Hand Planes

[Jim C.]

I could not agree more that the 78 is among the most useful planes.
 Of course I really like all of the solid iron rabbet planes.
 Hardly anyone else does, but I use them all the time. The 78, the 180 series and the 190 series too.
 These are all very simple and practically bulletproof planes.

 The era of the plane matters to me though. The later they get, the lesser the construction. The balance in your hand changes dramatically.  A lot of difference to me.

   For me the presence of a bottom spur on the tote is the cutoff point. While a few of the later models are better than the newest ones, its not as easy to tell the "good" ones at a glance.   
  Its come up before, so I already had a picture. If you look closely at this picture, you will see three different eras of the same kind of plane.
 The top one is the first model. The first model has scrolls on the handle.
  Notice the spur on the bottom of the tote, but also see the shape of the tote itself. Its serpentine shaped. Its connected to the plane by fairly long attachments both top and bottom.
 Now look and the bottom plane in the picture. Its the newest model in the picture.
 See the tote? It has all the shape of a billy club, and its connected to the plane by short attachments that not only change the angle of the tote in relation to the plane, but they limit the space for your hand inside.

 Either of the top two models is a world better, to me.
        yours Scott
 
 
       

Looking back to page 15, reply 221, Scottg added some great details regarding the Stanley 180s, 190s and the #78.  His comments are certainly worth re-visiting and pertain directly to the recently featured Stanley #180 rabbet plane shown above.  Go back and take a look because he included a picture that very clearly illustrated the information he provided. 

Jim C.

[Jim C.]

I hope you all enjoy a very Happy Thanksgiving with family and friends.

Jim C.

[Jim C.]

At some point along the way, I probably mentioned that I’ve been replacing the sash on several windows in my house.  There are 31 windows to be exact.  I’d like to say that I’m restoring a 100 year old Victorian mansion back to its original glory, but unfortunately, that’s hardly the case.  I’m actually just replacing rotted sash in “maintenance free” (that’s what the home builder told me) windows that are only fifteen years old.  They’re the builder grade windows that were installed in my newly constructed home back in 1999.  What I learned about eighteen months ago is that aluminum clad windows are NOT maintenance free, particularly when they’re poorly manufactured, and not properly caulked.  Rain and snow also reminded me that once it gets behind aluminum cladding to the bare wood, that wood is going to turn black and rot away before you know it.  (See last picture below.)

I discovered the problem in the spring of 2013 when I opened a window and the double paned glass slid down about an inch in the sash, and as I caught it, black damp crumbs of what used to be wood were pressed into my hand by the glass.  I had to call a “window guy” who came out and informed me that most of my windows were in bad shape.  He went on to explain that the manufacturer of my windows went out of business five or so years earlier and I’d need to have new sash made for the windows.  The cost of new sash, rebuilding each window on site, and installation would run about $500 per window.  Remember I mentioned having 31 windows?  You can do the math on that.  Well, I had to pay for that first window since it was literally falling apart and wouldn’t close.  The “window guy” had the parts on his truck and me over a barrel.  So, my introductory crash course in window sash replacement cost me $500.  In the last eighteen months or so, I’ve repaired 21 windows with home made, exact copy, better than new sash.  I won’t get into the whole process here, but with the help of a couple wood shapers, a set of custom made cope cutters, two table saws, a drill press and three or four hand planes, I’m actually getting pretty good at manufacturing window sash.

Most of my weekends are spent making sash.  One part of the process involves making a rabbet joint along the bottom and top rails to accommodate a couple brackets.  In order to increase speed, I cut that joint by making two passes through the table saw.  Occasionally I’m a little bit off, leaving a small ridge in the corner of the joint where the cheek and shoulder meet.  Rather than readjusting the saw to knock off the 1/32” – 1/16” wide ridge, it’s just easier and faster to make one pass with a hand plane to clean up the corner.  There are a few small rabbet planes that will accomplish this task.  Lately I’ve been using this one.

