What 2 hand planes to start with.
Welcome! / Forums / General Woodworking Discussions / Tools and Tool Maintenance/Restoration / What 2 hand planes to start with.
- This topic has 42 replies, 12 voices, and was last updated 1 year, 5 months ago by John Carey.
-
AuthorPosts
-
10 November 2022 at 12:13 am #779769
[postquote quote=779766]
Well that puts me at ease. I thought I may have done something wrong. The shavings break off about 12-15″? they don’t go full length of the board and they seem to tapper at the beginning and ends, Is that normal? I put a slight chamfer one the blade and can’t feel streaks/ tracks where I ran the plane so I think it is correct. That is why i tried to show the board to the best I could so you could see what it left after planning.
10 November 2022 at 12:18 am #779770Thank you Sven-Olof,
Thank you for adding this relevant information!
Along these lines, I learned that chopping end-grain with a chisel has complexities around the type of wood.
I once chopped end-grain on a dried beam of Douglas Fir that I assumed would be easy on my chisel. Instead, to my alarm, the confident first chopping quickly folded said chisel edge in certain areas. Areas that I think corresponded to the harder portions of the growth rings – that were surrounded by spongier, softer wood. The chisel was fairly damaged in fact. This chisel was not a Japanese chisel with a very hard cutting edge smithed to a softer body. It was a generic Western-type chisel with consistently softer steel through the blade.I learned that day that the homogeneity or lack thereof in wood may really affect a chisel’s capability while chopping end-grain. If a wood is hard or soft, but highly homogenous in density and resistance to the severing of its fibers, a chisel is more evenly “supported” by surrounding wood during the blow of a mallet. In other words the chisel meets with relatively even stresses along its cutting / severing edge.
Then take the highly un-homogeneous wood. And assume that the chisel meets the growth rings at a nearly parallel angle as in chopping down the end grain of a quartersawn board, with growth rings pointing upward toward the chisel. The chisel is struck, and the stresses upon the blade’s edge are concentrated where the wood’s harder strands lie. And the chisel is more prone to deformation of edge.This description is still a simplification of what is happening. The bevel angle of the chisel and the chopping depth before relief-cutting also influence how a chisel fares when chopping like this. If heavy chopping is done all at once with no relief to the chisel bevel, I believe that the forces of pressed wood against the bevel “pile up” or pressurize and “try” to deform the chisel edge. And if the harder growth rings pass down the chopping face at any angle, think about how this would further press for deformation of an edge with several heavy blows to a chisel into this wood. This all is the best explanation I have for why a chisel unexpectedly failed in what I thought was soft wood. Perhaps there were other variables and unfortunately I don’t have a fully scientific compilation and report to offer. I hope this may serve as material for thought.
One may suspect that Japanese chisels evolved with this type of material in mind. Material that may be termed softwood but that has exceedingly hard growth rings alongside very soft growth rings. A Japanese chisel is build with the goal of delivering a hard slicing edge on a tool that is not liable to crack from brittleness. Perhaps also, this is the best goal for dealing with any wood. Or weapon such as a sword.
Thanks again for the photo-illustrated discussion of climate and growth rings as related to tool design. It certainly got me thinking.
Sincerely,
Tom
Maryland“Well I am not positive if I have it set up correctly the shavings taper at the ends. ” Do you mean side to side? If you adjust the blade with the lateral lever, you can probably get the thickness to either be constant or taper off similarly on the two sides (and thicker in the middle) depending upon how you sharpened (shape of camber). I use shavings from a piece I keep on the bench to confirm my setup quite often, although one can often do it on the work depending upon the stage you are in….roughing work, sure set up on the piece. Final smoothing or fine adjustment of joinery, then probably I set up on my test piece. If you mean taper off at the start and stop along the length, I don’t know that that means much, usually.
