• 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!

Oak coffee table - finished!

AndyT

Old Oak
Joined
Nov 23, 2020
Messages
2,686
Reaction score
287
Location
Bristol
Name
Andy
I've not been doing much woodwork lately, which means it's time I did.

Several things have come together to help. One is the gradual realisation that our sitting room could be improved with a low coffee table. Another is that a generous friend gave me some nice oak boards which I haven't done anything with. So here we go!

I've not done a detailed design, but we have played around with bits and pieces of different sizes propped up in the right place, and have come to an agreement on something that I can build, with the wood in stock.

Here's what I have. Four nice big window boards, two of them rebated and one rounded along its edge.

P1090451.JPG
I also have a couple of oddments of inch boards

P1090452.JPG

and this great big lump, which was somebody's mantel shelf until the new occupants of the house ripped it out and put it in their front garden. They were pleased to see it disappear on my trolley. I was thinking it would be ideal for table legs.

P1090453.JPG

What you can't see in the pictures is several hours of fiddling about looking closely at the wood and any flaws that needed to be worked around, then thinking about how wide a leg should be, how deep the rails of a table frame need to be, how far in from the edge the frame should be set - anyone who has built a table will know the experience of thinking closely about this sort of thing.

I've built a few tables, but nothing for a long time and nothing quite like this. I reckon the sensible order of work is

1 Make the top and get it all square enough and flat enough. Adjust its size if necessary.
2 Make the frame and legs to suit the actual dimensions of the finished top.

So today I started in with the tools. I'll document this in my usual detailed way; if there are too many words, the pictures should tell most of the story.

The rebated edge on a window board is useful if you are fixing it onto a frame, but no use here so I sawed it off. There's not enough space in my workshop to do this sort of thing on the bandsaw and my default is to prefer hand tools when I can, so I clamped the board and ripped the edge off. The saw is an ordinary no-name handsaw which I converted from crosscut to rip, at 4 tpi. It really doesn't take long and is part of my exercise regime for the arms and chest muscles.

P1090454.JPG

This board is longer than I need, but just the right length if I remove the big knot. It soon succumbed to this other saw, filed and set not by me but by the same generous friend who gave me the timber. (You know who you are, Peter!)

P1090457.JPG
P1090455.JPG

There's nothing like a properly set up saw to make cutting wood a pleasure. Although I don't have space at the end of my bench for this sort of cut, this saw cuts straighter and squarer than my other saws, and quicker too. If you know anyone who can really take care of saws, treat them right and sit at their side for a lesson. I feel very privileged to be using this tool.

After that, there was quite a lot of planing, mostly with a Stanley 5½ and a no 7. This oak was a treat to use, really well-behaved. Everything seemed to fall into place like the books describe, and the edges got straighter and squarer without anything going wrong.

On the board with the rounded-over edge, once I had removed the rebate I needed to gauge the width. It was around 7", which I find is a bit too far for an ordinary marking gauge. Even if the stock is long enough, the head is too small to stay square. Fortunately, I have been unable to resist picking up one or two panel gauges. These are almost always user-made. That means that they don't appear in catalogues and so don't appeal to collectors wanting to collect one of every model made.
I think the variety makes them more interesting. Their makers often used the nicest bits of wood they could get their hands on and were skilled enough to do an accurate job. This one is in mahogany and has four different owners' names on it.

P1090462.JPG

Although it marks quite well, the line is difficult to see on this open-pored oak, so I went over it with a pencil.

P1090461.JPG

It wasn't worth trying to saw off the rounded edge. I used this wooden jack plane to take off thicker shavings, then reverted to the Stanleys.

P1090468.JPG

This was followed by lots of comparisons and adjustments. It's difficult to photograph, but you may be able to see here that although the edges touch nicely, one of the boards is a bit bowed end to end, showing as a shadow.

P1090458.JPG

I think I can deal with that by adjustment when gluing, followed by planing, but we'll find out later. For today, I was pleased to get to this stage, with the three boards reasonably well matched together.

P1090469.JPG

I've been told or read somewhere that it's good practice to get on and glue boards like these while they do still touch, not wait for them to curl up in different directions, so by the time you read this it will be too late to tell me I'm going wrong...:unsure:

And here you can see everything ready for glue-up.

