SamQ aka Ah! Q!
Old Oak
Seconded. You do have to be careful with some solvents, as they dissolve the constituent plastics.
-
Hi all and welcome to TheWoodHaven2 brought into the 21st Century, kicking and screaming! We all have Alasdair to thank for the vast bulk of the heavy lifting to get us here, no more so than me because he's taken away a huge burden of responsibility from my shoulders and brought us to this new shiny home, with all your previous content (hopefully) still intact! Please peruse and feed back. There is still plenty to do, like changing the colour scheme, adding the banner graphic, tweaking the odd setting here and there so I have added a new thread in the 'Technical Issues, Bugs and Feature Requests' forum for you to add any issues you find, any missing settings or just anything you'd like to see added/removed from the feature set that Xenforo offers. We will get to everything over the coming weeks so please be patient, but add anything at all to the thread I mention above and we promise to get to them over the next few days/weeks/months. In the meantime, please enjoy!
Like the ocean under the moon
- Thread starter Dr.Al
- Start date
Doug
Old Oak
Another vote for Stop Loss Bags, I’ve been using them for a number of years now with the price of oils for me it’s a no brainer.
Woodbloke
Sequoia
As I've got a few VacuVin stoppers surplus to requirements, I'll try the wine bottle approach first of all. The Stop Loss bags look intriguing though, but does each come with that stand up blue plastic base thingie as shown in the pics? - Rob
Dr.Al
Old Oak
I don't know: mine (which look a bit different to the newer ones) didn't, but then I've never felt the lack: they stand up okay on they're own.
The only two blue bits on the woodworkers' workshop images are the foldable funnel and the printing on the bag itself. As Al says, they stand up fine once they have something in them. There isn't a stand AFAIK Rob
Dr.Al
Old Oak
I've been away for a week so haven't done much with the plane. However, that does mean that the four coats of Mike's Magic Mix that I did before going away had plenty of time to dry properly.
The sun was shining when I got back today so I took the opportunity to go and take a few photos. I'm out for most of tomorrow so it'll probably be Saturday before I get a chance to give it a decent test (I still need to give the blades a bit of attention on the corners and a final strop), but it's nice to see it oiled and together.
First of all, all the pieces laid out in a mostly dismantled state (the lever cap doesn't come apart and I was too lazy to unscrew the Norris adjuster):
You may notice the addition of a small brass piece in the lever cap. I made that before going away but didn't take any photos. It's just a top-hat washer, glued in place with Loctite 603. It reduces the diameter of the hole (to account for the fact I swapped from an M8 mounting thread to an M6 one). The only pieces in that photo I didn't make were the shorter two of the three screws.
Partly assembled (and in the state it'll be when sharpening is happening) it looks like this:
Right-hand side:
Left-hand side:
The sun was shining when I got back today so I took the opportunity to go and take a few photos. I'm out for most of tomorrow so it'll probably be Saturday before I get a chance to give it a decent test (I still need to give the blades a bit of attention on the corners and a final strop), but it's nice to see it oiled and together.
First of all, all the pieces laid out in a mostly dismantled state (the lever cap doesn't come apart and I was too lazy to unscrew the Norris adjuster):
You may notice the addition of a small brass piece in the lever cap. I made that before going away but didn't take any photos. It's just a top-hat washer, glued in place with Loctite 603. It reduces the diameter of the hole (to account for the fact I swapped from an M8 mounting thread to an M6 one). The only pieces in that photo I didn't make were the shorter two of the three screws.
Partly assembled (and in the state it'll be when sharpening is happening) it looks like this:
Right-hand side:
Left-hand side:
Just thinking the same as Andy. Not the usual shape for a wooden plane but looks like it will be more comfortable to use.
Dr.Al
Old Oak
Thanks all
I'm not surprised that you don't like them; I've realised that my opinion of what looks good (e.g. the fact that I think slotted screws are ugly and that Torx and Allen heads look better) differs from a lot of people.
I'm not surprised that you don't like them; I've realised that my opinion of what looks good (e.g. the fact that I think slotted screws are ugly and that Torx and Allen heads look better) differs from a lot of people.
SamQ aka Ah! Q!
Old Oak
Taste is individual. If you like it, sorted.
Woodbloke
Sequoia
Nice job! - Rob
Very nice. I wish I had the skill.
Just one small point can we stop calling the finish Mike's Magic Mix. There are and have been several recipes around for many decades maybe even a century or more. I was given a version as an apprentice nearly 50 years ago. I have seen many variations on the theme from both sides of the pond. It is merely a form of rubbing oil or varnish. I am not sure it can be ascribed to any one individual.
Just one small point can we stop calling the finish Mike's Magic Mix. There are and have been several recipes around for many decades maybe even a century or more. I was given a version as an apprentice nearly 50 years ago. I have seen many variations on the theme from both sides of the pond. It is merely a form of rubbing oil or varnish. I am not sure it can be ascribed to any one individual.
