I finally received the plane I won on eBay.  The seller mailed it quickly after the auction ended, but due to the Memorial Day weekend I didn’t get it until over a week later.  The “unboxing” went well, although the box itself was a bit ruffled.  The corner was broken out and I could see the end of the plane.  The only padding was a paper bag.  Fortunately, the plane was okay.

I was able to quickly determine that it’s a Type 11, my first choice in Stanley plane types.  The three patent dates mean Type 11 or 12; the low knob and small adjuster nut indicate a Type 11.  A quick look showed no serious defects, no cracks, no missing parts.

Given the amount of crud on the plane, it was obvious it hadn’t been cleaned in quite a while.  It had been used, however, as the handle, knob, and blade adjustment nut were clean.  Whoever owned it before didn’t care much about appearances!  The blade was still pretty long, so it hadn’t been sharpened a bunch.  Good news.

Taking the lever cap off was easy.  If the lever cap is difficult to get off, it means either something is frozen up or it was put on too tight.  Too tight often means someone tightened the lever cap with the screw instead of the lever (not a good thing).  The frog attach screws also came out easily.  Things were still looking good.

Wow!  Lots of crud around and under the frog; apparently, it hadn’t been removed in quite a while.  Not a problem; actually a good sign.  Why good?   Many people tend to overtighten screws and/or use the wrong size screwdriver, which can mess up screw heads.  These are in great shape.

Next, the blade.  If it’s too rusted on the non-beveled side, it won’t be useable without lots of work.

Both blade and chipbreaker look pretty good.  I see no major pitting on the blade near the edge, although it’s a little hard to see until it’s cleaned up some more.  The other end of the blade is bent, but I should be able to fix that.  The chipbreaker looks great.  From what I understand, the black on the underside is from the heat-treating process.  Usually, it’s not this clean and consistent.  Another good sign.

Here’s a photo of all the parts.  Everything looks great and I think this plane will clean up very nicely to make a great user.

I was amazed at how much crud came out of the plane, so I included it in the photo.  As for the rest of the parts, I’ll discuss how I clean them up in future posts.  When the plane is complete, I’ll be selling it on eBay.  My current #5 has been with me for a long time and I don’t need another one.

Tags:

I just purchased a plane on eBay.  Not that I need another  plane…  I just wanted to describe the steps I take to tune up a bench plane, and I neglected to purchase a suitable plane last week at the quarterly Old Tool Swap at Anderson Plywood in Culver City.  Just plane forgot…

Stanley #5

The plane is a Stanley #5.  It’s a little hard to tell in the photo, but I think it’s a Type 11 – low knob, no raised ring around knob, no logo on lever cap, small adjuster knob.  When purchasing old Stanley bench planes, the Type 11 is my first choice; I like the low knob.  Types 11 through 16, however, have the main features I’m looking for:  frog-adjusting screw, rosewood knob and tote, and the frog is accurately located front and back (more on that later).  If you want more info on Stanley plane types, there’s plenty on the web; Google this if you’re interested.

The seller only posted the photo above and this description “Nice #5 Baily wood plane.  Blade is a Stanley with the Sweetheart mark. Handle has a chip removed at the top; but no cracks. A few spots of lite rust. This is as found, has not been cleaned.”  Bidding started at $9.90 and shipping was $13.03.  Perfect for my project.

When purchasing an old plane, I have the following questions:

  1. Is anything cracked?  Cracks on the body around the mouth area immediately disqualify the purchase.
  2. Are all the parts there?  Parts can be replaced, but I’d prefer to not mess with hunting down replacement parts.
  3. Is the blade salvageable?  No pitting near the tip, lots of blade left, and flat.  Ron Hock and others make great replacement irons, but this will add about $35 to the plane.  Ditto for the chipbreaker, but at a lesser cost.
  4. Is there a lot of rust?  Surface rust is no problem, but when parts are really pitted, I’ll pass.
  5. Are the handle and tote salvageable?  No serious cracks.  A chipped handle (like this plane) can be fixed, but some damage isn’t worth fixing and will require replacement.
  6. Are the adjustment knob and lateral adjusting lever working well?  The brass adjustment knob can get pretty trashed where it interfaces with the Y-adjusting lever, or the knurling can be worn off.  The lateral adjusting lever rivets can be loose, the washer may be missing, or the little tab at the far end of the lever can be loose or missing.  The knob is easy to replace, but replacing the lateral adjusting lever is tricky business.

From what I could see in the photo, everything looked pretty good, but I needed more info.  I emailed the seller to see if he could supply some additional photos.  He did, emailing me three pics.  They showed the underside of the body around the mouth; the blade/chipbreaker and lever cap; and the area behind the frog.  Not great pics, but enough for me to determine what I’d spend on the plane.

I decided my maximum price would be $35 including the shipping, which worked out to a max bid of $21.97.  No one was bidding on the plane, so I hoped I might get it for much less.  Turns out, I got the plane with a winning bid of $12.47, for a total price of $25.50.  I quickly paid, and the seller shipped it the next day.