P1090471.JPG

I've had these Record sash cramps since the 1990s, when I was aware that the prices had been cut by about a third and decided to invest in them. In one way it doesn't feel like very long ago, but on the other hand there's no equivalent UK manufacturer of such things, and if there was I doubt if I would ever find out that they had a sale on nowadays.

I used my usual Titebond Liquid Hide Glue and warmed it up in a jug of hot water first. I brushed a thin layer onto both edges, making sure that the glue went all the way across with no gaps.

Then it was the usual procedure of tightening up the cramps evenly and wiping off the excess with a damp rag. I also used a soft faced hammer to bring the edges of the boards into line as much as I could.


P1090472.JPG

Tomorrow I shall find out how well it's worked.

Whatever happens, it's good to be back with the saws and planes again! :)
 
Last edited:
It's good indeed for you to be back with the saws and planes again :) . As soon as I saw the thread title and author I thought to myself "yippee, that looks like another AndyT build thread". I'm looking forward to following every step closely.
 
No biscuits nor dowels?
I think the glue is strong enough on its own. Biscuits and dowels can help with alignment but with one board here being slightly bent end to end, I wanted to be able to adjust the fit as I tightened up the joint.

And although biscuits go well with coffee, dowels don't!
 
Nice project Andy. Although you may not realise (but you probably do) this is very much a Krenovian approach; you've got a fixed quantity of some respectable wood and you're seeing what can be produced from it, this time a coffee table. I've just started another JK thing this weekend using just the same approach. I haven't even done a drawing for it yet but I may cobble up a sketch or two regarding construction details later on - Rob
 
Thanks Rob. I'm sure I've seen photos of Krenov next to racks of far more wood than I shall ever disturb! I suspect this table will be plainer and squarer than he would have liked, but it's nice to know he shared my approach;) .

Here's the story of this morning's efforts.

First, the top out of the cramps. This is the underside, showing a nice line of glue drips. Some newspaper on the bench would have been a good idea. Never mind, it prompted me to have a proper tidy up.

P1090473.JPG

All I did with the top was to stand it out of the way and notice how alarmingly heavy it is. I hope the finished table isn't immovable.

The table, I've decided, will have conventional square legs at the corners, linked by rails tenoned into them. To make the rails I decided to use these bits, as shown earlier.

P1090452.JPG

Trust me, underneath the brown varnish there's some good wood.

I used the rest to make the sides and other parts of this little chest of drawers, in 2015.

IMG_4073.JPG

The first step was to mark out my chosen width, 2½ inches. (This is mostly an imperial measurements build, as I'm using old wood.)
That needed a strip to be trimmed off, thus losing some old holes.

This is the sort of job for which my little three wheeler bandsaw is all I need. You might be amused or appalled by how little space there is around it, but don't worry; the feed in is through the doorway, and the feed-out is between the two hand-powered bench drills. Just enough room, with no space wasted. ;)

P1090474.JPG

Here it is on the bench

P1090475.JPG

and here it is ready for planing back to width.

P1090476.JPG

To distract you all while I spend a while making more shavings, let's take a closer look at the handscrew.

I've said it before, but I like these, they're versatile. Unusually, this one is commercially made and marked with an address and a trademark.

P1090479.JPG

That's not the clearest photo ever, but trust me, it says:

341 - 345 OLD ST
SHOREDITCH E.C.1
Zyto
REGD.

I expect you all know that means it's from Tyzacks. Cutting a very long and complicated story much shorter, the Tyzack family were big in tools for a long time. In Sheffield they made saws; in London they had big stores in the furniture making district, in amongst the warren of small and medium businesses that supplied the city with all its furnishing needs. (There's more info here http://www.tyzack.net/hackney.htm and on the rest of that site.) They were at 341-345 Old Street from 1905 to 1976.

Looking at the other side, there's a much clearer mark identifying the owner, but I've no idea who HF&S were. Anyone know?

P1090480.JPG

If we turn to a couple of old catalogues, we find this, probably from 1908. Proudly made in London, and only a penny an inch.

T704-1908.jpg

but by about 1930 the listing has changed - whatever happened to making things in England!?



T704-1930.jpg

Imported from somewhere, at such shocking prices! (To be fair, there had been some events affecting world trade between these two dates.) I've no idea which country mine was made in, but it works fine for me.

