Well… I filed the blade at a 60 degree angle, then I mount it in the plane bed and slid it a little bit until it touched the finnest diamond stone, and the angle was totally away from 60 degrees.
This plane looks like it’s made so that only the first half of the blade cuts the wood, not the full width.
Does anyone who has the same plane have this problem with the bed of the blades? How is the tilt of the bed?
I contacted Paul Sellers’ team and John (I assume he is his apprentice) said that Paul’s plane has the number 40 on the front, while mine has number 50. Is this number related to the slope of the bed of the blades?
This way, the skew angle doesn’t become very important, because it’s impossible for the full width of the blade to protrude evenly.
I even removed the extremity of the plane so that the blade wouldn’t touch it.
– Place the shim of tape on the lowest part of the bed, to level this excessive inclination a little with the angle of 60 degrees (in this case, the blade is too high parallel to the sole of the plane, and I will have to file the extremity of the plane (I want to avoid this) because the blade cannot protrude without touching it.
– Any more suggestions…?
I really think that this plane was manufactured like this from the beginning, but I don’t understand the reason.
I f when putting a shim on the lowest part of the bed, the Paul Sellers test on the diamond plate gives a good result (same abrading mark on the whole iron width) then the next step would be to very carefully remove some material (equivalent to the thickness of the shim which was giving good abrading result) on the high side of the bed.
But as we say in French “les conseilleurs ne sont pas les payeurs”.