As I write this it’s on way from Connecticut to Southern California…

Tags:

Finally getting back to the blog.   My apologies for the absence.  This post is really just a test to see if everything is working correctly;  I just updated the WordPress software that’s running the site.

When my sister got married, my wedding present to her and her husband was a project yet to be determined.  I should have known better, but my heart was in the right place (or at least that’s what I tell myself).

The project for a while was a coffee table, but that never worked out.  I just didn’t have the time to take that on.  Over the years (I’m embarrassed to say how many) the topic of the wedding present would come up.  My sister would mention it in passing, just a little reminder of a promise unkept.  A little (well-deserved) jab.  Nothing malicious, but I knew she hadn’t forgotten about it.

Last year, in a span of a few months, two of their cats died.  Both had had long comfortable lives, but their passing was a big loss, especially to my brother-in-law; they were his cats prior to their marriage.  My sister saw her opportunity.

Two urns to hold the ashen remains of two beloved cats.  I could do that.

She gave me the dimensions of the little plastic boxes that held the little plastic bags of ashes, and I was set.  The boxes were about 2″ x 2″ x 4″.  My idea was to make veneered urns.  To make them special, the edges would be a contrasting color.

I started with 1/2″ MDF and veneered one side with walnut.  That would be the inside of the boxes.  I then constructed the box sides using rabbets in the corners to keep things aligned.  The tops and bottoms were then just glued on with no special joinery…I think.  I started the boxes last fall and don’t remember exactly how I constructed them.

Once the boxes were glued up, I sanded all the outside surfaces flat, then cut 3/16″ x 3/16″ rabbets on the four long edges.  I glued ebony into the rabbets, sanded things smooth, then cut eight more rabbets in the remaining edges.  More ebony (no, I didn’t miter the corners), more sanding, and I had MDF boxes with black trim on all the edges.

I then veneered all the faces.  One box got redwood burl, the other myrtle burl.  More sanding to get everything flat, then the edges were shaped.  The redwood burl box got rabbets; the myrtle burl box got chamfers.

The boxes were then cut into two parts, and I glued 1/8″ ebony to the cut surfaces, mitering the corners.  More sanding.

I spent a lot of time figuring out the next step:  locating and attaching the tops to the bottoms.  I finally settled on a mortise and tenon (maybe tongue and groove is more accurate) solution.  I cut mortises in opposite corners of the tops and bottoms, then glued ebony tenons into the mortises on the bottoms.  The parts were all shaped by hand to fit nicely, with mitered corners and rounded ends, and the tenons in each corner were different lengths to ensure alignment.

After final sanding, gel poly was applied, then waxed.  The tops fit snugly but are removed with a little effort, just right for something that needn’t be opened much if ever.   I was very happy with how they came out, but more importantly, so were my sister and brother-in-law. 

Two urns

Top attachment

Redwood burl, rabbeted edge

Myrtle burl, chamfered edge

Tags: ,

I’m back!  I lost some momentum on posting to the blog when I went on vacation last month.  I’m hoping to get back on track and posting about once a week starting with this post.

My hall table was finished with gel polyurethane, which up until recently was one of my favorite finishes.  Woodkote made a very nice gel poly, called Jel’d Poly Kote, which I found to be easy to apply, allowed recoating in two hours, had reasonable build qualities, a generous working time, and gave great results.  What more could you ask for?

How about not changing the product???

Apparently, to meet the South Coast Air Quality Manangement District’s 2006 VOC requirements, WoodKote had to change the formulation.  According to the the MSDS, the old product had a VOC count of 589 grams/liter; the new product VOC is 273 g/l.  The old product had 35-45% naptha and 20-30% alkyd resin, the new product has no naptha and 15-25% alkyd resin.  I’m no chemist, but I know that naptha slows drying, and higher amounts of alkyd resin would(?) increase the build.

The result?  A runny, slow building, fast drying (short working time) product that is no better than any other of the gely poly’s I have tried (Rockler, General Finishes, and Behlen, if I remember correctly).  Very disappointing.

I’m just finding this out now because I finished off my old can in the middle of finishing the hall table.  If you know of another gel poly that is worth trying, please comment.  I’d love to try it out.

Woodkote Jel'd Poly Kote 275

Tags: ,

I went to the Design in Wood show yesterday, the woodworking competition/exhibition of the San Diego County Fair, held in Del Mar on the racetrack grounds.   As usual, the work was amazing.  The San Diego Fine Woodworking Association helps put on the event and this is their 28th year.  Work from all over the country is presented, of course, mostly from California.

I’m happy to say that several Cerritos College students (or former students) won awards.  Nick Kleha got 2nd in Veneering/Marquetry Furniture for his Period Game Table:

Kleha Table

Bruce Lewellyn got 2nd in Wood Turning – Laminated/Segmented:

Lewellyn turning

He also got 4th in Wood Turning – Face Work: Perpendicular, and an Honorable Mention

Dick Foreman got two Honorable Mentions, this one in Wood Turning – Embellished/Mixed Media:

Foreman turning

View the first-place winners in each category here.

