the plane was new, when the nickel flakes off it looks decidedly shabby. No big deal from a functional standpoint though.
A less obvious but arguably more important change was a reduction in the machined surface on the top of the frog where it contacts the iron. This would have presumably reduced Stanley’s machining costs slightly while offering slightly less support for the iron.
I don’t agree that there is a consensus that post-WWII Baileys are a “No-Go”. The wartime Type 17’s had a few manufacturing shortcuts and the finishing was coarser than on the prewar planes but they work just fine. The early postwar Type 18’s were finished a bit better and left the factory with all of the features of the prewar type 16’s except for the plating on the lever cap and the beautiful but somewhat delicate cocobolo handles.
The subsequent Type 19’s are hit or miss. Some have cocobolo handles and some have stained beech ones. The clear finish on top of both is so thick that it’s hard to tell which is which. Overall quality of the machining varies a lot and seems to have gradually declined over the years
For the record, although I have an unconscionable number of old Bailey planes of various types, my go-to plane is a Type 18 (1946-1947) No.5. It works as well as any of them.
Dave
- This reply was modified 6 years, 2 months ago by Dave Ring.
- This reply was modified 6 years, 2 months ago by Dave Ring.
[quote quote=485987]I donât agree that there is a consensus that post-WWII Baileys are a âNo-Goâ.[/quote]
Yeah, probably “consensus” was a bad term. I’ve just seen a lot of forum posts (not necessarily here) that talk about how quality drops off after WWII, when companies started upping their output again, and figured out ways to save money, usually at the expense of tool quality.
After the US entered WWII fit and finish suffered but they recovered somewhat after the war, although they never again rose to prewar standards. Nevertheless, Stanley Bailey planes made in the late 40’s and well into the 50’s are generally good, useful tools although they might need more fettling than the earlier ones. {I’m speaking now of US made Stanleys. I don’t know much of anything about the English ones.)
Dave
27 February 2018 at 10:17 pm #486123Certain types mean more to collector$, but if youâre using them I get great results out of some of my Stanleyâs from the 40s, and certainly donât notice the kidney hole setting me back at all.
-
AuthorPosts
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.