Woodbloke
Sequoia
Agreed, it's a matter of personal taste. In my very 'umble opinion, 'old skool' slot screws of the brass variety can look very classy, with a number of caveats; the hinge and screw heads need to be mirror polished, the slots of each screw must be in line ('clocked') and slots cannot, under any circumstances, be mangled, so the screw driver blade must be a perfect fit in the slot. Doing all that is time consuming and a faff, but well worth the effort...my 2 euros worth - Rob
Mike G
Petrified Pine
I made that point myself. There's a thread somewhere in the finishing sub-forum. In the US, it's sometimes called the Maloof (Part 1) mix...but even he didn't invent it. It's been around forever. I suppose using "MMM" as a name might at least point people to the right thread on the forum, where it is discussed in detail. It's a technique, really, rather than a formula.
I have a recipe for chocolate cake that is labelled and forever known in my family as Bob’s Chocolate Cake. It is the same as any other cake mix. What’s in a name? The important thing is that people know what is being spoken about and MMM is a lot easier to type than the actual recipe. My jar is labelled 3M but that moniker is already spoken for.
Dr.Al
Old Oak
This morning I sharpened all the blades and did some experimentation with the plane.
I mentioned before that I've done something a little unconventional on this plane (for reasons that will become clear later in this post) by not having a sprung cap iron. The usual approach with a cap iron is to have a curve in it so that the tip is clamped rigidly down near the cutting edge to ensure there's no gap for shavings to get trapped. My cap iron is flat. To get that same effect of having a gap-free join at the tip, I run a burnisher across the tip in a similar way to how you might with a card scraper:
That produces a tiny roll-over of the tip, which then gets collapsed back down as the cap iron is screwed to the blade and hopefully ensures a gap-free join.
I grabbed a bit of sycamore out of the pile and attacked it with the plane:
It cuts really nicely and, with the low cutting angle, is very easy to push through the wood. I had a couple of instances of shavings getting caught between one corner of the blade and the brass base, so I might open up the mouth a little at some point, but I'd rather be in the position of needing to open it up than needing to close it!
The low cutting angle (36°) also means that it glides through end grain really easily for shooting:
I feel I ought to discuss the cutting angle a little more on this plane as it explains some of the more unusual design decisions. This is a cross section of the plane:
Ignore the weird position of the lever cap: I didn't bother to update the CAD model as I moved some of the clamping parts around. On the real plane it clamps where you'd expect: on the flat bit of the cap iron (which is shown in blue).
The pale blue arrow shows the cutting angle: 36°. That's a lot lower than a Stanley #4 (45°) but is about the same as what you'd get with a low angle bevel-up plane with a 12° bed and 24° bevel. That low cutting angle is great for slicing easily through end grain or nicely grained wood, but not great if the grain's a bit more wavy as it'll cause tear-out very easily.
As I mentioned before, the mouth opening is quite tight. You can, of course, increase the cutting angle and the mouth opening together by adding a back-bevel onto the blade (shown in red):
Here the lever cap position looks even worse but that's just a CAD model issue as before. With this 10° back bevel the cutting angle is now 46° so fairly similar to a Stanley #5. The mouth opening is much bigger as a result of the back bevel so now the plane can be used to take quite heavy cuts if required:
That's fine when you're trying to rough some material down to thickness, but having a big mouth opening is perhaps not ideal for a smoothing plane. If we go back to the plain blade (with no back bevel and hence a 36° cutting angle) and try to plane something less well behaved (in this case Ash) you get a rough surface finish, which is hopefully visible in this photo:
So what if you want to have a tight mouth opening but a high cutting angle? That's where the unusual cap iron helps. This is what the plane looks like without the lever cap fitted:
That little protrusion on the cap iron (the nut for the screw that holds it to the blade) has the same diameter and thickness as the head of the screw. That, combined with the fact that the cap iron is flat and the same thickness as the blade, means you can turn them over:
It's now a bevel-up plane with a 66° cutting angle:
Having the cap iron the same thickness as the blade means that the tip of the blade is still in the same place and hence the mouth opening is the same.
Here's that same bit of ash after planing it with the plane in bevel-up mode.
Of course, in practice it's much more sensible to grab a different plane rather than removing the blade, turning it over and refitting it, so I don't know how often I'll take advantage of the the different ways of using it. Nevertheless it's been a fun experiment and I've really enjoyed the project. Even if the plane spends the rest of its life as a simple bevel-up smoothing plane it's great to try different things and see how they work.
I mentioned before that I've done something a little unconventional on this plane (for reasons that will become clear later in this post) by not having a sprung cap iron. The usual approach with a cap iron is to have a curve in it so that the tip is clamped rigidly down near the cutting edge to ensure there's no gap for shavings to get trapped. My cap iron is flat. To get that same effect of having a gap-free join at the tip, I run a burnisher across the tip in a similar way to how you might with a card scraper:
That produces a tiny roll-over of the tip, which then gets collapsed back down as the cap iron is screwed to the blade and hopefully ensures a gap-free join.
I grabbed a bit of sycamore out of the pile and attacked it with the plane:
It cuts really nicely and, with the low cutting angle, is very easy to push through the wood. I had a couple of instances of shavings getting caught between one corner of the blade and the brass base, so I might open up the mouth a little at some point, but I'd rather be in the position of needing to open it up than needing to close it!
