Bamboo Tips - Tips Area - Planing - Lie-Nielsen

< Home < Tips Area < Planing < Lie-Nielsen


I am setting up for my first bamboo rod and have decided to buy the Lie-Nielsen planes.  Hope that's a good decision.

What model(s) should I buy? Being new to this, there are quite a few choices in their catalog and I figured your experiences could save me some possible mistakes.  (Dewey Hildebrand)

    If you are just getting started, I would suggest the "standard angle" adjustable mouth block plane. A few rodmakers use low angle planes, but a beginner will have a much easier time planing with the standard angle. As will most experienced rodmakers. The blades that come with the Lie-Nielsen are of high quality, and you do not need a Hock blade, although Hock now makes blades to fit Lie-Nielsens. Do invest in an extra blade or two if you can- makes life a lot easier.

    They are wonderful planes, and I wish I had more than just one.  (Jeff Schaeffer)


Has anyone tried the Lie-Nelson version of the Stanley 9 1/2? Particularly the sole plate with the "rodmakers" groove?

Saw the plane mentioned in Wayne's 2nd edition.  (Eric Barksdale)

    I have one and I really like it (I have the grooved version).  

    You (probably) won't be disappointed if you decide to buy one.  And if you are, I imagine the folks at LN would work something out with you.  I had great experience with their customer service when my LN 212 was acting strangely.  (And they're not paying me to say that either.)  (Eric Koehler)

      What benefit does the grooved sole offer over  the flat,  standard sole?  Does the groove fit snugly in your forms?  (Eric Barksdale)

        It keeps you from nicking the forms with the cutter. I use the grooved version and finish up the last few swipes with the flat sole.  (Marty DeSapio)

    You can't go wrong with an LN plane. You really do better work with fine tools and they don't come finer. (Tony Young)


I was going to order the LN 9 1/2 copy with the optional .003 groove in the sole, given the positive response from others on the List. Given that, would the same hold true for the 212 Scraper? Would the groove give you the same advantage, or would the Scraper be better with the standard sole?

As somebody may have gathered by now, this is the all important "tool accumulation" stage in pursuit of #1  [:)] .  (Eric Barksdale)

    I maybe looking at this cross eyed, but I can't see the purpose of the groove in a plane. If your blade is set less than the .003 you won't be able to get down to the forms. So then you would have to set the forms accordingly. If the blade is set more than the .003 then the groove won't do any good anyway. Looks to me like the groove would limit the depth that you can set the blade. But, on the scraper I can see it working great. I put a groove in my homemade scraper and it would work great if I had a better quality blade. To set the blade all I have to do is set the scraper on a flat surface,  drop the blade down to the surface, tighten and scrape. It can scrape down to the forms without digging in. I usually just use a handheld blade for scraping anyway, works better for me.  (David Dziadosz)

      That is exactly what makes the groove useful. You set the blade a thousandth or so above the bottom of the plane, so it never hits the forms, the groove allows the bamboo to be planed . You then plane your first strip and reset the form accordingly, or just have enough leeway on each end of the strip so you can trim the glued up blank in the correct place. I can most always plane at least one rod without having to resharpen the blade, sometimes more than one rod.  (John Channer)


Just a quick question is that L-N 9 1/2 worth the money?? I'm a part time builder that is only building rods for myself first and maybe down the road for a few friends but I am not happy with my old Stanley plane.  I can justify the cost if I will truly get more accurate strips. Any thoughts.  (Mike Maero)

    I'm totally happy with my L-N 9 1/2, I got it grooved with a .005 channel.

    I doubt you'd be disappointed.  (Patrick Mullen)

    I'm certain the Lie-Nielsen plane is a fine tool.  Everything I have seen from them is top quality.  However I'm not sure that it will assure that your strips are more accurate.  I haven't actually used a L-N plane so I could be wrong.  But most of the time when my strips aren't as accurate as I might like it's not the fault of the plane.  Instead it's usually some flaw in my own technique.   Perhaps my plane irons are not as sharp as necessary, or I have allowed my plane to lean rather than keeping it parallel with the forms, or I have set the plane up with the blade skewed.

    Just my $.02.  (Harry Boyd)

      As usual you have summed things up quite nicely.  The blade sharpness and attitude in the housing are paramount to the strip's outcome.

      I find the .005 groove/channel really helps to assure that the blade remains parallel to the form.  It actually rides on the form, the blade being recessed .005.