Meanwhile, I marked, sawed and planed two more bits and planed the varnish off on one side:

P1090484.JPG

I noticed that the shavings were very different from yesterday's. Instead of full length ringlet type curls, I was getting little fragments:

P1090482.JPG

P1090483.JPG

Anyone know why? Is it just because this oak is older, and maybe drier?

Anyway, that's it for now. I expect there will be a bit of a gap, while I sort out how to get some little legs out of that big lump of oak I showed you earlier.
 

Attachments

  • P1090473.JPG
    P1090473.JPG
    179.7 KB · Views: 2
  • P1090452.JPG
    P1090452.JPG
    169.5 KB · Views: 2
  • IMG_4073.JPG
    IMG_4073.JPG
    107.9 KB · Views: 2
  • P1090475.JPG
    P1090475.JPG
    202.1 KB · Views: 2
  • P1090476.JPG
    P1090476.JPG
    205.6 KB · Views: 1
  • P1090479.JPG
    P1090479.JPG
    188 KB · Views: 1
Yesterday I said I needed to think about how to cut the wood for the legs. The lump I have is big and heavy. It's about 3" thick, just a little bit too big for my old, horrid, noisy, cheap tablesaw. Definitely too big and heavy for the bandsaw. I don't have a circular saw.
I could go and visit someone with a big saw and get it done, but I fancy getting on with this project if I can, and frankly I am enjoying the exercise. But hand ripping 3" oak is a bit much if I can avoid it.

I remembered that there are people who start rip cuts by ploughing a narrow groove all round. Apparently some of them make a fashionable "kerfing plane" for the purpose. But I also remembered an excellent article by Richard Arnold in Mortise & Tenon magazine no 7. He describes making a panelled door, by hand, in one working day. To speed up the rip cuts he first ploughed a groove all round with his ordinary plough plane set up with its narrowest iron, the No 1, which is about an eighth of an inch. He was working in softwood, but I thought a groove would be even more help when working in oak.

First of all, I made sure that one edge of my mantel shelf was reasonably flat, straight and square to an adjacent surface. It's a good job I enjoy planing.

P1090485.JPG

Looking at various plough planes, I noticed that the maximum depth of cut varied quite a bit.

My Record 050 and 045C would only cut down to half an inch deep.

My favourite plough, the Record 405 would manage 3/4":

P1090487.JPG

But an old wooden plough would go the full inch.

P1090488.JPG

I sharpened the No 1 iron and set to work.

P1090489.JPG

P1090490.JPG

Results were ok, but I was struggling to go the full depth. I swapped to the 405.

P1090491.JPG

Results were immediately better, for less effort, so I used the Record for the second cut as well.

P1090493.JPG

I really like this plane. I expect I would say the same of a Stanley 45, which it is a close copy of, but I don't have one of those. I just like the way it behaves predictably and adjustments stay put. Last time I looked they were still really good value on eBay, rarely fetching more than £100. And as they appeared relatively late, with a sturdy box, it's easy to find one that's complete and in good condition.

For sawing out the remaining bit of wood in the middle, I used my Workmate.

It's a sad sight to see some of the flimsy rubbish that has the Workmate name on these days. This is a proper heavyweight thing that's had plenty of use but is still reliable. You might expect me to have an assortment of sawing horses and low stools, but they don't suit the uneven floor in my workshop and the lack of space.

P1090494.JPG

P1090495.JPG

P1090496.JPG

That worked just fine and I can see from the timestamps on the photos that even with pauses to adjust the grip and take pictures, it took me less than ten minutes. And I could still breathe at the end of it!

I cleaned off the sawn surface a bit, down to the level of the ploughed grooves.

This lump is long enough for three legs, so I also cut a bit more off for a fourth one.

I'd decided not to bother about lining up the growth rings so as to show similar grain on all four sides of the legs; there's no point with a low table where the understructure will be hidden by the top. But that did mean that any flaws in the wood could become a source of difficulty.

This is what I mean - on a planed surface there are voids like these:

P1090499.JPG

P1090503.JPG

I'm not sure if that's just the effect of the medullary rays or a bit of shake in the timber, but it's got to go. I'll decide the exact dimensions of the legs when I can see them all side by side and work on them together!

That's all for now; I don't think I can do any more on this until next week some time, so please bear with me as the pace of progress declines to my habitual level. ;)
 
Last edited:
Nice description and pics of the technique. I was given a new ish work mate copy and yes not the best.
 
