I couldn’t find this picture earlier on, but it has now appeared
This is one of the best adjuster I have ever made, and I hope to revisit this but it is only suitable for a bevel down plane
February 13, 2019
Workshop blog 8 – No 985
I still keep revisiting the drawing board making final adjustments to my new plane the No 985 – seems to go on forever. Whilst I have been doing this I have been making comparisons between non-adjuster planes and adjuster planes and I am working on the basis that having an adjuster does double the price. I will try to explain the difference and why the work compounds.
Since designing my own planes I have moved on a long way from the earlier Norris examples. The Norris planes with their adjusters did tend to be a bit basic, like most planes of this time, almost bordering on primitive. You could literally recess the infill and drop the adjuster straight in, securing with two wood screws.
I will explain with an example of where a lot of the work goes, which doesn’t appear to have much to do with the actual adjuster. My adjuster designs are truly integrated into the plane, I don’t just pop an adjuster in as an extra!
The photo below shows the swivel which is balled so it matches any irregularities whilst connecting with the blade. This is, like most of my design elements, my own innovation.
As you can see the lever cap (from my No 984 plane which is blogged here:http://www.holteyplanes.com/blog/category/no-984/, showing the machine working) is stepped/recessed so that it will carry a swivel. This is necessary with adjuster planes as the swivel shoe will bridge the adjuster holes in the blade. From my research it appears that I am probably the first pioneer to drop the chip breaker on bevel down planes. The first plane I made like this was the 11-s (see photo)
As the 11s has no adjuster drillings the lever cap was quite straight forward and less work. When I made the No 982 I was able to avoid the holes in the blade with the lever cap placement but it put some limitations on the design.
This is an example of the adjuster recessing in the No 983.
This is the bottom for the No 984 showing the adjuster recess.
In summary: to add an adjuster, both adjuster and plane have to be truly integrated. Of course the adjuster has to be made as well.
February 5, 2019
Workshop blog 7 – No 985
I have spent a long time on my drawing board this year working on a new design – designated No 985 which will be part of my range of non-infill planes, which I very much prefer. This smoother is a non-adjuster type plane which means a reduction in work as the adjuster is a big item – both to make and accommodate, which will show in the price. Some people prefer a non-adjuster plane and I have not made this on a full handled plane before.
This plane is to be made from 416 stainless steel which is expensive and flat sections cannot be sourced in the UK. My experience with this alloy is that it is the best for my purposes. It is also preferred for making rifle barrels. It is very nice for working with and has a lovely texture to it. And I can stick it on a magnetic chuck for surface grinding.
Whilst waiting for the stainless to arrive I have made a start on the handles.
This is an area in which feedback would be greatly appreciated. Since I am making a smoothing plane my objective is to keep it as short as possible. A lot of the older planes were 7 1/2″ long which makes sense for finishing purposes. However, these planes were usually handleless, which can be uncomfortable to use. Once you introduce a handle it is going to increase the length. As this is a non-infill plane I will be using a round bun, which also needs a little bit of extra room. I would like to make the handles short for use with three fingers plus the index finger resting on the side of the blade. What I want feedback on is would you prefer a taller handle so you can use four fingers which will make the plane longer, or do you prefer three fingers and a shorter plane?
For those who have experienced my No 98 they will have noticed how comfortable the handle is as it has plenty of room for four fingers
- http://holteyplanes.com/. However, it is better to have the plane shorter if you are going to use it for smoothing/finishing.
If I use the taller handle the plane will be 8 3/4″ long or 8″ with the shorter handle.
A lot of modern smoothing planes seem to be about 9 1/2″ long which is neither a smoother or a panel plane – needs redefining.
My handles are all hand made and I make several templates to find the one I am happy with.
January 10, 2019
New Workshop 6
Blades for the No 98 hardened, tempered, cryogenically treated and now ground and polished. Pictures of finished planes to follow shortly.
December 14, 2018
New Workshop 5
I have decided to put my blade chamfering onto the No 98 blade, it does set off a low angle plane – ergonomic and aesthetically. It is a lot of work, especially finding 30 deg chamfering tools (a 45 deg just doesn’t look right). The polishing is very time consuming. I have to do the polishing before I send them off to heat treatment, then I only need to buff the edges and surface grind when they come back.
December 7, 2018
New Workshop 4
Just a few more pictures as I get near to finishing these new No 98 planes
December 4, 2018
New Workshop Blog 3
No 98 bronze lever caps
These are the last lever caps of this type. I also used them on my mitre planes. Gone forever as the foundry closed down and my patterns are lost.
After preparation including flattening, squaring etc, the profile is cut out.
The lever caps after profiling also showing centering hole to be bored to make ready for tapping
Tapping after the boring
The machining for the keep recesses so the lever cap can be released after 2-3 turns on the thumb screw
Ready for final shaping and polishing
Discussion
I am hoping to get some feedback here, so please register if you haven’t already and comments will be appreciated.
Snecked Blades
In the course of my research I have found that the only planes that were made with snecked irons were shoulder planes, and the occasional thumb and chariot planes – these were side snecked as in my 11-s smoothing plane here (double sided sneck).
Mitre planes usually have top snecked irons, as in my No 10 shown here.
I can’t understand why smoothers and panel planes etc did not have snecked irons. Of course top snecking would require a longer blade as lever cap or wedge would restrict their use. A side sneck should still work on these planes.
Is it possible that the use of chip breakers had something to do with this?
I am working on a development plane at the moment and planning to make it a non-adjuster plane. I feel that having a snecked iron will make a considerable difference in setting up the blade. I am also wondering if users choose to use a non-adjuster plane because it is better or is it an elitist thing?
November 27, 2018
New Workshop blog 2 (post retirement)
Some more components for the No 98 plane. Showing the integral rivets being cut in situ
Finished items are the front and rear handle bosses. All in stainless steel as usual.
November 26, 2018
New Workshop blog 1 (post retirement ????)
During the course of finishing off bits and pieces out of the back of the cupboard I decided I would put together some more No 98 planes. I was horrified to find not all the pieces there. However, I had already promised a plane to someone so I need to get on with it.
I am just making components as I need them. I will start with some pictures of the adjuster boss and post as I go. This No 98 plane was the start of my own designs (and the start of bevel up smoothers in general). You will notice from just these few pictures how much work is involved.
An enormous set up for a tiny component
Planing the end off to initiate a 15 deg angle
Milling out the integral rivets at the same 15 deg.
The finished item
You can pick out where this item belongs
Over the years I have and many enquiries for this No 98 plane which I hadn’t been able to fulfill. So those of you who want one this is your only chance to get one. Just making a few. See my website for pricing.