      The Lie-Nielsen is very a well built, extremely solid tool.  Their blades are top notch as well.  Whether that's worth the extra $100 that you wind up paying is in the eye (and wallet) of the beholder.

      If I had it to do over again, I'd by the Lie-Nielsen.

      my .02 (that I paid $100 extra for).  (Patrick Mullen)

    You might also look at the new Lee Valley Veritas block plane (not the older low angle plane).  Its nicely made, comes with a flat base and thick A2 blade, and doesn't cost quite as much.  (Ted Knott)

      Not being a professional rodmaker either, I will throw in my thoughts as well. I have the L-N plane and like it very much, although if I were to purchase again I would buy the steeper angle version. I agree with others but it never been said too many times, a sharp plane blade avoids lots of problems. I have another method of planing, I tilt the plane so that the sole of plane is angled and is closer to the form on the non enamel side side.  This I think makes it a potentially steeper angle and avoids any glue line. I guess if I make a mistake, it is likely to take it away on the inside edge or rather the apex side of the bamboo. I've never had a glue line show, and didn't even know what they looked like until I saw a production Orvis rod. Not until the final planing do I use the L-N plane with a recessed sole, and this of course is parallel to the form on the last few strokes. Like much of this hobby, it works for me, but it may not work for others. Having said that I think the sharp plane blade works for everyone.  (Taylor Hogan)

      I have a L-N 9 1/2 which is a solid tool and a pleasure to use but I have to agree with Ted on this one the new LVV block plane is a very nice tool also and a lot less $. Friend of mine has one and sanded his own groove. IMHO the advantage of the groove is you never plane the form. If you do, it's your fault. The disadvantage is the groove allows the plane to lift the strip out of the groove. Solution: Get close and then switch to a grooved L-N 212.  (Don Schneider)

        There is another solution which I have not tried yet because my L-N 9 1/2 is quite new and don't feel like purchasing another one at this time.  During a conversation about strips lifting while planing with a grooved plane, someone mentioned (I am sorry, but have forgotten his name) "How about only putting a groove in the adjustable throat portion of the plane sole in front of the blade, so the strip cannot lift after it passes the plane blade?"   To me it makes 100% perfect sense.  However if you clamp your strips to the forms this may not work because the strips will make contact with the ungrooved part of the plane and the blade will not make contact with the strip.  Don't know if this makes sense to anyone the way I have explained it.  Hope it makes some sense.  (Robert Cristant)

          Why not buy another adjustable throat shoe for your current plane so that you can try this. It should not be as expensive as a new plane. You might have to send your plane in to have it fitted,  but it would give you both options to try.  (Dick Fuhrman)

    The L-N is certainly a beautiful tool, I got mine for Father's Day a couple of years ago.  My feeling is that a quality tool is worth the price.  I've bought less expensive tools  (read "cheap") in the past and I always end up buying the good one later anyway.  Newer Stanley 9 1/2 s don't have the quality of the old ones IMHO.  That said, I agree that tool quality is by no means the only thing that affects strip quality.  LOTS of variables.  Does your Stanley hold an edge well?   Has it been  "tuned up"?   The L-N comes tuned and with a very good iron.  Did you replace the Stanley iron with a Hock?  Or, is the Stanley an antique?  The older ones were MUCH higher quality, though they still were improved by tuning.  (Neil Savage)

    I bought an L-N three years ago when I started. You spend a lot of time with a block plane when building a rod, and it's nice to know that you have a well made tool.

    One advantage of the L-N is that you know that you have good equipment, so when problems develop you know for sure that the problem is "operator error" like Harry described.  (Tom Bowden)

    Well, maybe. It is by far my favorite plane. I still use my Stanley 9 1/2 for rough planing. Planing does go easier with 2 planes, one set for preliminary (heavier) and the other set for finish (finer). This way you do not have to play with the adjustment as the strip gets closer to dimension. Actually I use three planes, a Stanley 9 1/2 flat sole, L-N 9 1/2 grooved sole, L-N 120 Special flat sole. As far as accuracy goes, it's not the plane but the planer. Just like the most important component on a bicycle is the motor.  (Marty DeSapio)

    Accuracy is in the hand that firsts adjusts the plane and then uses it, not so much in the plane itself. If you appreciate well made tools that do the job they  were designed for extremely well, then go for it, if a hand plane is just something you have to be bothered with to make a rod, then the Stanley will do it just fine, but will take some work to get it as good as the L-N is right out of the box.  (John Channer)