If you’re in the area, try to visit, you won’t be disapp0inted.  The fair runs until July 5; admission is $13, parking $10.

Tags:

I’m currently in New Mexico on vacation with my wife, Lindsey.  On Tuesday, the 9th, I received a phone message that I was invited to attend the Design in Wood awards dinner.  As Martha Stewart would say, “That’s a good thing.”

Unfortunately, the dinner was Friday, and I was still here in New Mexico.  That was a bad thing.

I was hoping Bob Stevenson, the coordinator of the event, might email me after the dinner with some news.  Saturday went by with no additional information, so I emailed my friend Pam Goldman of Woodworker West.  She and her husband Ron cover the event and are usually present during the judging.  They would know.

She emailed me back with this message:  “You got the Master Woodworkers Trophy which is the most skillfully executed furniture piece, and an honorable mention in your category.  Ron went on Sunday after all the judging was done so he didn’t have any inside info…  I didn’t go with Ron so I haven’t seen any of the pieces.”

That “inside info” can be very enlightening, and would undoubtedly explain the seemingly incongruous awards.

I was a judge at the exhibition last year, and Bob does a really great job making sure the awards get spread around and the good stuff gets recognized.  There were many excellent pieces in my category (which I mentioned in my last post), and an honorable mention does not surprise me, given what I saw when I delivered my piece.

The other award is the result of Bob doing his thing (a good thing as far as I’m concerned).

This will probably be my last post on the hall table project.  Thanks to all of you for your encouragement here on the blog and at school where I teach.  Your support means a lot to me.

Humbled

I delivered my hall table to the Design in Wood show yesterday, taking the afternoon to drive down to Solana Beach near San Diego.  I got there around 4:00 pm, the halfway point of the noon-to-eight delivery window, and about half the pieces were already present.

Last year, I had the privilege of judging one of the special categories at the competition.  Through a friend referral, I had been asked to select Popular Woodworking’s Best Use of Traditional Woodworking Techniques award.   The judging process was a real eye-opener, in that I got to really see “behind the curtain.”

It’s amazing what you find when you can open doors and drawers.  Poorly sanded surfaces, lousy joinery, home center plywood drawer sides, and various other workmanship shortcomings not seen by the masses.

With those thoughts in the back of my mind, I perused the entries present yesterday.  Most of them were amazing, from what I could see.  I didn’t feel comfortable prying to much, so I only opened a few doors and drawers (and only those in my category, Contemporary Furniture).

Let’s just say I have low expectations for garnering any awards.

My hall table, although (IMHO) it is nicely done, just doesn’t stand out like some of the other pieces.  It’s a pretty understated piece, and may not get the judges’ attention as they take their first looks.  No exposed joinery, no sinuous lines, only one drawer, few curves.

I’ll be curious to see how things turn out.  While my expectations are low, I must admit I’d be a bit disappointed to leave with no award.  We’ll see…

I have received some questions from my students regarding how my top attachment system works.  I know my description in the previous post was a little hard to understand, so I made a cut-away mockup of the setup.

This photo should clarify any issues.  Please comment if you have other questions.

ht43-top-attach

Tags:

There are lots of ways to attach a table top:  cleats, buttons, figure-eights, pocket screws, Z-clips.  All work with varying degrees of elegance and effectiveness.  But none of them will work for my hall table; with the exception of the pocket screws, they all incorporate parts that would interfere with the drawer or would be visible from the exterior of the table.  I suppose some version of pocket screws would work, but that just occurred to me right now as I’m writing this…

I mentioned previously that one option would be to use a method similar to the frog attachment on a Stanley Bedrock plane (or Lie-Nielsen).  After lots of thought, I decided to go this route.  It appealed to my engineer brain; it was functional, elegant, and challenging.

The pins are 3/4″ brass, turned on my Jet mini-lathe.  The brass mills surprisingly easily with standard turning tools.  I located and drilled 7/8″ holes in the base, then made a locating pin using dowel stock and a dowel center.  The table top was already located via two 1/4″ dowels, so I installed the locating-pin/dowel-center in one of the 7/8″ holes, mounted the top on the 1/4″ dowels, pressed down so the dowel center did its thing, then repeated three more times with the locating pin in each hole.

I then mounted the brass pins using #10 screws, installed the top, and marked the pins with the locking screws (#8 x 2″ Spax screws) to get the correct height of the groove in the brass pins.  The pins were put back in the lathe and a groove was turned with my parting tool.  Each groove was located slightly off center from its locking screw in order to provide some hold-down force.

I hope that all makes sense…

Some photos:

Top attachment pins

Top attachment holes and alignment tool

Drill jig

The bottom photo show the little jig I made to drill the lock screw holes.  It worked great; all the grooves into which the lock screws protruded were at almost identical heights.

When I put the whole thing together, it works great.  The top feels very solid and is right where I want it.  I emphasize “right where I want it” because the other option I looked at was using keyhole hangers.  They would have worked, but I was concerned about the lack of a fixed location and getting them all equally tight.

Despite the extra work, I’m very happy with how it came out.

Tags:

« Older entries § Newer entries »