Last edited:
I love it, Andy. Good to see such a nice write up, too. As for the various flaws and the variable shavings, I guess "oak is oak" covers it. This sort of stuff just happens. I'd dab a bit of glue in those flaky bits, I think, and then just plane away and see what you get.

I still have the Workmate I started on 45 years ago. It's amazingly useful, once in a while. I think mine has had more use holding doors on edge for planing than anything else in the last few years.
 
Rob, rest assured that the contents of your workshop are definitely on my mental list of local highlights. It's just that this time I didn't have a day spare for a visit, and I wanted to try the groove first method.
 
Rob, rest assured that the contents of your workshop are definitely on my mental list of local highlights. It's just that this time I didn't have a day spare for a visit, and I wanted to try the groove first method.
Andy, after the hospitality shown to me in Bristol a couple of years ago, you'll always be more than welcome in Wilton - Rob
 
Andy, this table is just the sort of post I enjoy and need as a tonic. I haven't picked up a tool now for a long time due to various things including depression, but I can feel your excellent post is helping me and reviving my interest again in woodworking. Many thanks.
 
Andy, that is such a clever trick for ripping by hand. I have never come across that technique before and will probably never use it but I will pleased to regale other woodworkers with how it can be done.

I also happen to have a motorized hand held Japanese groover with a 4.5 mm cutter, which would be a nice hybrid approach.
 
A great read Andy, loved how it’s all in Imperial as it’s old wood, brill.
Yes those Medullary rays do lift occasionally, as Mike said a bit of glue squrted down helped with airforce down a straw. Bit of paper to stop staining and cramp it down. Jobs a goodun. Awaiting the next episode with interest.
Ian
 
Thanks for the interest and kind comments. And I like the reassuringly simple suggestion of just sticking any stray bits back down.

Progress will continue, but only in little bits. This morning's session was limited to planing.

I'd thought that I'd be really systematic about flattening the top. I'd follow the way a stonemason would do it. Start with the underside. First establish a flat margin around the edges, going in as far as the framework will sit. Ignore the area inside that - there's no need for it to be flat there. Next, gauge a thickness line round the edges and plane the top side down to meet it.

In practice, I was rather less orderly. I did start with the bottom, but worked on the top as well before finishing it. Rather than gauging anything I just tried to make it all look flat enough. Only removing the minimum amount of wood seems to come automatically - this is fun, but it is also a bit of a workout and my body rebels if asked to do extra work.

This photo is trying to show how unflat it was on the underside. You may be able to see a shadow under the bit of wood.

P1090505.JPG

At the centre, the gap is about 4mm.

P1090506.JPG

I started by working across the grain, taking the high spots off either side with my 5½.
P1090507.JPG

with more of the same sort of thing on the other side.

P1090508.JPG

You can see various wedges to hold the table top steady. There are also some handscrews behind it, to push against, and the odd bench dog or g-cramp at the ends. I find it's best to have a way of holding things like this where it's very quick and easy to lift the work off and look at it, or turn it round so I can plane the right way of the grain without stretching.

Here you can see a bit more progress. I'd swapped to the spirit level as a reliable straight edge. Slim wedges are a good way to measure gaps.

P1090509.JPG

Frankly, I expect this was more interesting for me to experience than it is to watch, so I think it's time for a tool digression again.

I can understand the argument in favour of a minimal kit of perfectly maintained tools. You get properly familiar with how they perform and how to get the best out of them. You keep some space to move around without bumping into a box or chest of drawers or overflowing shelf. But understanding the argument hasn't yet stopped me exploring the differences between various choices of tools. Surely some of those differences must be advantages some of the time.

So although I had done most of the work on this so far with the same two Stanley bench planes, here comes a different one. A wooden jack plane with a "razee" style body, cut away in height below the handle.

P1090510.JPG
This style was often used by boys learning woodwork in school (including me). It's a bit lighter and easier to handle than a full size wooden jack plane. It's definitely lighter than its cast iron equivalent. As I get older, I have no hesitation in turning to this sort of tool, especially if I want to reach out and take long swipes across a bit of hard oak, and take shavings that are reasonably thick.