    I think John has really hit the point.  "Accuracy is in the hand that first adjusts the plane". I have 3, all different, 9 1/2 Stanleys, 2 with Stanley blades, one with a Craftsman. Each of these blades fit the plane they are in and the depth and chip adjustments are "fairly" easy to set up after sharpening, but I have to fool with them quite a bit to get them just right. IE: anybody that says the Stanley is a great plane is pretty naive. My difficulty began when my son bought me 2 Hock blades for the Stanleys. Neither of them fit any of the three 9 1/2s. The problem is that the depth adjusting slots in the blades are too far apart to fit properly into the grove in the adjusting mechanism. After widening the grove in the adjusting mechanism with a file the Hock blades fit "Better". The wider slots in the Hock blades cause depth adjustment difficult. Anybody else experienced this?  (Don Greife)

      I have the same problem with  blade fit.  I have  a Stanley 9 1/2 "type." Definitely a Stanley, but no one can identify the model (no quick release). When the Hock blades were new,  it was an extreme adjustment- either too far in, or too far out. But it is my favorite plane, so I just play with it until it is right.  (Jeff Schaeffer)

        Well, I have that problem with the original blade in my old (1960s) Craftsman block plane.  I'm pretty sure Stanley made it for Sears judging by the looks of it.

        As I recall, Hock makes blades for "old" and "new" Stanley block planes.  I took the plane with me to Woodcraft and compared the blades to be sure the new one would work.  (Neil Savage)

    You can't justify the cost in terms of getting more accurate strips, but is that the point?

    I have a Lie-Nielsen 9 1/2, a newer Stanley 60 1/2, a newer Stanley 9 1/2, an old Stanley 9 1/2, and a Veritas low angle block plane.  I do not believe that the plane makes much difference in the accuracy of your strips.  Any properly tuned plane will give you accurate strips.  I prefer my newer Stanley  91/2 with a Hock blade sharpened at 45 degrees for taking strips to final dimension, but that's just because I spent so much time tuning and grooving it.  I have a 0.001" groove in the sole and can easily take .0005 shavings with it.  So far I haven't grooved the soles of the Lie-Nielsen or the Veritas.

    I'm something of a tightwad, and have a tendency to try to save money by buying cheap stuff.  However, I have NEVER regretted buying top quality things.  When you buy a quality tool you will appreciate it every time you pick it up.  That alone is worth the cost.  Isn't that why we fish bamboo? A quality tool will also usually last may times longer than a cheap one and save you money in the  long  run.  I  have  never  regretted  buying  my Lie-Nielsen plane for craftsmanship, the way it looks, and the way it feels in my hand. I also had an accident in the shop this weekend with my L-N plane that could have been disastrous.  I knocked the plane off the bench and it fell onto the concrete floor.  My heart sank as I saw it go and was too far away from it to catch it or even to get a foot under it.  I picked it up and carefully examined it, took it completely apart and put it back together.  It hit the floor on one of the front corners, and the plane was completely undamaged. If that had been one of my Stanleys, it would have been toast.

    However, like the L-N, the Veritas plane also has a ductile iron body, and a 1/8" cryogenically treated A-2 tool steel blade.  It also has much better mechanisms for tensioning and adjusting the blade.  I'm looking forward to getting one of the new Veritas high angle block planes soon.  (Robert Kope)

    As a carpenter, the best thing about the L-N block planes are the fit-in-hand, and heft. I’ve used both low angle and standard and with the blades sharpened correctly they're FAR superior to a Stanley or Record, even with Hock blades.  (Chad Wigham)


I am looking at buying my 1st plane and wanted to get some opinions. Was looking at the Lie-Nielsen standard angle adjustable mouth block plane 9-1/2. Wanted to know if this is a good plane to start.

I understand opinions will vary.  (John Parrish)

    I don’t think there is a better place to start.  (Brian Morrow)

    Kinda like learning to drive with a Porsche! Can't go wrong, I love mine. Not so sure you need to spend that kinda cash to start though, a 9 1/2 Stanley is pretty cool too. I love that one too. It's not the only thing you’re gonna need, plenty of places to spend money. So you might get good stuff and I guarantee you that you will be adding as you go.  (Joe Arguello)

    Tough to go wrong there, they are among the finer hand toyls made anywhere.