Stanley #75:

This is a small rabbet plane that is perfect for small cleanup operations, such as what I described above.  The #75 was manufactured by Stanley from 1879 to 1983.  It wasn’t designed as a high end plane, but it works and it incorporates an adjustable throat that allows it to make a precise, light pass, thus producing very acceptable results.  Notice how the bull nose in front of the iron is connected to the arched section of the top casting.  By loosening the screw on top of the plane, that top casting can be moved backwards and forwards along the bottom casting, thus closing down or opening up the throat.  Also notice the elongated hole in the top casting that allows for such forward and backward movement.  It’s a similar design much like the previously featured Stanley #90. (see page 2, reply 25)  I see examples of this little rabbet plane regularly online, at tool shows and occasionally at flea markets.  They’re fairly common and relatively inexpensive.  Prior to buying one, inspect the top casting arches for cracks and/or repairs.  Those arches are little bit fragile, but overall, the plane is certainly worth owning and more than capable of putting in a good day’s work out in the shop.

Jim C.             

[Branson]

Welcome the the new, improved school of window sash.  Somebody always thinks they know more than the old farts who worked on a thousand years of experiment and experience.  They're almost always wrong -- and later, out of business.  On the other hand, I went through all the windows of an 1887 Victorian, and every one was intact.  One of the out buildings had a multi-pane window, probably salvaged, that was built somewhere around 1850, by hand.

I now have two of these little guys, and enjoy them both.  They're sort of the #100 version of rabbet and bull nose planes.  I recently got one by Sargent, and the other is an AMT with a brass body.

[Jim C.]

Hey Branson,

I wish I would have had you here back when this whole window sash project began.  Your experience would have been welcomed and appreciated.  My first prototype sash took me about a dozen hours to make.  Fortunately I had the machinery and hand tools necessary to accomplish the task, but there was still a lot of trial and error early on.  Other than paying the "window guy" for that first window, my only other real big expense was having a custom stacked cutter set made so I could reproduce the cope cuts on the ends of the sash rails.  That set me back another $300.  In terms of hand planes that I use to make some fine adjustments to the sash, I've found myself using a Stanley #75 rabbet plane (like the one featured immediately above), a Stanley #92 shoulder plane (not yet featured in the thread) the Sargent #507 (see page 11, reply #162 above) and a Lie-Nielsen #60 1/2 block plane (not yet featured in the thread) most of the time.  Maybe I'll do a separate thread on my window sash project.  It may not be of much interest, but I'll give it some thought.

And as always my friend......PICTURES......please post a few pictures of your planes...

Jim C.   

[Nolatoolguy]

Hey Jim I really appreciate this thread. I only have a few cheap planes but this is such a great thread. I enjoy reading it. 

[Jim C.]

Hey Jim I really appreciate this thread. I only have a few cheap planes but this is such a great thread. I enjoy reading it.

Hello Nolatoolguy!  Thanks for checking in and thanks for the feedback regarding the thread.  I REALLY do appreciate your comments.  I'm glad that you've been reading along so far.  No need to minimize your hand plane collection.  If they're working for you and getting the job done, then what more can you ask for?  I hope the thread motivates you to keep using planes, and furthermore, motivates you to seek out and try a few new ones.  Don't be afraid to post a few pictures.  ALL hand planes are welcome here!!

Jim C.           

[Jim C.]

Sometimes luck can be good and sometimes it can be bad…… and sometimes it can be GREAT!  I was visiting with my parents today and as I was getting ready to leave, my dad suddenly remembered (with my mother’s prodding) to give me a plane that he had been given by an “old timer” at the VFW Hall pancake breakfast last weekend after church services were concluded.  I have to laugh when my dad refers to someone as an old timer, since he himself is well into his 80s.  Anyway, it’s pretty well known that I like to collect old planes, and my dad isn’t shy about telling people that when he starts talking about his kids.  Well, I guess one of the “old timers” at church overheard him a few weeks ago and as a result, brought him a “junker” saying, “Give this to your son if he wants it.”  That actually happens more than one might think.  I tend to receive a lot of old hand planes and tools just by word of mouth.

