Skip to main content

Smoothing Planes, Which is Better? The Stanley No. 3 or the Stanley No.4

What, sir rule, said the plane,
Another reason I will thee say;
Tho oft my master have no stock,
Yet thy master thou should not mock;
For yet a means I shall see,
So that my master shall prosperous be.
I shall him help, both day and night.
To get him good with all my might,
I shall cleanse on every side
To help my master in his pride.


Anonymous, 15th century manuscript





Rob Gates, who has a wonderful blog, The Offcut, asked me whether I like the Stanley #3 smoothing plane better than the #4 smoothing plane.


I like both, but I find that I will pick up the #3 more often than I do a #4. Why? Maybe because of the #3 seems to "cleanse" wood easier than a #4. I find it interesting that one of my #3's smooths Indian rosewood better than the other, that could be explained by saying I have that blade and plane tuned up perfectly for such wood, or...?

For the record, the two planes I use most are a #3 and a #7.

And another thing-I discovered that these old vintage planes (pre-WWII types) work better with their original irons capped by a new Hock or Lee Valley chip breaker. Those old blades are made from wonderful steel that I can quickly hone to razor sharpness and with the thicker breaker I experience no chatter, no tear outs, just shavings. The old chip breakers are good, but don't throw them away! They're collectible, you know!

I mention this because I recently read in some wood working magazine that there is a "hand plane revival", but in order to be part of this revival you must buy some expensive blades and chip breakers and alter your original antique planes to accept those new irons and breakers!

Please, don't alter your old planes for these new blades, they will work fine with original parts issued for them!

I think it is better to spend your time working with the wood and getting to know your old tools than reading opinions in a magazine. Or on a blog.

Now get to work!

Comments

  1. What's better than either? An infill smoother or an Old Street smoother. But, if forced to ignore my own kit and pick one of the options, I'll take the #3.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Thanks for your thoughts on the Stanleys, Wilson.

    ReplyDelete
  3. "Now get to work!"

    That's the key, isn't it? Quit thinking about things. Put down the magazine or turn off the PC. Head down to the shop. Start putting edge to wood and see what happens!

    If you screw it up? Start over! And learn from your lesson!

    ReplyDelete
  4. I have thicker Hock and Lee Valley/Veritas blades in several unaltered Stanley hand planes.

    ReplyDelete
  5. I agree totally, all these "new" steels are not any better than high carbon, Ron Hock explains why in his book. I like high carbon, o1 and a2 especially I think is just too damn hard. GIve me old high carbon any day.

    ReplyDelete
  6. I agree Wilson, high carbon is the best steel out there, sharpens easily and gets sharper than the others, esp. A2, hate A2.

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

How to Make a Traditional Froe Mallet

What holds the Holy of the Holies, what did Brahma become? Wood. Why will aspen always tremble? For the nails driven into the cross. What makes the color of wood? The soil it tastes. Cradle, fiddle, coffin, bed: wood is a column of earth made ambitious by light, and made of beauty by the rain.

Kim R. Stafford, Having Everything Right, 1986.

Rive, verb, to split
Shake, noun, a split in a piece wood. (Heart shake, ring shake)
Shake, verb, (Middle English), to split.

I know I should have been in the studio working on my back log of guitars, but the day was so nice and warm with a tall blue canopy, I couldn't stay inside. I decided that I needed to make a proper froe mallet. This style of mallet is traditional to northeastern California, primarily Tehama (where I'm from), Butte, Shasta and Plumas counties where making shingles by hand from sugar pines was an industry. I don't know if it was used in any other region along the Pacific Rim, other parts of the United States or even o…

Basic Hand Tool Kit for Making a Classical Guitar, Revised

Ours is really a simple craft.

James Krenov, The Impractical Cabinetmaker, 1979


So, you want to build a guitar.

Since the original post, Basic Hand Tool Kit for Guitar Making, click here to see it, is the most popular post on this blog, I thought I would revisit it and adjust it to what I am using now to make a classical guitar.

The first thing I recommend doing is to buy or borrow copies of the following books:

Guitar Making: Tradition and Technology, by William Cumpiano and Jonathan Natelson
Making Master Guitars, by Roy Courtnall
The Guitar Maker's Workshop, by Rik Middleton

These are required reading before you begin making a guitar.

Also required reading are these books by Roy Underhill:

The Woodwright's Shop
The Woodwright's Companion
The Woodwright's Workbench
The Woodwright's Apprentice


Why these books by Mr. Underhill? You will learn valuable wood working techniques if you make any of his projects. The dovetail joints used to join a drawer together are far mor…

The Guitar's Scale Length, Your Hand Size and a Chart

I will cite the case of a marvelous concert player, a Japanese lady who is barely 5 ft. tall and with hands that are real miniatures. She plays a 664 mm 10 string guitar and demanded that I build this guitar with an action 1 mm higher than normal, which she handles with incredible ease. This is serious study!


Jose Ramirez III, Things About the Guitar, 1990




Here is the hand size and scale length that I found on the forum at delcamp.com.

Thumb tip to pinky tip span of 250+ 664mm scale length
Thumb tip to pinky tip span of 230 to 250 656mm scale length
Thumb tip to pinky tip span of 210 to 230 650mm scale length
Thumb tip to pinky tip span of 190 to 210 640mm scale length
Thumb tip to pinky tip span of 170 to 190 630mm scale length
Thumb tip to pinky tip span of below 170 615mm scale length



Here is my flexible imperial/metric ruler.




Here is my hand properly placed on the flexible imperial/metric ruler.




Today my reach from little finger to thumb is 240mm. I should more or less be playing a…