As for width, it depends upon your camber. Usually, I want my camber so slight (if at all) that I can get a full width shaving almost the width of the mouth and then tapering at the edges so that I don’t get tracks. You can do plenty of good work exactly as you have things, and sometimes you need it like that, but I like the wider shavings for sake of speed and uniformity in most cases.
“What was it about the Lie-Nielsen chisels that led you to move along to something else?”
The first bit of fun was that the blades would fall out of the handles, which was always exciting. I read of many possible fixes, tried them all, some sort of worked, but ultimately I epoxied the handles into the sockets. Too bad. The bigger problem is the A2 steel. It is slower to sharpen (not such a big issue for most chisels) and it is more brittle than O1. I played with the A2 vs. my O1 chisels and found I needed something like 35 degrees for the A2 when chopping end grain in oak to avoid fracturing the edge too quickly while, for O1, I could use a bit less than 30. The steeper angle means more mallet force and means more creeping back into the knife line. If you don’t want to change bevel angles for different purposes and end up paring with your chopping chisels, paring will take more hand force. For me, there were just no up sides. With O1, everything was better and I don’t care about sharpening less often because it takes me two blinks to sharpen a chisel free hand (except on those days when nothing will sharpen because the sharpening Gods have been angered and you just need to go for a bike ride or walk and stay away from not-so-sharp things).
10 November 2022 at 1:50 am #779777Hi John,
The shavings may go the 12-15″ due to physical ability to put downward pressure on the plane with a thicker shaving in oak, or wood that is either not totally flat on one or both sides or is not supported on a flat enough surface.
This is all normal stuff around hand tools and the work surfaces you use when working. A flattened workbench is a big help depending on how you hold your work and how big your boards are. You’re on your way and I can suggest that its just a matter of continuously and patiently problem-solving for the fun of the whole process.I watch people like Paul Sellers, try to pick up on the nuances they share, and put it all to the test with real live action. Here some thoughts on stock prep.
I find Paul’s method of planing the faces of boards while clamped in the vice quite interesting. He is able to take shavings down the length of a board while its only clamped in the middle, and he does it all the time. The clamped board acts as a spring against which he is working while he planes. I find this wild and crazy in the best senses, and probably genius if you can work accurately this way! Paul works very efficiently in hand tools.By contrast, others will use a workbench that is flat, supports the board as it is clamped / stopped in some form, and rely on the support underneath the board as they true the board. In this method, I will slide shims such as index 3×5 cards or thicker if needed, to support a board that is not true, as I begin to true one face. This shimming becomes rather a necessity while flattening thinner boards around 1″ thick. A 3″ thick beam won’t need those shims as much because it won’t really deflect under planing. Then, with one face flat or nearly flat, I may flip the board over and work to true the other side more easily, now that the opposite side is resting more consistently on the flat workbench. Then I may decide which side will be the “Face” “Reference” side from which I’ll thickness the board. The second side may be the likely side that I stick with for fully truing since its now fairly well-supported by the roughly trued opposite face. And prior to this, the edges need to be somewhere near a right angle to the reference face. I do work some boards in the quick release vice like Paul Sellers does. But I now also have a bench that has a working wagon / tail vice and bench dog holes all down its length. I have found it helpful for flattening very large, long, heavy wide boards. For what its worth.
But now you can see how Paul Sellers flattening his boards in the vice jaws bypasses all this shimming and perfectly flat workbenches handily… He has been doing it for so many years that he, the tool, the wood and the bench all hum along perfectly. I suppose its a question of what you ultimately find reduces variables in the way of success. Paul may view the requirements of a flat bench, tail or wagon vises, bench dogs, and shimming of stock as unwanted variables compared to his effortless style at the English workbench and its quick-release vice. Another may prefer the approach where they work up through a big Roubo bench and super-controlled sharpening with honing guides to get results. Less freehand, more guides and reference surfaces I guess. Far from me to say one way is wrong or right. They are just different. Another example: Paul uses a mortising guide clamped against his work as a reference for the chisel. Somewhere along the way, he decided that having such a guide was a useful aid to making better mortises. In this case, the decision was in favor of a guide of some type to keep things straight rather than relying on freehand and sighting of the tool / work. So even with one person, they may go one direction or another based on what works best for them.