So my dad went to the garage and came back with this Stanley #4C.  It was dusty, grimy, and covered with a hardened coating of what must have been thick grease at one time.  The plane was so dirty that I just put it into a plastic bag that my mom offered and headed for home.  (Unfortunately I didn’t photograph it before I cleaned it, initially thinking it was going into the parts plane box.)  When I got home, I pulled it out of the plastic bag, and my first impression was, “The tote is cracked, it’s covered in a hardened tar like glop, and it’s a parts plane.”  It was just someone else's cast off like so many others I’ve received over the years.  For some reason, my first impulse was still to take it apart just to see what I had, and to see how it had been mistreated by its previous owner.  As I started disassembling it however, my excitement started to rise.  It was in pretty good shape for its age.  With just a little elbow grease and a small brass brush, the crud and dried on glop started coming off.  I started to realize that the grime and gunk had actually preserved and protected the plane from years of neglect and inactivity.  Most of the japanning was still intact, and the there wasn’t any rust on the bare cast iron.  All the original parts were present and accounted for, and with the exception of the cracked tote and dinged up knob, the plane was a keeper for sure, and easily categorized as a top quality user tool.  In my haste to clean up the plane and then bask in my good fortune, I nicked my left index finger on the still extremely sharp iron.  I got careless.  Normally, planes that I receive in similar condition are equipped with irons that are so dull, they wouldn’t cut through butter.

I wish I had photographed the plane before I took it apart and started cleaning it!!  After I got into it, it was clear to me that I had badly misjudged the previous owner, who appeared to have made some kind of intentional attempt to protect the plane in grease or cosmoline or some other preservative substance.  Everything was coated in the stuff as if it had been purposely applied.  After about two hours of careful cleaning and lubrication, I ended up with a VERY nice Type 11 (1910 – 1918) Stanley #4C smoother.                       

Jim C. (who occasionally forgets the old saying, "Never judge a book by its cover.")

[Billman49]

The military often coated tools in a thick grease like coating to preserve them - tools still turn up in the UK covered like this, and often wrapped in a canvas like cloth bandage - underneath they are in pristine factory condition.. As the military have downsized since WW2 less and less appears, but it still turns up as old stores are sold off as surplus.

[johnsironsanctuary]

The goop is cosmolene.  It is a wax based coating that has a solvent in  it that dries away after a few weeks.  The military used to insist that tools, parts and even weapons be coated in it before shipment.  Theory being that how long before the item was put in service was unknown. Any solvent will take it off, but it will protect metal pretty much indefinitely.

[Jim C.]

The military often coated tools in a thick grease like coating to preserve them - tools still turn up in the UK covered like this, and often wrapped in a canvas like cloth bandage - underneath they are in pristine factory condition.. As the military have downsized since WW2 less and less appears, but it still turns up as old stores are sold off as surplus.

Hi Billman49!  Good to hear from you.  You know, I've heard of such things happening, where old tools and such have been found in new condition and were sold as military surplus.  I'm not so sure my recently acquired Stanley #4C falls into that category.  A couple things that I didn't mention in the initial writeup included the fact that beneath the frog, various species of wood shavings (oak, pine, and cherry... I think) were accumulated and the iron itself had been sharpened and honed more than once or twice.  I could tell that based on comparing the iron's length to other NOS irons from the same period of time.  The NOS irons were longer by about 3/16" and the characteristics of the iron's edge (which I cut myself on) had a craftsman-made appearance versus a semi-dull factory grind.  And then there's the matter of the tote.  The tote was cracked completely in half and very poorly, and sloppily, repaired a long time ago.  I think the blackish crud that coated the plane's surfaces was dried/hardened grease, and it was really applied heavily to the bottom and sides of the plane.  The plane could not have been used with that crud on it, particularly on its sole.  With the shavings jammed under the frog, the characteristics of the iron's edge and length, and the poorly repaired tote, I'd have to guess that the plane had been used for many years before it was finally put aside.  Perhaps the person who applied the "glop" to it knew that the plane was going to sit for a long period of time and thought he/she would use it again someday.  It seems that someone cared about it enough that he/she tried to protect and preserve it for a period of extended inactivity.  It's hard to say.

