My Posts about Tools You Don’t Need…
May make it seem like I’m anti-boutique tools. That’s not really the case. I started with mostly boutique tools because they work out of the box, but unfortunately, due too to the reiterated repetition that “they’re better”. Most of the things that they’re better at have nothing to do with you being better with tools in the long term. For example, a LV or LN plane is flatter on average than an older stanley plane (and if you’re dimensioning wood, flatness at the jointer and smoother level will save you a whole lot of work), but it’s also true that you can generally flatten a stanley plane sole to less than LN or LV’s spec and bias it in your favor for about $2 in materials and an hour of time. When you’re a beginner, that kind of thing is out of your reach. But, it shouldn’t be for long.
Supporting the Makers
I could make chisels and sell them, but I don’t (I don’t want to). The idea that if I did, someone might see additional value in supporting a current maker is something I can’t sit with. It would be my job as a maker to make the tools better than or at least as good as anything you could buy, and my bent is in favor of making tools that experienced users would like. I don’t think there’s anything sold at this point that is the equal of a 26c3 chisel made in an English pattern. But, there are boutique makers who do make very nice tools and some make them in classic proportion and usability, and if you like them and they give you pleasure, that’s something you should decide. It’s not always about whether or not they’re better or if you can justify utility, it should be what you like.
You have no obligation, though. The maker is selling you something. You are the buyer. This isn’t a relationship that goes both ways, and the magazines and some publishers will push the idea that you have some kind of obligation to support current makers. You don’t – you have an obligation to yourself to do whatever you like. And for a lot of people, that’s going to be less in terms of heavy thinking or learning to work by hand and more along the lines of taking a test shaving once in a while and being a Tool Preserver.
It’s not Just Boutique Tools
I can’t tell you what’s virtuous about infill planes other than that they’re pretty. Well, there’s one thing – if you get a shoulder plane from England and it’s not Norris or Holland, you can often find such a thing for about $100 in very large format. Though, even when you do that, you may find that what you’re really looking for is a rabbet plane, as there’s not much in woodworking that a shoulder plane does better than a rabbet plane, and in most of the cases where you can think of something (like endgrain), there’s probably another way to make a joint that is better and would avoid planing anything at all (for example, malleting the shoulders of a tenon with a strong marked line and a simple bench chisel – if you mark well, there’s little else to do).
But I still have a bunch of infill planes, anyway. I like them. I like the older planes that have proportions that do seem to lend themselves better to longer duration work. For example, a Norris 2 or a Spiers handled smoother will generally be near the weight and proportions of a Stanly smoother, but not all – even some of the old ones are nose heavy and overweight. On my shelf is a Norris 15 1/2 inch long #13 panel plane -8 1/2 pounds and really tolerable only for a few minutes if you’re doing more than Wood Show planing. There’s no virtue to the weight, even if you are doing the odd bit of work on rosewood sticking. This may also help explain why there are so few of them.
I couldn’t tell you a sane reason that I have the infills except for the chance that I may make more infills (they’re not difficult to make and the barrier to entry in making them accurately is low as far as tooling goes).
But, I’m comfortable with being able to say that it doesn’t make great sense that I still have those planes. If you read far on internet forums, you’ll see all kinds of descriptions about “difficult wood” or whatever else there may be in terms of intangibles, but it has nothing to do with doing a volume of work or doing accurate work, and I have yet to see an infill plane that can out-plane a properly set stanley plane, and it’s no contest when efficiency is involved
So, it’s Something Else, I Guess
Maybe for folks, it’s the connection with something current. But we should all be honest enough that we’re not telling the next person who comes along that it’s got something to do with making.
Of Making by Hand with Wood and Steel 