Relaxation of the body is key, I think. Tight grip and tense muscles may make it harder to process good feedback and balance while working with hand tools. Yes, pressure and force are sometimes needed, but they are not the same as undesirable muscle tension. For example, if you want to hold out your fist and keep someone from moving it, you will naturally tense up all opposing muscles in your arm, and probably your shoulder and core muscles. We can do this with tools too, and not realize it fully, tensing up our muscles to get more control, we think. But if we sharpen our minds and focus on being sensitive to the tool and the wood, we can build confidence in the forces we apply without having to rely on “opposing muscle tensions.” I tend to naturally over-tension my body at times without realizing it. I give things the death grip too easily whether its a pencil or a chisel handle. But this needs to be “thought” and practiced against. I drink regular coffee but I’m trying to cut back and drink more decaf. Too much caffeine seems to put my mind toward tighter grip / more tension if anything. But I’ve been hooked on coffee for way too long. Such is life.
I should probably give your thread here a break for your and others’ sake. Good luck and best wishes as you continue John! Too much writing here from me in the light of what we want is simple clarity and a peaceful way with woodworking!
Sincerely,
Tom10 November 2022 at 1:53 am #779778[postquote quote=779773]
Ill take a picture of it tomorrow I am not even sure if you can see it. All I did was did the 5 points of contact method did 20 on the both the left and right 10 on the inner left and right and then 5 in the center. I only did that on the5K, 8K and12K, stones. I could see streaks on the stone’s but enough to actually do any thing I am not sure.
A couple comments about expectations that will be in contrast to what Tom said, but not meant to debate or gainsay: In my opinion, you need to keep in mind what the goal is. We are less machinists and more artists. If the object we build looks good, feels good, and functions, it is good. Precision serves the purpose of achieving the piece we are trying to make and is not an end in itself. We are not trying to be machinists with human powered cutters attempting to make mathematical planes and arbitrarily high precision.
The purpose of the plane is to change the dimension or shape of the wood, not to make it perfect. I do not ever aim to get a continuous shaving along the length of a board. Yes, having such a thing can tell me something about the shape and flatness, but it is not my goal and I rarely produce one. In fact, I often deliberately break the shaving along the length for one purpose or another by lifting the heel of the plane.
I do not seek to make light, thin uniform shavings. I seek to change the shape or dimension of the wood. Sometimes, I set for really heavy shavings. I just want the wood to be gone. A great deal of plaining is like this, and I’m talking about planing long after the scrub is done and gone.
My bench top is garbage. It is a couple of pieces of MDF that I have meant to replace for years, but I always seem to start a new project rather than rebuild the bench.
If you try to be a machinist with hand tools, you will waste an enormous amount of time. If it brings you pleasure, fine, but I have the sense you are trying to make a living from this. You need to understand how hand tool work differs from using woodworking machines and learn where they can save time *if* you use hand tool methods, many of which were developed to achieve tight joints and high esthetics despite imperfections in the work. I built a table, for example, on which two surfaces of the aprons were barely planed at all and will not square or flat. I did not have to spend any time on truing or improving those surfaces. In fact, as long as the ends of the aprons are out of twist with each other, since there is no drawer, it doesn’t matter what happens along the length in between as long as it pleases the eye. Often, when smoothing, we just work out the imperfections locally and do not try to bring the entire surface into one uniform mathematical plane. This is *precisely* why smoothing planes are short…so they can get into small areas and work just those areas. Or, you can consider the shortest smoothing plane of all, the one with a sole that is only 1/32″ long, the card scraper.
