What are the reasons so few modern planes measure up to the old one?

[busbus]

I am starting to slip down the slope and have acquired several handplanes. Nothing great: a Stanley #4, a block plane, and I found an old Stanley router plane at a garage sale for $3.00--only one cutter but it is in good condition.

These purchase got me to wondering: Just what are the reasons these old mass-produced planes are better than many of the new mass-produced ones? Was it just because they were heavier? Because the were flatter? The metal was difference? Because the just felt better?

One would assume if you install a nice blade, like a Hock blade, into a newer plane, it should cut well--but I am not going to waste my money buying a cheapo Buck Brothers or something and then have it cut for crap.

Is it true old planes are better or is it urban legend? I guess the same could be said for other hand tools as well (saws, chisels, etc.). I can see why the metal used to make saws and chisels can have an impact because inferior steel won't take and keep an edge and 'good grade' steel may be very expensive but I don't see how this could be the case for planes since the metal that does the cutting is the blade, and a Hock takes care of that, doesn't it?

[Juergen Hannappel]

[...]

Well, none of my new planes (4) is worse than any of my old planes (10), and the old ones somethimes needed (or still need) work to get a mouth that is not a gaping 1/4" or even 1/2"...

But then, the new ones are very nicely made chinese (or taiwanese style) planes and a japanese block plane, the old ones european style wooden ones with lots of wear.

[Frank Arthur]

How many dollars a day do you earn compared to how much a Stanley worker made when he produced #4 planes?

[busbus]

I understand that, in comparison, the payscale has increased immensely over the years but that doesn't answer my question. I know if you made the old Stanleys the same way now as you did then and only accounted for labor, the price would be tremendously more than what a person made in, say, 1910.

And I also know the one best way to keeo labor costs down would be to go to China--I don't like that but it is the truth.

But it would seem to me that the improvements in economies of scale would come into play in modern times, like using computers and machines to do the work of scores of men.

I guess I am asking if a cheapo Buck Bros. plane from Home Depot will cut as good as an old Stanley if both were equipped with a Hock blade?

I am not trying to be a smart aleck, I am really confused as to whether it is worth obtaining old planes when as cheapo new would work as long as it used a good blade.

I would have to say the same is NOT true with a saw or chisel because not only does labor need to get factored in but also the steel used to make them--a higher quality steel will, obvisously, cost a lot more and no longer make a saw cheap.

[Chris Friesen]

Nope. The cheapo new one is different in other ways than just the blade. Looking at metal planes, you need to consider the type of metal used in the casting (ductile cast iron or brittle, bronze, etc.), the cast quality (voids, impurities), the machining of the base (smoothness, flatness, sides square to sole).

Then there are things like the quality of the machining of the frog, the fit of the cap iron to the blade, and on, and on.

Old planes are at least in part good because people actually relied on them. People who care about a decent plane now generally either use a good old one, or spend the money on a good new one (Veritas, Lie-Nielsen, Clifton, etc.)

Chris

[Morris Dovey]

| These purchase got me to wondering: Just what are the reasons these | old mass-produced planes are better than many of the new | mass-produced ones?

It could be because the poorly-made old ones took the path that the newer poorly-made planes will follow: to the scrap heap.

The good old planes and the good new planes were/are/will be afforded appropriate TLC and in another hundred years people will hold up a LN, LV, or Clifton plane and ask the same question.

-- Morris Dovey DeSoto Solar DeSoto, Iowa USA

[George]

First, crappy planes were made back when, just as they are made now, and for the same reason - to meet the standard of a user who did not demand the finest hand-finished and fettled hardware for the price that such commanded. You'll have to look to find one of any age, because most were trashed. The user of a crummy tool had two choices, fettle to a higher standard, or pitch it. I've got a couple of old thin metal types on my shelves as hand-me downs, but they have some hours in them, where I've worked the frog, the bed, and removed manufacturing uglies like grinding burrs. One of jacks has a Hock iron, which still makes it no match for my LV or LN planes, though it's a good deal more useable than when I started. The smooth is just a dust collector.

As to cost and quality, there are a couple of roads available there, as well. Back when I worked in a stamping plant making parts for Fords, of steel produced in the Ford steel mills - Henry liked vertical integration - we were obliged to reject some rolled stock because the number of defects was too high. That steel was resold to Cadillac division downtown, where hand finishing was the norm, and each stamping was filed, bumped fitted and sanded to a different standard at a higher price. No way you could do that for a Ford, or even a Mercury, where the standards of material and manufacture were higher than the Ford of similar body style. Imagine the Lincoln plant was the same as Cadillac.

When you buy a used plane, chances are it's one of the fittest, or it would not have survived.

[Swingman]

... and therein lies the preponderance of the answer to your question.

[Andy Dingley]

Look at the retail price for them when new, as a proportion of a worker's weekly wage. In their day, these were expensive tools and only owned by well-heeled tradesmen. There were cheaper options, as might have been used by farmers and similar, but these were relatively crude and we don't pay so much attention to them today.

