Skip to content

Richard Guggemos

Forum Replies Created

Viewing 15 posts - 1 through 15 (of 198 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #457714
    Richard Guggemos
    Participant

    Tony Lenge,

    I hear what you’re saying. The handle is loose and won’t come out. I have that problem on my wooden jointer.

    Solutions for repair aren’t useful until you can get the handle out, right?

    I don’t have your answer. My impression is that usually, the mortise is undercut on one end and the handle fits under this. I’m guessing that usually its the rear of the mortise where this occurs because the rear of the handle is where there is most upward force.

    Regardless, I can’t get vertical movement (or longitudinal either) at either end of the handle.

    My plane does have, however, several large checks. These don’t overall hinder the use of the plane, but at least one of them has a role in the lateral handle movement.

    It has been suggested to me that that the following will often close (by how much I don’t know) checks:
    1) remove the iron and wedge.
    2) securely tape over the mouth of the plane and any open cracks on the sole.
    3) set the plane somewhere flat and level (I’d put it in some sort of container just to avoid a mess).
    4) fill the mouth with natural linseed oil.
    5) let things sit until the linseed oil seeps out of the ends (I suspect this takes more than overnight).

    At this point, you can pour out the remaining linseed oil. You’ll probably have to let it set for a while (week? more? IDK) to stop sweating linseed oil. But, the checks will supposedly be shrunk at this time, and the plane should be closer to its original (or last) square and dimensions. And, sometimes, the handle will have tightened up.

    Let me be clear. I haven’t tried this (yet). I’m just passing on something I read.

    If you try this, let us know how it goes. Likewise, if you learn of another way to free the handle, please pass that on too.

    Thanks and good luck,

    Rick G.

    #447276
    Richard Guggemos
    Participant

    Late to the party, my fate in life.

    Hey, after lots of diagnostics and fussing over the last year my bench planes are working pretty well. One problem with frog adjustment is seeing a clear line against which to adjust the front of the frog.

    For three out of four of my planes, the mouths were not square across the body. Moreover, one had (apparently from the factory) problems inside the mouth. Perhaps some of my experience will be of benefit to you.

    I used bluing across the sole in front and back of the mouth. Then tested a square across front and back from both sides. Fortunately, the two sides agreed in each case indicating that the sides were parallel. Therefore lines were scribed in the bluing to indicate the smallest possible mouth with square front and back edges.

    A 6” second cut flat file with safe edges was the appointed weapon, and in each case squared the opening quickly. At this point the edges of the opening had been filed vertically. On the front, it’s easy to open up the angle and approximate what had been there previously.

    Fitting and adjusting the frog to the back edge is harder. One plane had a Bedrock style frog and there was an odd bump on one side of the body next to the bottom of the frog. It was hard to find but required correction. Other lesser oddities existed on the remaining planes.

    An upside-down Hock blade works effectively to test the frog to body interface. Hock because the top of the blade is straight across, and it’s a thick rigid blade. BTW, this applies to Bailey pattern frogs equally.

    First partially tighten the frog screws – allowing just enough slack that you can adjust it with a tack hammer or very light ball-pein. Set the blade in place (cutting edge up for protection) and slide it down. It should sit tightly on the frog and while sticking into the mouth. Then tap the frog and blade back until the blade also engages the mouth (without lifting from the frog).

    I’m going to offend the world here, but hang with me.

    The proper position of the frog is when the full plane of the blade is in contact with the bearing surfaces of the frog and the back edge of the mouth. The back edge in this case will be only the inner edge (meaning the mouth is cut vertically or nearly so).

    In other words, support for the blade will not extend through the sole. Not to worry. Even if the plane of the frog is extended by the edge of the mouth, the blade’s bevel prevents it from being supported by the mouth itself.

    Most people speak of moving the frog forward In order to avoid tear out, and don’t accept that there’s a correct position relative to the mouth. They may be right.

    I believe, however, that frogs are adjustable for one reason. Back when Bailey was perfecting his design, it’s wasn’t cost effective to accurately mill the plane body to hold the blade. Similarly, it wasn’t cost effective to mate a frog and body to fit together in a single position while accurately positioning the blade. In other words, the adjustments were designed to overcome poor tolerances – not to tune for tearout.

    This would explain why it’s hard to tune the mouth despite the later addition of frog adjuster screws. One still must remove the irons, loosen the frog screws, adjust the frog, check it’s square, tighten screws, replace irons and test whether the adjustment works.

    Yes it’s possble to close the mouth, but this is cumbersome and not something many people regularly adjust. And cap iron adjustment does a great job of tuning for tear-out.

    So just adjust the frog to mate the squared back edge of the mouth and you’ll be good.

    #447062
    Richard Guggemos
    Participant

    I use safety glasses with bifocal readers built in. The upper lens is a 0 prescription, lower +1.50 Cheap ones from eBay have worked fine, FWIW.

    On the other hand, I’ve known folks who,seem to look up a lot. And they’ve had to get reverse bifocals which don’t seem to be available as generics.

    Rick

    #447055
    Richard Guggemos
    Participant

    You have to take that edge back anyway due to the chips – so that’s good news.

    All of my gouges are square on the end. All were received that way not as new and as used. So go ahead and square it up.