    On the other hand, you will learn far more by rescuing a vintage 9 1/2. In addition, there is just something about holding a 75+ year old plane in my hand  that the Lie-Nielsen just doesn't have, as far as I am concerned.

    Now, whether all that education is of any value is a matter that could be discussed endlessly.  (Larry Blan)

    Hard to find a better plane than the Lie-Nielsen 9-1/2. There is a another plane however that Lee Valley has  that is also very good 

    Veritas® Low-Angle Block Plane  (Don Schneider)

      I second Don's recommendation.  The Lie-Nielsen is a very good plane.  But the Veritas planes are also nice.  They are a little bulkier and heavier, and have a 1 5/8" blade instead of the 1 3/8 that the Lie-Nielsen has.  But like the Lie-Nielsen, the body is made of ductile iron, and the blades are A2 tool steel.  The Veritas blade adjustments are far superior.  They also make a standard angle block plane.

      I  have all  three and  find that  I use  the Veritas  planes more  than the Lie-Nielsen.  (Robert Kope)

    Porsches are nice I suppose. Why not look into a Ferrari.

    Of course they're out of production at this time but they were only 600 bucks. LOL

    Really though...Lie-Nielsens are nice but I'll take an old 20 dollar 9 1/2 any day!  (Mike Shay)

      I use a Stanley 9 1/2 that I hand filed a groove in to bottom of.  It works nicely as a starter and I still use it.  I  can  get  the  shavings to .001 pretty easily.  (David Gerich)

    I have 5 Stanley 9 1/2's (One that came from Douglas Ducks bench that I start all my rods with, just for luck) all with Hock blades and flattened bottoms and one 9 1/2 Lie-Nielsen. The Stanley's are good planes. I use the them until I get to the last few thousands and the use the Lie-Nielsen. When I pick that plane up it's like sliding your  butt behind the wheel of a Porsche. If I was rich I'd have a cabinet of Lie-Nielsen tools. Also have a Lie-Nielsen 212, can't even tell you how sweet that tool is.  (Mark Heskett)

    For what you’re going to pay for the Lie-Nielsen you could pick up four or five Stanley’s on ebay.  (Ren Monllor)

    If you've got $150.00 bucks to spend on a plane right now, then go for it, Lie-Nielsen is the Dom Perignon of planes( Shay won't know what that is,lol). However, an old Stanley (I'm talking 1960ish or older) is a darn good plane and will have a better blade and a truer throat(very important!) than a new one. If you do buy a new plane, take the blade out and look at where it comes thru the bottom with good glasses, you want to see that the bottom of the plane is the same thickness on both side of that opening. You probably won't have to worry about that with a high end plane such as Lie-Nielsen or Lee Valley, but all new Stanley's, Records and the cheaper makes need to be checked, if they're not true they will be impossible to adjust to make a good cut.  (John Channer)

      I must have the exception to that rule. I have two very old Stanleys, an 18 and a 19. Both have an uneven slope on the mouth from one side to the other making only  the very left side the only usable place. I have a recent Stanley G series whatever that took minimal tuning and is as perfect as can be. What I am saying is that all planes regardless of vintage need to be checked for this before buying. I keep meaning to send the two old planes out to have the angle of the mouth ground dead even.  (Scott Bearden)

      I looked it up!  (Mike Shay)

    My personal preference  is an English made Stanley G12-020 (aka. 9 1/2) and a hock blade.  Paid twenty bucks for the plane at the flea market and about forty  for  the  hock  blade.  The Lie-Nielsen was my first plane.  It's a fine plane, but I should have saved the money for more bamboo.  There's a little more detail and pictures at this link.  (David Bolin)


OK, I finally got extremely pizzed off yesterday at my Stanley plane, with the blade rocking back and forth on me, and causing the plane to dig in while final planing tip strips.  Not exactly the time when you want to hog off material, especially when it's starting to get close to the final dimensions.  I went to the L-N web site and ordered me up a 9 1/2 Adjustable mouth standard angle block plane.  According to L-N, the plane blade bevel is set to a 25 degree flat bevel.  On my Hock blades that I was using in the POS Stanley, I reground the bevel to 35 degrees.  My question is, with the higher quality of plane in the L-N, have any of you guys that own and use this plane decided it was worthwhile to regrind the bevel to a steeper angle?  I did it on the Stanley POS to get rid of the tearouts I was getting in the nodal areas.  (Mark Wendt)

