In the first half of the twentieth century, several manufacturers were competing with Stanley to make mass produced hand planes, and other hand tools. Some companies did cut into Stanley’s share of the market, and often did so by copying many of Stanley’s designs and ideas. Some tried to “make a better mousetrap” by adding special features and gimmicks. Most of the time, those unique features didn’t really enhance the plane’s overall performance, and occasionally, they detracted from it. There were other times when various Stanley competitors came up with entirely different “non Stanley” ideas and designs that really worked. Two such planes that I previously featured are perfect examples; the Sargent #507 block plane (see page 11, reply 162) and the Rumbold butt mortise plane (see page 17, reply 254).
In my opinion, more often than not, these new ideas and designs fell into the “better mousetrap” category. As one of Stanley’s top competitors, Sargent manufactured a few planes that looked very different and unique, when compared to their Stanley equivalents. Take for example their #1500 series rabbet planes, commonly referred to as “lady bugs” due to their insect like appearance. They sort of remind me of a snail too…. Anyway, those planes don’t look like anything else out there and when compared to the results produced by Stanley #90 series rabbet planes, there’s not much difference. What makes the “lady bugs” so special is their shape, and that makes them VERY collectable. Depending on the model and its condition, those little planes can easily sell for a few thousand dollars apiece!!
Sargent also made a relatively unique looking series of bench planes called “Autosets.” Several different sizes were generally manufactured between 1916 and 1943. I say generally because a few sizes were manufactured for much shorter periods of time within the 1916 – 1943 span, making them rare, collectible and expensive. The Autoset plane model numbers were designated with a 700 series, that like many Sargent planes, was followed by their size in inches. They were also available with corrugated soles and as such were referred to with a “C” after their model number. For example, an 8” long Autoset would be model #708, while an 8” long Autoset with a corrugated sole would be model #708C. When I think about Autoset planes, what really catches my eye is the distinctive shape of their main body castings, which adds nothing to their function, and their one of a kind pressure cap and frog configuration, which may or may not be an added benefit and could be seen as falling into the “better mousetrap” category. I guess the individual craftsperson will ultimately have to make the final decision on that score.
The unique pressure cap and frog design are what give this plane its name… Autoset. The theory was that once the plane was setup for a particular cut (light, heavy, etc), its pressure cap and cutting iron could be removed from the plane and then re-installed to make the same cut without having to re-adjust the frog, the iron or the depth of cut. The fact of the matter is that after using any tool with a cutting edge, like a hand plane, that edge is going to get dull and require honing. The Autosets allowed the user to remove the iron, hone it, and then re-install it back on the frog while still producing the same cut, but without having to fiddle around with the adjustments to achieve it.
The design employs a fixed frog that’s attached with screws to two stout screw bosses that are cast into the main body of the plane. Down near the throat, the bottom edge of the frog rests on a lip that’s cast into the plane’s main body. This configuration provides a stable platform for the cutting iron, thus reducing chatter and potential iron flex. On more traditional bench planes, the double iron (cutting iron and chip breaker) configuration usually requires that the chip breaker be removed in order to hone the cutting iron. A traditional chip breaker has that little horizontal slot that orients itself on the yoke attached to the top of the frog, so it must be fitted to the cutting iron in exactly the same place in an effort to avoid having to re-adjust the frog, the depth of cut, etc. No matter how hard I've tried to install the chip breaker back on the cutting iron in exactly the same place, I'm usually off just a little, causing me to have to re-adjust the depth of cut, the frog, etc. to get the same cut I had prior to removing the double iron assembly. Autoset planes use a single short iron that sits directly on the frog, which has a small pin protruding up to engage a small slot on the cutting iron itself (not a chip breaker that has to be perfectly re-oriented on the cutting iron).
Finally the pressure cap is designed to act as a chip breaker that can be moved closer or further from the cutting edge depending on the desired cut. Once it's positioned, the pressure cap too is "autoset" and does not need to be adjusted if removed from the plane. If one looks closely at the photos below, he/she will see that the pressure cap incorporates a "T" shaped catch that's held in place by a nicely engineered capitve nut at the top of the lever cap itself. Notice how the "T" has catches on it that lock onto the pressure bar that runs from side to side across the plane's main body. Even when the pressure cap is removed, that "T" mechanism remains fixed because of that captive nut. When the pressure cap is re-installed on the plane, the catches on the "T" re-engage the pressure bar at exactly the same distance from the edge of the cutting iron as it was prior to removing it.
In terms of doing what they were designed to do, the Autoset planes deliver. Their unique components do allow the user to remove the iron, hone it, and then re-install it onto the plane without having to make any significant adjustments thereafter. I like that. Do the Autoset planes produce superior results when compared to the results produced by a well-tuned traditional looking/functioning bench plane? Probably not, but again, that decision is up to the evaluation of each individual. In the end, the Autoset "better mousetrap" idea probably didn't cut wood (or catch mice) any better than the more traditional looking bench planes that we're all so familiar with. As for creating a bench plane that required little if any adjustment after disassembly and reassembly, well, I think Sargent got it right.
Hopefully I didn’t bore you or confuse you too much with this feature. I spent a lot of time talking about frogs, chip breakers, irons and pressure caps. The best way to really see what I’m talking about is to compare any common bench plane you may have to an Autoset. Get an Autoset out in the shop, play around with it a little, and I think you’ll see what I’m talking about. With that being said, I have to admit that the Autosets are my ALL TIME FAVORITE bench planes to collect. I have a couple that I use too. I absolutely love the theory behind them, the engineering and machining that went into making them, their distinctive styling, and the functional “contraptionism” of their pressure cap and frog design. What a great looking tool! It’s fair to say that I’m a hardcore Stanley hand plane enthusiast, but when it comes to Sargent Autosets…… well you get the point.
Sargent #708:
The plane depicted below was probably manufactured between 1925 and 1943. It’s approximately 8” long, or about the size of a #3 bench plane. Sargent manufactured a 707, 708, 710, 711, 714, 718 and a 722. All were also available with corrugated soles. Most Autoset planes are relatively collectible. They’re available, as I still see them at tool shows and online, however, condition and completeness are everything, even when considering a user quality plane. The parts on these planes are relatively unique to Autoset planes only. Buying one with missing and/or broken parts could turn into hassle. Parts can be expensive and difficult to track down. Be picky regardless if you’re going to buy one to use or for your collection. Thanks for hanging in there on this one.
Jim C. (who likes to ramble)