You have a plane that is taking shavings. You need to go see (and do) project construction to learn what level of performance is needed and what isn’t. Look at it this way: If I put a perfect tool in the hands of someone who isn’t trained, the plane will not do perfect work no matter how much that person has read. Experience and skill are both needed (and those are different),. Nevertheless, a dozen of us showed up for Paul’s class and he put us to work on the first day. Over the month, we built a chest, a table, and a rocking chair. You have to be building to gain the context to tell you what is needed from the tool and, at the same time, you need to experience what the tool does to improve your building.
Go build stuff.
- This reply was modified 1 year, 5 months ago by Ed.
10 November 2022 at 2:49 pm #779823Robust debate is a good thing when done right. Disagreements will arise in the pursuit of knowledge!
With respect to the mathematical machining of wood, how hand planes are employed, and flat workbenches as a reference surface in your work:
– I totally agree on your description of how planes are used, Ed. Excellent.
– On whether to dimension workpieces precisely, it depends on what you’re making. Most people are going to teach that accurate stock prep is the basis for good work, and allows for faster completion of a project in all later stages of joinery. Paul certainly teaches that.
– On whether a flat workbench is useful and much used, I look at the history and the present in traditional woodworking.
As far I as can see, many famous furniture builders have dimensioned boards that are resting on well-maintained traditional workbenches. No-one would accuse James Krenov of being a machinist in wood. He was the consummate artisan. Yet he emphasizes the importance of the workbench in his training as a young man, and the importance of it in his mature work. Including flatness, I must add. Add to this, people like Chris Schwarz, Rob Cosman, David Charlesworth, Matt Estlea and his connection to formal Academic English woodworking, and the picture starts to come into focus. Working on a reliable surface, and dimensioning one’s work accurately, is the norm that I’ve learned and now practice to some extent. And yet my attitude toward wood and furniture is more aligned with James Krenov than cleverly-machined furniture design.
For what it’s worth, I practiced woodworking on a plywood-top workbench with a quick-release vice bolted to it for a while. When I finally got my big workbench into operation, it absolutely sped up my work and made more things possible in terms of the efficient use of planes. This is because I can now drop a 7’ long x 18” wide board down on it, fasten it perfectly on both ends in seconds, and dimension it as quick as you like, in any direction. And again, as soon as I rough one side, I can flip the board over and flatten my reference surface very fast indeed, because of the reliability of its support on the bench. But smaller boards also prep faster on this setup too.Ed, I won’t debate for a second that what you’re doing works for you with what you want to build. But as far as what all these other professionals do and whether it is standard practice or unusual, their techniques and opinions are on the record.
So.. go build stuff, yes. But take a little time
to square up your stock on 4 sides initially. You’ll feel good about your work, and your work will be the finer for it. And probably simpler and faster too.
Sincerely,
TomTom, we agree more than you think. I use my bench top as a reference surface to test quickly for flatness by seeing if the work will rock. I think a flat bench is indeed desired and fully intend to build one. I also agree about the utility of having adequately flat and true work. That said, I have sensed in John a tendency to have everything perfect before proceeding. I don’t mean that as criticism because I suffer from the same. One can get so bogged down that things become glacial.
My background is physics and engineering. One key lesson one learns in those fields is that an optimized system is not made of optimized components. It is made of balanced components. If one optimizes components in isolation of each other, one can even make the individual components unsuitable for integration into the system.
I like to say, “Something for everything before anything gets better.” That’s really where I’m headed with my comments here. I really agree with almost everything that you have written, but I was afraid they may spur John towards perfecting things individually before establishing the context of working on a project to tell him when to care and when not to care. I remember when I started reading so much about making fine, perfect fluffy shavings that I wasted time using finishing cuts when I was dimensioning or finishing surfaces beyond what was needed for accurate joinery even though, after glue up, further planing would be needed for joint cleanup, planing that would push me back planing that was almost dimensional, undoing the finishing work. At the same time, some surfaces *must* be brought to final finish level before glue up because if you plane them after cutting joints you can open up gaps. So, really what I am saying is for John to get into projects to give him context and to point out that hand tool usage is, in many ways, different from machine based building. One thinks differently. If you think of your plane as a human powered surface planer, I think much time can be wasted.