    My opinion won't be the popular one, but I have left it at, and been very happy with the 25 degree factory bevel. I have minimized tear out by making sure my strips are straight and the blade stays sharp. I think it also helped that you showed me the proper way to hold and push a plane. To give some context to everybody else, Mark helped me out a lot when I got started (and still does) and he showed me to push from the rear of the plane instead of applying downward pressure from the top of the plane. If you blade is dull, you won't be able to push it forward without applying downward pressure.  (Scott Bearden)

    I'm using a 35 degree micro bevel on the L-N & Hock blades used on both Stanleys & a grooved L-N.  Use a bench dog to set the guide so it's always the same.  So far as actually grinding the larger base bevel back, I won't have to worry about that for some time, but I'll stay with the 25 & 35 since it works.  (Bob Brockett)

    I have been sharpening mine to a 35º bevel since I got my WorkSharp 3000. To be honest, I have no idea why I changed it, but it has been very successful. I predict that you will like your new L-N plane much better than the Stanley, but if you don't you can feel free to send it to me and I will replace it with a brand new POS Stanley for you. I wouldn't do that for just anyone, you know, only for those with a L-N plane that they don't like.   (Hal Manas)

      I mainly use a grooved L-N std angle plane.  35 degree bevel works best for me. Any shallower  gives me problems. (Ed Miller)

      Yer a hell of a guy Hal...  So  kind, thoughtful and generous!  ;-)  Seems the consensus is somewhere between 30 and 35 degrees.  Wonder if I got a protractor setting on my sharpener for 32.5 degrees?  (Mark Wendt)

    I ground the plane irons to 45 degrees for my L-N 9 1/2's. No tearouts. I did grind one iron to 35 degrees also just to see the difference, but the 45 degrees just seems to cut a little better for me. One of these days I'll regrind that iron 35 degrees to 45 degrees. It's been sitting unused in a cigar box for several years now, so I should put it to use.

    Also, I didn't do a 45 degrees secondary bevel on the 25 degrees factory bevel, although that would save time I guess. I ground the iron over again. I don't know if that makes a difference in performance or not.   (Tom Vagell)

      Thanks Tom.  Yours is about the steepest I've seen so far in the replies.  Maybe we can get David Bolin to run a poll on his web site to see what bevel everybody grinds their plane blades to...  (Mark Wendt)

    I grind to about 30 degrees, and that works well for me.  I must say that I am a bit obsessive (What? A rodmaker, obsessive? Never!) about sharpening, and I just don't get tear outs or chipped nodes or whatever.

    I have two of them, one with a 3 thousandth "rodmakers'" groove, ex factory, and while I was pretty sceptical about the whole concept of a grooved sole, I decided to try it, and I couldn't be happier.  It just seems to take the distractions away during that critical final planing,  and is certainly easier on the forms.

    I don't use a secondary bevel, as after a while the secondary bevel walks its way up the blade and becomes the primary bevel and needs to be fully reground anyway.  But I do grind a very slight micro-back-bevel,  and that seems to help.   (Peter McKean)

    I have the L-N and since I used 35 degrees on all my others - POS et al - I just began it as a microbevel on the new plane. It's now about 50% of the bevel and it's never been anything but an asset in my opinion. I would've said a week or two ago that it prevents tearouts totally, but I recently took on the culm-from-Hell, and it's taught me some humility.

    I recently had a relative newbie come over for some "inside info" and really looked the pro (I think) till he left and I e-mailed him that evening to tell him that my crown of glory would've been some tarnished had I worked the strips that were in my form while he was here!!

    Alack and alas, I still think you'll enjoy the hell outta that L-N!  (Art Port)

      Funny when we get that culm that we should just simply throw away and start over.....not that we are stubborn or anything but that darn culm  isn't  gonna  get  the  best  of us......... even if it takes as much time as it would to make three rods by golly!!!!!!!!

      Or that's what you guys  do...not  me.....I'm not that stubborn!!!!   (Joe Arguello)

        You shoulda seen the Culm from Hell we used a few years back at Joe Byrd's place when we had the gang together for the "One Day Wonder Rod." Ever seen splines twist like a candy cane when they're split from the culm? Funny thing was we didn't really notice the twist till after we ran the strips through Joe's JW machine and started piecing the strips together for glue-up. Oy, what a mess.  (Mark Wendt)

          Oh, and by the way, here's how I come up with the angle to grind/sharpen my plane blades!