Jim C. (playing detective) 

[Jim C.]

During their most productive and diverse years of hand plane manufacturing, Stanley made several different variations of weather stripping planes.  I guess before hand held electric routers were popular, and access to heavy machinery like shapers was available, craftsman used this type of plane to cut narrow grooves in window sash specifically to accommodate weather stripping.  If you’ve been reading along, just a little while back, I mentioned that I was currently engaged (and still am) in a window sash project at my house.  Since I’m at my own home fixing/replacing the sash on my own windows, I have the benefit of a shop that’s full of heavy machinery.  My window sash project does involve cutting a groove the length of both stiles and both rails that will accept a piece of weather stripping.  For purposes of time and given the amount of parts that I need to constantly make, I have a small router table set up and dedicated to the task.  Outfitted with a 1/16” thick slot cutter, I can make those grooves pretty quickly.  Yesterday while I was out in my shop plugging away at my sash project, I got to thinking about how different things might be sixty or seventy years earlier.  Maybe I’d have a table saw to help me.  Would I have had two?  Probably not.  Would I have had a shaper?  An electric router?  Hard to say, but again, probably not.  For a craftsman of that bygone era, who was employed to fix one or two windows at someone’s home, lugging around heavy power tools probably didn’t make sense.  Thinking in those terms, suddenly it’s much easier to see how a weather stripping plane may have been a necessity for various tradesmen.  If one visits certain websites dealing with old hand planes, weather stripping planes tend to get a negative rap in terms of their usefulness and utility.  Although they may not be as well known today, or as efficient when making multiple parts, they had their place back in the day.  For any craftsman who went to a job site for purposes of repairing a window or two, they were the ideal specialty tool.

Stanley #238:

This plane was manufactured by Stanley between 1928 and 1938.  It’s very easy to use and as one can see, it does a very respectable, neat job of cutting grooves for weather stripping.  The #238 includes several features that are common to other “plough-like” planes such as a fence and depth stop.  The #238 also employs a relatively unique method of securing its various sized cutting irons.  The irons fit into a milled groove on the main casting, and slides back and forth in the groove to adjust the depth of cut.  A light pass seems to produce the best results.  Once the iron is positioned at the desired setting, it is held in place by the shoulders of two screws that pinch it (the iron) down into the groove of the main casting.   It’s a little tedious to set up, but not too bad, and the iron does not move once the screws are tightened down.  The fence is adjustable on rods that are threaded into the main body of the plane.  Notice there are two other rods that are connected to the fence, but not to the main body casting.  Those other two rods can be adjusted toward the main casting or away from it and then secured into position with screws.  By setting those rods in a desired position on the fence itself, a secondary, repeatable fence location can be achieved.  It’s a nice feature if two pieces of parallel weather stripping were used on the same piece of window sash.  Also notice how those secondary rods have a piece of wire wrapped on one end to keep them from sliding out of the fence when they’re being adjusted. 

The #238 works well as designed, but like many other planes that Stanley manufactured, it had several little parts and seven different width cutters ranging in size from 1/8” to 3/8” that could be easily lost.  Most of the irons that I’ve seen have their respective sizes stamped on their sides with a Stanley trademark stamped on their opposite side.  Prior to adding a #238 to your hand plane arsenal, do your homework and know what to look for.  Make sure all the original/correct parts are present and accounted for.  Some of the parts can be extremely difficult to locate separately.  Most particularly the fence, the secondary rods with the wired ends, and the individual cutting irons are easy to misplace and expensive to replace…. if one can find them.  Very often, the only iron that comes with originally equipped multi iron planes such as the #238, is the iron that was last used with the plane.  Any weather stripping plane is probably not one that I’d recommend as a “must have” to use.  Electric routers, shapers, table saws, etc. can get the job done pretty quick particularly if several parts need to be made over and over again.  But for the one little job, or maybe for some straight inlay work, a plane like the #238 might be fun to tinker with.

Jim C.

[Branson]

> Electric routers, shapers, table saws, etc. can get the job done pretty quick particularly if several parts need to be made over and over again.  But for the one little job, or maybe for some straight inlay work, a plane like the #238 might be fun to tinker with.