This particular specimen is even the same brand as I used in school - Emir. Until only a few years ago they were one of the few companies making planes and other woodworking tools in England, at their factory in Kent, but they announced redundancies in 2015 and finally closed down in 2021. I think I've seen a photo of their plane making machinery, but frustratingly I don't seem to have kept a copy anywhere that I can find it again.

My plane was clearly made by machine, as you can see from the milling marks here

P1090515.JPG

but it was very well made. And look at this iron - proper trad cast steel onto an iron body, with excellent thickness and stiffness to it. How much would that cost if it came from Lie Nielsen or Veritas?

P1090512.JPG

P1090514.JPG

P1090513.JPG

I paid £5 for this plane but would recommend it even if you have to pay quite a lot more. It was virtually unused when I bought it and still has several generations of life in it. And as I said, for a job like this it's ideal, especially if you're not built like Popeye.

Because the Emir Jack has a visibly cambered iron, it does leave tracks on the surface. Which plane should I use to level them off? Having abandoned any pretence of a minimalist tool kit, I decided it would be interesting to try an opposite extreme; an infill plane that sticks to the wood under its own weight and just needs to be dragged about a bit to make it power through the bumps.

P1090516.JPG

P1090518.JPG


There's no maker's name on this (the iron is marked Mathieson), so I can only call it a Scottish style panel plane and let you admire it with me. It weighs 7lb 13 oz (3.5kg) - as much as a healthy baby!

It did the job I wanted it to and made the top much more table-like, but my shoulders told me it was the end of another session and time for a cup of tea. The top is flat enough to move to the next stage, but will get a bit more detailed attention another day.
 
Ah, this thread is reminding me of a coffee table I started about ten years ago. I made the top, pippy oak, breadboard ends, pegged A&C-style tenons (yes, I know they don't go together, it was all fake and supposed to be a scherzo). I was looking forward to finishing it off, but somehow it has disappeared between Kirkby and here. Whilst most of my stuff came over in a lorry with me, the remnants came with a removals company, and I wasn't here when it was delivered. It went onto one lorry and came off a different lorry and quite a bit of stuff didn't make the transfer. There was my Workshop Sweet Workshop plaque, made for me by a mate, a box of assorted biscuits, an electric blanket I used with my vac press and various boxes of Other Stuff.
I was looking forward to finishing that table :(. I'm looking forward to seeing yours finished.
 
Steve, I hope I shan't disappoint you!

(I'm definitely not moving house for a while yet.)
 
I've spent a bit more time planing the top, mostly with the trusty old Stanley 4½. It's still not perfectly flat when you lay a straight edge across it, but is possibly flat enough for what's needed.

P1090522.JPG

The top surface will need some more detailed attention later, but I decided to get the ends and sides square to each other before going any further. One end (where I trimmed away a big knot earlier on) still has an area where the grain dives down awkwardly. It hasn't planed well and doesn't look right next to the other boards so I needed to trim a bit off. Fortunately I was expecting to need to trim the ends after the glue-up, so I can still get a table the size we need.

But what's the best way to get a nice straight cut all the way across a 24" table top?

I only have one square that's big enough. It's a rough old thing that I made to use with my electric router, so hasn't been featured on here before. I can make plans available if you want to make one just like it.;)

P1090534.JPG

The positives are that it is actually square and straight enough.

P1090535.JPG

I don't rate my chances of making that cut with a handsaw. And I prefer using a backsaw, on the bench top. I've not needed to go quite so wide before.

For making a channel to guide the saw, lots of people on YouTube chisel with the grain, towards the knife line, but I prefer to chisel across the grain, the way I was taught at school. It also gives me an excuse to use a really nice long paring chisel.

P1090536.JPG

It's hard to show in photos, but this chisel is flexible enough to work all the way across the board, with the blade bending until the handle touches the wood. This picture is awkwardly posed with just my left hand but I think it shows you what I mean.

P1090537.JPG

Anyhow, it worked and I soon had a groove across both sides.

To make the cut, I naturally turned to this rather fine saw, from the same source as the handsaw I showed at the beginning and the rather good oak. Thanks again, Peter!

P1090546.JPG

I hope you can tell that it's been beautifully sharpened and set.

P1090551.JPG

Simon Barley lists a similar saw, marked "For kitchen use" as probably dating to about 1910. There's still plenty of life in this one - and plenty of depth of plate below the handle, which is a bit of an advantage of the "London pattern" handle with the flat underside. Simon doesn't mention any difference in the design of kitchen saws and I can't see any. This one certainly works on oak; I've not tested it on bones or hard icing.