John, no disrespect is intended. As I said, I have this same tendency and am trying to save you from some of the mistakes I made. Well, not mistakes. I learned from them, but it wasn’t efficient. Maybe I’m projected me onto you. My apologies if this sounds negative in any way. It isn’t intended to be.
(I really do cuss about my bench _all_ the time….and then move on to the next project, grab my toothing plane, and flatten a section well enough in 3 minutes to handle the current work. It really needs to be dealt with, but I keep surviving. My guess is that this is the year I actually take the time to put things aside and deal with this…mostly because my vise is creaking and seems ready to fall off. 🙂
- This reply was modified 1 year, 5 months ago by Ed.
10 November 2022 at 10:14 pm #779871I very much thank the both of you for your very thoughtful and well thought out responses. It has been a very great and enlightening read. I can assure you, your words are not falling on deaf ears. No worries Ed I see no disrespect in any of your words. I am a apprentice of life always willing to hear new idea’s and ways to do things.
I was not discouraged nor dis-satisfied by the results I received yesterday. I knew right from the get-go that this was going to be a learning experience and was not going to receive “perfect” results right from the start. I totally understand why you mention not to look at this like a machinist, that would be futile. Wood is a living object it moves and changes.
I have noticed while watching Paul’s videos he makes one face “true” and uses that as his reference point. Now by true that can mean what ever he deems necessary and needed for that said project. What is “true” for project A can be totally different from project B and vise versa.
As far as a work bench to plane on, as of right now I have just a bench I inherited. While sturdy not exactly flat at the moment so I make do as like Ed and use MDF to have a flat surface. I am planning on over the winter to make a top for it.
Again I want to thank you for your very helpful and knowledgeable advise it has been a great help to me.
John11 November 2022 at 1:32 pm #779922about the necessity of a flat workbench,
look at the video of Paul Sellers’ post:
“newest piece for 2022” dated 21 January 2022.
Obviously, Paul doesn’t rely on a flat workbench (most of the time).
Although he found it necessary to make picture frames:
read “flattening one of my benches” dated 14 august 2014.As for advices, the best ones are in Paul’s blogs.
There are “essential tools”, “nice to have” and “not at all useful” ones.
Have a look at his site https://commonwoodworking.com/ (login with the same name and password as here).12 November 2022 at 3:25 am #779991[postquote quote=779922]
I appreciate and thank you for you advise and reply. While a flat surface is not exactly needed 100% of the time it is a nice addition to have when building. I Have watched Paul plane projects all in his vise and not even on the table.
I do not want to start or kick a hornet’s nest with this comment, but I don’t think its a wise choice to just look at one builder as the only way to build a project. The way one does something may not exactly work well for you like the way another builder does the same thing. It is a good thing to keep a open mind and see how others approach it.
For example If I just went with Paul’s method of cutting with western style saws id have abandoned using hand tools quickly. I have tried out western style hand saws and they do not jive with me for some reason I never feel comfortable and relaxed using them. Japanese style saws, they just feel like a extension to my arm.
Now his how to make a dovetail cutting template for beginners, that worked so incredibly well I couldn’t believe it. That was the most valuable 2hr video I have ever watched. That was how I actually found out about Paul Sellers I wanted to learn to do dovetails. Also how I realized western saws aren’t so great for me personally.
” I have tried out western style hand saws and they do not jive with me for some reason I never feel comfortable and relaxed using them. I have tried out western style hand saws and they do not jive with me for some reason I never feel comfortable and relaxed using them” This, this is the only right reason to choose one type of saw over the other. I am the opposite, western work better for me.
13 November 2022 at 1:28 am #780063[postquote quote=780031]
I am glad that they work for you, Not exactly positive on what the handles are called but I tried the D-shaped, pistol grip and straight handle on the Veritas. Now I am not sure if it is because of how they cut? pull vs push, was it just the handle to begin with.
-
AuthorPosts
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.