    Rick

    #447051
    Richard Guggemos
    Participant

    Most plane bodies are cast (a few are forged). Regardless I wouldn’t hammer the side as ATMO it’s the wrong tool for the job. I can expound if anyone is curious.

    Questions:
    1 How is the sole concave? Is it cupped? Bowed? By how much?

    2 How out of square are the sides?

    3 How often do you test the plane and how consistent are your testing procedures? Have you tested your test standards?

    Significant wear in two years, with anything less than full time use, suggests that the steel of the plane body is very soft. I wouldn’t expect this wear in a wooden plane over two years, so it’s worth checking all of these points before taking on the hard yak of flattening a big plane.

    Cupping isn’t generally a problem with a jointer. A jointer is almost always used on stock narrower than the plane. This is why they can develop a cup. Typically this is harmless in use; one just adjusts where to set the plane for the cut they want.

    A bow can be a real problem, if it’s a single curve. If the mouth (front and back) front of toe and back of base form a plane (and high everywhere else) you should still see good results. If you have one big curve, flattening is called for.

    As noted by others, the lateral adjuster can compensate on a shooting board. Moreover, only one side needs be square on a shooting board(depending on whether you are right or left handed).

    More importantly, are you using it to shoot? That’s a very big plane for shooting, although there are circumstances where it’s the appropriate tool.

    Hope this helps

    Rick

    #447010
    Richard Guggemos
    Participant

    Late to the party, but a few more ideas.

    1) Ergonomically, that looks like it’s for a lefty. Try holding your hand as if on a tote, now twist first clockwise, then counter.

    I don’t think it will give you bad habits, but it may be uncomfortable.

    2) It may be damaged in a way that leads to future breakage. Totes are ATMO poorly engineered, which is why we see so many broken. There are three areas for your concern:
    – Does the bottom of the tote engage the base fully?
    – Is the rod bent, and if so has this weakened the rod?
    – Are the (female) threads in the base damaged?
    Any of these conditions will lead to motion in the tote under use. This is annoying and may lead to more catastrophic failure. So now is the time to address them.

    The good news is all can be repaired, and generally easily and for low cost. ATMO the expeditious approach is as followes:
    1 Remove the tote even if it breaks (making an new tote is an easy job).
    2 Remove the rod from the base.
    3 Inspect how well the tote sits in the base without the rod. Is it straight and in full contact. Does the front nub of he base engage the tote to prevent twisting around a vertical axis? If you are good here, set the tote aside for reinstallation later.
    4 Inspect the rod. Are the threads good (both ends)? Is it straight. If it’s bent, you can try straightening the rod. Remove the top cap, hold the rod with a vice grips on a hard surface with the bend up, and tap to straight. Check closely that the rod hasn’t developed cracks at the site of the bend. If you’re still good, put it aside for reuse.
    5 If the threads are damaged on the rod, you’d probably do best to purchase a replacement on eBay. Be sure you get one for your type (Bailey vs. Bedrock) of plane.
    6 If the threads in the base are shot, you’re in a more difficult situation. Most of us don’t possess a machine shop, don’t have the proper taps, nor the setup to guide a tap at the proper angle into the base. FWIW, I think this rod happens to have Whitworth threads (bench planes were made with a crazy combination of standards). Moreover, it’s likely that additional material should be brazed in prior to retapping.

    If the plane is a worker rather than collectible, you may have a much easier alternative.

    I have a war-era #4 which won’t hold the rod. I tried epoxy in he threads with a new rod (good threads) but it won’t hold up to ash or oak. Understand that all of your muscle is transferred through that thread to the plane.

    What has worked for this plane is a bit ugly.

    File or chip any loose paint from the base under and around the tote.
    Mix up some slow setting epoxy (30 minutes or longer). Thicken it up with micro balloons or baking soda to the consistency of peanut butter. Apply to the bottom of the tote, including into the depression that receives the nub on the base. Put epoxy in the threaded hole in the base. Mount the tote and do your best to thread in the rod. Take the remaining epoxy and make a fillet between the base and the bottom of the tote. The end of a popsicle stick is good for forming the fillet. You can clean the excess with a paper towel soaked in rubbing alcohol, if you like. Let this set for a day or two. The tote should now remain firmly in place at least until the tote itself breaks (dropped on the floor or whatever).

    Hope this helps you or someone else with a challenged tote.

    Rick

    #446940
    Richard Guggemos
    Participant

    Your saw buck and saw bench dog clamps present ideas new to me. They’re very cool – and I’m going to try them out on my saw bench.

    Perhaps a saw bench is best for planing small pieces where one can sit on the bench while working.

    Nice work

    Rick

    #446929
    Richard Guggemos
    Participant

    Well done

    #446856
    Richard Guggemos
    Participant

    Nice looking work on this table

    #446832
    Richard Guggemos
    Participant

    Such good work

    #446827
    Richard Guggemos
    Participant

    Nice work!

    #381711
    Richard Guggemos
    Participant

    Getting near to the end. Only a few details left.

    Attachments:
    #379807
    Richard Guggemos
    Participant

    Very handsome – this is no prototype, it’s just the Poplar version😊

    #379782
    Richard Guggemos
    Participant

    What a nice piece, you can be justifiably proud!

    #379330
    Richard Guggemos
    Participant

    A little more progress – it’s cuts shavings now. And a few more pix.

    Attachments:
Viewing 15 posts - 1 through 15 (of 198 total)