To avoid any wobble in the cut, I used a handy engineer's V-block as a guide, which seemed to help. I made the cut from the underside about half way, then finished from the top.

P1090540.JPG

Here's the result, with the offcut placed on top. Ignore the unflatness now revealed and enjoy the reasonable straightness instead. That end grain will plane up nicely and also get a bevel to it later.

P1090542.JPG

The other end didn't need trimming, just a knife line and a little planing. I forgot to photograph that, but I expect you can imagine it by now.

Here's confirmation that at least one corner of this table is at 90 degrees:

P1090545.JPG

More planing sawing and tool digressions will follow soon. Maybe some chiselling too!
 
Thanks Rob. I'm sure I've seen photos of Krenov next to racks of far more wood than I shall ever disturb! I suspect this table will be plainer and squarer than he would have liked, but it's nice to know he shared my approach;) .

Here's the story of this morning's efforts.

First, the top out of the cramps. This is the underside, showing a nice line of glue drips. Some newspaper on the bench would have been a good idea. Never mind, it prompted me to have a proper tidy up.

View attachment 28160

All I did with the top was to stand it out of the way and notice how alarmingly heavy it is. I hope the finished table isn't immovable.

The table, I've decided, will have conventional square legs at the corners, linked by rails tenoned into them. To make the rails I decided to use these bits, as shown earlier.

View attachment 28166

Trust me, underneath the brown varnish there's some good wood.

I used the rest to make the sides and other parts of this little chest of drawers, in 2015.

View attachment 28167

The first step was to mark out my chosen width, 2½ inches. (This is mostly an imperial measurements build, as I'm using old wood.)
That needed a strip to be trimmed off, thus losing some old holes.

This is the sort of job for which my little three wheeler bandsaw is all I need. You might be amused or appalled by how little space there is around it, but don't worry; the feed in is through the doorway, and the feed-out is between the two hand-powered bench drills. Just enough room, with no space wasted. ;)

View attachment 28168

Here it is on the bench

View attachment 28169

and here it is ready for planing back to width.

View attachment 28170

To distract you all while I spend a while making more shavings, let's take a closer look at the handscrew.

I've said it before, but I like these, they're versatile. Unusually, this one is commercially made and marked with an address and a trademark.

View attachment 28171

That's not the clearest photo ever, but trust me, it says:

341 - 345 OLD ST
SHOREDITCH E.C.1
Zyto
REGD.

I expect you all know that means it's from Tyzacks. Cutting a very long and complicated story much shorter, the Tyzack family were big in tools for a long time. In Sheffield they made saws; in London they had big stores in the furniture making district, in amongst the warren of small and medium businesses that supplied the city with all its furnishing needs. (There's more info here http://www.tyzack.net/hackney.htm and on the rest of that site.) They were at 341-345 Old Street from 1905 to 1976.

Looking at the other side, there's a much clearer mark identifying the owner, but I've no idea who HF&S were. Anyone know?

View attachment 28174

If we turn to a couple of old catalogues, we find this, probably from 1908. Proudly made in London, and only a penny an inch.

View attachment 28172

but by about 1930 the listing has changed - whatever happened to making things in England!?



View attachment 28173

Imported from somewhere, at such shocking prices! (To be fair, there had been some events affecting world trade between these two dates.) I've no idea which country mine was made in, but it works fine for me.

Meanwhile, I marked, sawed and planed two more bits and planed the varnish off on one side:

View attachment 28175

I noticed that the shavings were very different from yesterday's. Instead of full length ringlet type curls, I was getting little fragments:

View attachment 28176

View attachment 28177

Anyone know why? Is it just because this oak is older, and maybe drier?

Anyway, that's it for now. I expect there will be a bit of a gap, while I sort out how to get some little legs out of that big lump of oak I showed you earlier.
I like your little chest of drawers Andy.
 
I find it's best to have a way of holding things like this where it's very quick and easy to lift the work off and look at it, or turn it round so I can plane the right way of the grain without stretching.

I couldn't agree more. Stops rather than tail-vices or even hold-fasts. Once they're set up it makes the work so much quicker and easier in my experience. But, as always in this hobby, each to their own.