I strongly suspect that, given the time period, these were more likely front line tools, used for whole jobs of retro-fitting various weather strips on site.  Factory produced weather-stripped sash and frame surely used power tools, but retro-fitting existing sash was its own industry, with carpenters and companies selling whole house weather-stripping.  Do the job, take the money, and march on to the next customer.

Since the carpenter is setting up at the home (nobody wants to  finish the day with a missing window!), a hand tool like this is at a premium.  You work the windows one at a time, perhaps two, and work the day until there isn't time to start another and see it through to the end.

Some of these jobs were not very lovely when finished.  I ran into one back in 2006, and just about lost my behind.  A customer wanted all of the windows in his house re-roped.  Sure, no problem.  I bid the job at $50 for the first window, and $35 for each additional.   Cheap, but I still stood to make a nice profit at the end.  Then I discovered all the windows had been retro-fitted, and bad things had happened to the sash in several windows, and that removing the stripping without destroying it turned a 1 - 2 hour job  into a 4 hour job at best.  At the end of the first day I called up one of my old customers for replacement sash, and asked what he charged for dealing with these retroed sash.  He answered $110 per window minimum.  (What was that quote about the wisdom of learning from others' experience?)

All of the early systems presented some kind of problem.  I think that people who had little real experience with window sash jumped on the retro-fit band wagon, and the job above was a case in point.   They put in weather strip channels without regard to the rope channels in the double hung windows.  As a result, the knot-retaining hole was destroyed, and the ropes had to be nailed in place, sometimes with 5 finish nails.  The access plates for the weights were trashed.

It was very ugly.  Fortunately, the home owner was both reasonable and understanding, and agreed to a bid change to $75 per hole, and in some cases, the old stripping was so damaged by the necessary removal that those windows went back in place without.

But back to the topic, retro-fitting had a big boom.  it had to be done on site at a time when hand planing was thought to be the thing to do.  These little planes made it all possible.  Loss of the whole set of blades?  Each company probably had one, maybe two sizes of weather stripping, and only needed a blade for each.  Setting the plane up once probably did it for all time, so ease of re-setting didn't matter much.  If it were me, I'd just have one of these for each blade I actually used, and the rest of the blades would go into a drawer in the shop or lie around the bottom of the tool box until I needed to grind one to replace one too worn to bother with.

[Jim C.]

Hey Branson, thanks for checking in and providing some GREAT historic background!  I kind of figured that weather stripping planes did provide some real utility back in the day.  Stanley and other manufacturer's didn't just make planes for fun.  They made them for a targeted consumer and with a purpose in mind.... to sell planes and make money.  Perhaps it didn't always work out that way, but there must have been some market for weather stripping planes.  Without the benefit of your hands on experience, it would be more difficult to see just how useful and relied upon these planes actually were at one time in the construction industry.  I think a lot of the value these planes provided was lost over the years and forgotten to some extent with the introduction of affordable hand held power tools.  GREAT information!!! Thanks again for jumping in!!!  Your comments are always welcome.

Jim C.   

[Chillylulu]

Branson said "It was very ugly.  Fortunately, the home owner was both reasonable and understanding, and agreed to a bid change to $75 per hole, and in some cases, the old stripping was so damaged by the necessary removal that those windows went back in place without."

The home owner was right to pay. Ethically and somewhat (don't know the contract particulars, but it sounds like a handshake deal) legally any unknown existing conditions are an owners problem. You, as a workman, are responsible for what you should have reasonably known when you gave the owner your quote. In other words, you bid based on normal expected conditions. The basis of your price changed. 

It would be different if you knew there was a problem and tried to gouge the homeowner after the fact. But you didn't.  You informed the owner of the changed conditions, revised your price with a reasonable adjustment, and the owner agreed to take care of their part.  It is great when both parties are honest and sincere.

Sorry for the off topic rant, Jim. But I have seen a lot of good people ( on both sides) get hurt by bad apples.  I'll send you some pics of my planes (nothing special) early 2015 to try and make it up.

Chilly