          X being the angle to sharpen to + - .0005 degrees.

          Can't give you the answer it's a closely guarded secret!

          OK OK.....40 degrees. When I got my WorkSharp 3000 I took it apart and milled  the table so I could get that angle, no more tear outs.  (Joe Arguello)

      Mark, I am with Joe on this 40 degrees. Shavings on final planing at .00005 give or take a 0, anyway they look like smoke, semi transparent at any rate. Love my L-N plane, I have a couple of 9 1/2's and a 9A if anyone is interested. (Jon Holland)

      So, you basically ground in a 35º microbevel rather than regrinding the whole blade? (Mark Wendt)

        Yep! And then kept going. It'll be ALL 35 soon! I HAD used 37 degrees (dunno why I settled on that) but the WorkSharp does only 5 degree increments, so I convinced myself that 2 degrees couldn't make much of a difference.  (Art Port)

          Nifty! Maybe I'll try that then.

          Here's an additional question for all you L-N users that reground your blades. Did any of you experience tearout prior to regrinding your L-N blades? (Mark Wendt)

            I went back to the 25 degrees after trying 45, 40, and 35. With a 20 degree bed and a 45 degree angle on the iron you get 65 degrees which felt to me like a scraper. I found that with that steep of an angle it was difficult to push the plane easily. To each his own I guess. I can very easily take very fine shavings, and the effective angle is 45 degrees. I think it goes back to straight strips and keeping the iron sharp. I have not had any problems at 25 degrees.  (Scott Bearden)

              Hmmmm, decisions, decisions. A plurality has their blade bevels at 35 degrees, while a close behind minority has it at 30. And one or two fence sitters at 32 degrees...

              I've been right all along. Put 12 rod makers in a room and you get 13 different opinions.

              Thanks fellas! (Mark Wendt)

    I set the bevel in my standard L-N to 35 degrees, and in  the low-angle plane I set to 45 deg.

    No tearouts.  (Henry Mitchell)

      Forgot to say (maybe obvious) you don't have to re-grind the whole blade at once, just make a secondary bevel with the steeper angle.  (Henry Mitchell)

        That is quite right, Henry, but the problem with secondary bevels is that in what seems to be the twinkling of an eye, they exceed their authority and become primary bevels, which then need to reground, and that is a terrible job.  (Peter McKean)

          Still and all, if you want a steeper bevel than the plane iron has at the moment, you can use the secondary bevel until it becomes the primary one...  (Neil Savage)

            On my plane blades I almost always grind the bevel to 25 degrees and then hone to the cutting bevel I want. The shallower grind bevel seems to speed up sharpening and resharpening. When the honed bevel gets too wide I grind the primary bevel again to 25 degrees.

            Grinding also gets the cutting edge square and straight. Even with a honing guide and using diamond plates I get a convex edge over time. A convex edge is not a real problem for planing cane as it is in other applications.

            I can hone a fresh ground blade in about 30 seconds. When the honed bevel gets wide, especially on thick blades, honing takes me three minutes or so. I am still working on my honing technique and do over-sharpen some.  (Joe Hudock)

    I use the L-N with my blade bevel reground to ~32%.  I used it with the  "factory" angle for a while out of the box, but decide to go steeper after a little use.  Works well w/o tearout.  (Eric Koehler)

    Heh, once I get the L-N, I'm gonna play with the Stanley. I'm going to chuck it up in my mill vice and take a pass or two in the mouth to make sure the bed angle is at 20 degrees and parallel to the base. I think there are a couple of "nubbies" on the inside that just aren't quite wide enough to hold the blade in place allowing it to skew. I was thinking of drilling and tapping through those two nubbies for a 4-40 set screw with the plastic insert so it won't back out or get tighter. Then I was going to chuck up the frog in my mill vise and take a couple of passes down that thing too, to make sure its dead-nuts flat. I'll be doing all the same things L-N or Veritas does to their quality planes on a POS Stanley! I may also dink around with the blade adjustment mechanism too. That'll be done in all the spare time I'll have once I finish my machine.  (Yeah, right).  (Mark Wendt)


Site Design by: Talsma Web Creations

Tips Home - What's New - Tips - Articles - Tutorials - Contraptions - Contributors - Search Site - Contact Us - Taper Archives
Christmas Missives - Chat Room - Photo Galleries - Line Conversions - The Journey - Extreme Rodmaking - Rodmaker's Pictures - Donate - Store