The low cutting angle (36°) also means that it glides through end grain really easily for shooting:
I feel I ought to discuss the cutting angle a little more on this plane as it explains some of the more unusual design decisions. This is a cross section of the plane:
Ignore the weird position of the lever cap: I didn't bother to update the CAD model as I moved some of the clamping parts around. On the real plane it clamps where you'd expect: on the flat bit of the cap iron (which is shown in blue).
The pale blue arrow shows the cutting angle: 36°. That's a lot lower than a Stanley #4 (45°) but is about the same as what you'd get with a low angle bevel-up plane with a 12° bed and 24° bevel. That low cutting angle is great for slicing easily through end grain or nicely grained wood, but not great if the grain's a bit more wavy as it'll cause tear-out very easily.
As I mentioned before, the mouth opening is quite tight. You can, of course, increase the cutting angle and the mouth opening together by adding a back-bevel onto the blade (shown in red):
Here the lever cap position looks even worse but that's just a CAD model issue as before. With this 10° back bevel the cutting angle is now 46° so fairly similar to a Stanley #5. The mouth opening is much bigger as a result of the back bevel so now the plane can be used to take quite heavy cuts if required:
That's fine when you're trying to rough some material down to thickness, but having a big mouth opening is perhaps not ideal for a smoothing plane. If we go back to the plain blade (with no back bevel and hence a 36° cutting angle) and try to plane something less well behaved (in this case Ash) you get a rough surface finish, which is hopefully visible in this photo:
So what if you want to have a tight mouth opening but a high cutting angle? That's where the unusual cap iron helps. This is what the plane looks like without the lever cap fitted:
That little protrusion on the cap iron (the nut for the screw that holds it to the blade) has the same diameter and thickness as the head of the screw. That, combined with the fact that the cap iron is flat and the same thickness as the blade, means you can turn them over:
It's now a bevel-up plane with a 66° cutting angle:
Having the cap iron the same thickness as the blade means that the tip of the blade is still in the same place and hence the mouth opening is the same.
Here's that same bit of ash after planing it with the plane in bevel-up mode.
Of course, in practice it's much more sensible to grab a different plane rather than removing the blade, turning it over and refitting it, so I don't know how often I'll take advantage of the the different ways of using it. Nevertheless it's been a fun experiment and I've really enjoyed the project. Even if the plane spends the rest of its life as a simple bevel-up smoothing plane it's great to try different things and see how they work.
Mike G
Petrified Pine
Well, I followed along from the start and didn't see that coming. How clever. A bevel up or bevel down option is not something I have ever heard of before. I did wonder why you had multiple irons, but didn't put a back bevel into the calculations.
Cabinetman
Sequoia
- Joined
- Oct 11, 2020
- Messages
- 5,249
- Reaction score
- 1,005
- Location
- Lincolnshire Wolds + Massachusetts
- Name
- Ian
Interesting being able to see the difference a different angle makes.
Dr.Al
Old Oak
Thanks all. As you've probably all figured out by now, I quite enjoy experimenting with ideas like this and seeing how they work out. I'd be surprised if it's something that no-one has ever tried before.
Steve Maskery
Old Oak
Waaaayyy beyond me. but I enjoyed every moment of the ride. Thank you for sharing.
S
S
Dr.Al
Old Oak
I said in the first post in this build series that "I like making tools and I find it really satisfying to be able to use tools I've made on other projects". @AndyT later commented that he'd lost count of the number of home-made tools I'd used so far. Now that the project is finished I thought it would be quite interesting to go through the photos and list all the home-made tools I'd used in the making of this home-made tool. In approximate order of use:
Did anyone spot any I've missed?
- Bowling-ball mallet
- Retractable Scriber
- Sheet Metal Bender
- Welder's Third Hand
- Rotary Broach (home-made from a Hemingway Kit)
- Heat Treatment Oven
- Tormek Support Bar for Bench Grinder
- Shooting Handle
- Block Plane
- Vertical Bandsaw Table
- Screwdriver
- Portable Workbench
- Spring Centre for alignment on rotary table (modified to have a straight shank since I wrote the linked web-page)
- Soft Jaws for Metalwork Lathe
- Woodturning Lathe
- Sanding Table for Wood Lathe
- Chisel Handles (arguably doesn't count as a home-made tool but I thought I'd include it in the list anyway)
- Various 3D-printed jigs
Did anyone spot any I've missed?
Perhaps you should patent that design?
Dr.Al
Old Oak
No chance! First of all, you can't patent something that is already known in the public domain (this forum would count as public domain). Secondly, patenting isn't for the faint hearted or light of pocket (think many tens of thousands of pounds and lots and lots of work). Thirdly, I can't imagine ever being able to make money from it, even if I could get a production process going - who's going to buy something like this rather than two or three planes that between them do the same job? Fourthly, even if I could imagine making money from it, it would quickly go from being a hobby to a job and I'm quite happy to keep it as a hobby.