It's difficult to realise just _how_ expensive a "simple" tool like this was in its day, and how few possessions even a well-off tradesman would have owned at the time. That box of good planes might have been a major investment, yet nowadays we happily see a Unisaw as a mere trifling indulgence in a hobby.

My grandfather was well off for the time. He owned a small shop, a stable and began a lorry haulage business. Yet today (and discounting the horses), I live on my own in a house that's about the same size he had, have a workshop the size of his stable, and probably have an equal weight of petrol vehicles.

For a fascinating look at 1900's life for jobbing trademen, I thoroughly recommend "The Ragged Trousered Philanthropists"

[busbus]

Ok, ok, I give. Allt hese answers make quite a bit of sense, especially now that I understand that these tools were in the same mold as the finer planes today. And they lasted this long only because they were workers and built with quality materials and great craftsmanship.

Andy: Thanks for the book suggestion. That seems like a good read.

[busbus]

All this said, I never hear about anything other than Lie-Nielsen or Veritas or Knight planes as examples of fine quality modern planes. Are there others as well? Is Clifton any good? How about the new Stanleys? Are wooden planes better/worse than metal ones?

I am still very new to this aspect of woodworking. Heck, I just made my very first handcut dovetail joint last week. It took me a heck of a long time to cut it and the pieces don't fit like a glove, let me tell you! But it worked. And I can only see me getting better at it as time goes on. I am planning on making a drawer, of sorts, as my first "project" using dovetails. I know it will probably be a nasty looking thing, but it'll be better than nothing.

I am beginning to find hand tools very interesting and that is why I want to learn about such things as the quality of modern hand planes. I guess I am being impatient. I need to scrounge garage sales and eBay to get good deals because I don't have the money to plop down $250 for a hand plane!

If I did that, the wife would have my left nut, too.

[Mike Marlow]

Notwithstanding the bottom of the barrel stuff - there has always been cheap junk, even in the "good old days" - I should think that the quality of the metalurgy today is superior to that of 50 years ago.

[Brooks Moses]

I happen to have a reprint of a Montgomery-Ward catalog from Fall of

1894 handy, and it's got some Bailey planes in it just like the #5 I picked up at an antique mall a few weeks ago. Here's the price list:

Bailey Adjustable Iron Planes: Smooth plane (iron), 8 inches long, No. 3 ........ $1.37 Smooth plane (iron), 9 inches long, No. 4 ........ $1.50 Smooth plane (iron), 10 inches long, No. 4 1/2 ... $1.70 Jack plane (iron), 14 inches long, No. 5 ......... $1.70 Fore plane (iron), 18 inches long, No. 6 ......... $2.16 Jointer plane (iron), 22 inches long, No. 7 ...... $2.40 Jointer plane (iron), 24 inches long, No. 8 ...... $2.96

So, what's the equivalent value today? There's a handy online tool at

which compares these sorts of things. So, plug in $1.70 in 1894 (for a No. 4-1/2 plane), and today that's worth $194.75 if one compares it using the average unskilled labor rate then and now.

And I see in my Lee Valley catalog that the really nice Veritas No.

4-1/2 smoothing plane costs $195 today.

Startling coincidence, innit?

- Brooks

[Ba r r y]

I live 30 minutes from Stanley headquarters in New Britain, CT.

I don't think Stanley makes ANYTHING here anymore, it's all Chinese and Mexican. That said, I'll bet the people making Stanley stuff today still make the same hourly wage they did in 1910.

Hint: Stanley HQ is all cubicles...

Barry

[alexy]

Clark & Williamson, Holtey, Anderson, HNT Gordon, ECE, Shepherd.

Heard mixed reviews on them. Lots like them, but some claim that current manufacturing standards have dropped. No first hand experience here, just what I've read.

and it gives a great sense of accomplishment. Ain't it grand? With practice, they will only get better.

Better pass on the Holtey's, then, or she might take off your left nut at your armpit!

[alexy]

I suspected as much. But good to see actual data that supports what I suspected to be true! Thanks for posting that.

[busbus]

Whoa! That's amazing. That puts everything in perpective. Thanks for the info.

[Mark & Juanita]

What you are seeing is a cumulative effect of "value-engineering" over the years. Various cost-saving measures, looser tolerances, more inexpensive alloys got applied to those designs, a little at a time until you went from something that was rock-solid and well-built to the flimsy, poorly made specimens one gets today. Along the way, users became less demanding as power tools began taking more of the jobs of hand planes and the primary purpose to which handplanes were applied was by home handymen to plane down sticking doors. Many of the buyers of modern handplanes had no idea of what planes are capable, I know that until I started making furniture, I had no idea.

... snip

+--------------------------------------------------------------------------------+ If you're gonna be dumb, you better be tough +--------------------------------------------------------------------------------+

[– Colonel –]

Once, in my younger and stupider days, I bought a Buck Bros. plane at Home Depot before putting a straight-edge on it. When I got home, I did. Not even close. That plane went back to HD the next day.

[– Colonel –]

I've had good luck with Record (basically identical to Stanley but "English" instead of "American.") But Record seems to no longer exist...