There's no maker's name on this (the iron is marked Mathieson), so I can only call it a Scottish style panel plane and let you admire it with me. It weighs 7lb 13 oz (3.5kg) - as much as a healthy baby!

I don't know about you but I've never really had great success in trying to flatten a board with a baby, healthy or otherwise. :D
 
Last edited:
Do you think you might have had less unflatness in that top had you clamped or weighted the boards down while they were being glued. That presupposes you have a flat surface to clamp them down on of course. Or something very flat and rigid above and below.
I also clamped my table tops one board at a time which I thought would help avoid that scenario.
As seen here.
https://www.thewoodhaven2.co.uk/threads/v-a-coffee-table-finished.7017/post-122925
 
Do you think you might have had less unflatness in that top had you clamped or weighted the boards down while they were being glued. That presupposes you have a flat surface to clamp them down on of course. Or something very flat and rigid above and below.
I also clamped my table tops one board at a time which I thought would help avoid that scenario.
As seen here.
https://www.thewoodhaven2.co.uk/threads/v-a-coffee-table-finished.7017/post-122925
In retrospect, Yes! I wish I had remembered your lovely table before I started. Serves me right for working so fast!
 
I must confess though Andy I bought my oak boards PAR no edge prep nor thicknessing required. Sizing was done without hand tools too. I am in awe of your approach and results.
 
So although I had done most of the work on this so far with the same two Stanley bench planes, here comes a different one. A wooden jack plane with a "razee" style body, cut away in height below the handle.

View attachment 28306

Out of interest, how long is that wooden jack plane (compared to a #5 for example)? I've been on the look-out for a shorter (and lighter) wooden body plane that still has a handle - most of the wooden planes I've seen are either quite a bit longer than a #5½ or are coffin-style planes with no handle. I love my wooden jack plane when I've got a lot a material to remove (as it's so much lighter than the #5) but something even smaller and lighter would be really nice.

When I've got loads to take off, I either use the bandsaw or a wooden scrub plane (one of these), but it'd be nice to have something that was fully wooden bodied, with a proper handle and somewhere in between #4 and #5 in length.

Yes, I know I could make one and I probably will eventually, but that doesn't stop me looking out for one in any junk shops I go into and it'd be nice to know they exist.

This photo shows my wooden "jack" plane leaning up next to a #5½ and you can see it's a heck of a lot longer. Most of the handled ones I've found in junk shops have been a similar length. It's probably more of a fore plane than a jack plane, but I use it when the #5 jack plane's feeling a bit heavy so I call it a jack plane.

toolwall.jpg
 
Al, here's a winning hand of four jacks ;) .

- a common late 19th/early 20th century wooden one, 17"
- a Stanley 5½, 15" (same length as the No 5 but with a wider iron) (I don't have a no 5 and can't really claim to need one)
- The razee jack you asked about, 15"
- an uncommon Marples design, 14"

IMG_20240903_165342488.jpg


IMG_20240903_165352955.jpg

I think all of the old wooden jacks I have had have been 17". (It's not that many really, I'm not a dealer!) Catalogues did list them in different sizes. For example, Charles Nurse, 1902, lists the ordinary style in 12, 14 or 17", with the "sunk handle" in the same sizes, but a shilling extra. Trying planes were 22, 24 or 26" long; jointer planes were 28 or 30".

I've included the Marples beechwood plane too, as it's another lightweight jack plane. They were only available for a few years in the 1960s. (For a full account, see https://williammarplesandsons.com/prefabricated-planes/ .) Mine is a rare variant with a closed handle. You might come across one on eBay or elsewhere - you do seem to be very good at finding old tools! The cast iron frog and iron are the same size as on a No 3 plane, which makes this a nice lightweight option.
 
AndyT,
One of these is surprising useful.
Bang on square and cheap as chips.


I modified mine and can post a photo if anyone is remotely interested.
 
Agreed - and I do have one - but I prefer the positive fit of a thick stock below the thinner blade.

I'd be interested to see your modification though - there's always room for a digression round here as far as I'm concerned.
 
AndyT,
One of these is surprising useful.
Bang on square and cheap as chips.


I modified mine and can post a photo if anyone is remotely interested.
I simply can't imagine how I'd get on without mine. On virtually anything with a sawn edge it's always the first square I go for, and for squaring the ends of table tops etc it's just about the only single-tool option.
 
Back
Top