Once you’ve mentally mastered the sharpening ideas of Nicholson, it’s time to move on to the bench planes. When you read these entries, note that the point is to have a compact but relatively complete description about the size of the planes, the function and how you use them. I’m splitting this up into this post about the planes and the next will be about their use. It seems preferable to making 6 or so individual posts about each plane and repeating some of the core principles.
Again, there is a link to the text for you. There is a reading tool at google that might even allow me to link a single page, but I don’t have confidence that links to it won’t change.
Planes are under “Joinery” on page 91.
They are, Jack Plane, Trying Plane, Long Plane, Jointer Plane, Smoothing Plane, Compass, Straight Block and Forkstaff to make up the group of bench planes. I won’t mention the Forkstaff plane further – but you can read it and you can google pictures of them. Nicholson says they are typically used in volume by coachmakers. I’ve never met someone making fine coaches or truck bodies or truck cabs with hand planes.
The Jack Plane: Nicholson’s take on the jack plane is quite long. A lot of the language describing how the insides of the plane are arranged is there to set the state not just for the Jack plane, but for others. Important details are there, though. You can disregard these and say you like a 12″ plane for jack work or whatever, but you’re peeing into the breeze trying to get work done. This text is stellar and it’s better to follow *most* of the key items.
The Jack plane is about 17″ long, 3″ high with an open handle, and about 3 1/2″ wide. As a planemaker, this translates to a plane that would house a 2 1/2″ iron with an open handle. It sounds a little odd to me. More typical now is a 2 1/8- 2 1/4″ iron meaning the plane will 3″ wide or just over and almost square in cross section. Now is probably a poor term – what we find that dominated a few decades later.
For sharpening, Nicholson mentions a nearly flat arris on the honed edge – something that happens when you freehand sharpen. Remember, this is the last tiny bit honed, not the grind – that’s important. An arris like this does put the strength right at the tip, though, without leaving a bunch of intruding steel rubbing the wood when you plane. Nicholson mentions Convexity again in the profile laterally, and of course, we are familiar with this and some would refer to it by radius. Commentary follows that it needs to be set up to get the most done. This will vary based on what you work with, but it’s safe to say that most of the planes I’ve seen are set up with a jack iron almost flat because they’re kept by hobbyists – or radically radiused like a plane meant for wet soft wood. Something in the middle is better.
To set up the cap iron, there is an arris right at the terminus into the iron, too. This is refreshing to read. In 2012, I wrote a cap iron article. After testing, an iron with a slight radius just at the tip, but not too steep seemed to work better and be more intuitive than a flat bevel.
Note, too – 45 degrees for the bed, and the discussion of different radii depending on whether you plane crap or hard or soft or whatever else. You’ll find something that works well and stick with it – stay away from the idea that you need to start buying several irons.
The Trying Plane: the trying plane is used to knock the ridges off left by the jack. Nicholson specifies a slightly narrower plane at 3 1/4, which is still about enough width to squeeze in a 2 1/2″ iron. I’m going to give my opinion – if you want to work by hand, width to a plane is relatively important as it will impart flatness on what you do and ease some operations. If you are male, you can push a plane with a 2 1/2 iron. I can’t speak for all of the ladies, but at least some could, too. This blog may live for 20 years without anyone who can sweat without stinking, though.
The iron is sharpened the same way, and the cap iron is set up the same way, but of course with a flatter radius profile than the jack plane. In my estimation, good is when this is somewhere around 80% as flat or more of the smoothing plane – as in much closer to flat than it is to the jack profile.
Nicholson specifies 22″ in length. This is pretty easily found. 20-24 is probably a good range, but Warren has opined before that my own try planes (that I’ve made at 24″) are more like a long plane. I’d stick with 22-24″ as it’s common to go from the try plane to the smoother and be done.
Comments in the text state that the plane is both longer and more broad than the jack, leading me to believe the jack is probably more like 3×3 in cross section. Too, Nicholson states the trying plane is about 3 1/8″ tall. If you start to make planes, you will find that a plane long planes will work best when they’re just a bit wider than they are tall.
The Long Plane: this is a 26″ version of the try plane, but somewhat wider and slightly longer. The text doesn’t say it, but you can use my rule of thumb from planemaking – you will be comfortable making a plane well at about 3/4″ wider than the widest part of the tapered iron. That makes this plane somewhere around 2 3/4″ wide expected for the iron. This is obviously not a name we hear day to day in modern planes, but it’s a reflection of the standards at the time. As much dimensioning as there was, perhaps in a very large shop, it would be useful to have a 22″ trying plane and 26″ long plane. I think you don’t need to worry about having both. I’ve had 2 3/4″ planes – and as a bit of a tub but with reasonable smooth power, 2 3/4″ in hardwoods is starting to be a load. It’s uncanny how it makes a difference. Could prove to be useful match planing a joint that was right at the limit of a 2 1/2″ iron, though.
The Jointer Plane: specified even a little wider than the long plane and 30″ long. Mentioned for planing long straight edges, not a surprise, but also laid on its side to shoot a jointed edge on long narrow stock. If you have ever looked around for older jointers, you find that 26-28″ is far more common. Don’t confuse this jointer plane with having the same name as a Stanley 7 – the length makes the front of a 28-30″+ jointer very heavy and even though it may only be a pound or two heavier than a 26″ plane, it will wear you out with lack of balance. It makes sense that wider use isn’t offered. You want to use planes in a way that you can use planes again tomorrow. Pushing a 10 or 11 pound plane that’s nose heavy might improve your preacher curls, but too much use and you will be touching the top strap on your forearm all day, fascinated with the way it feels.
These are the things that Nicholson says for long flat planes. I’ll tell you my preference, because I’ve bought everything. I’d rather have a jack, 22-24″ try plane and a stanley 7 or 8, so long as you have the ability to make sure it’s flat. Even though the length is the same, the try plane will outwork a Stanley plane easily trying up after a jack plane and the Stanley plane will be easier to set finer and work effectively just a bit flatter in yucky wood.
The Smoothing Plane: Nothing earth shattering here if you’ve seen a coffin smoothing plane or any other basic unhandled smoother. The size mentioned (7 1/2″) seems a bit short, but coffin smoothers are generally a bit fat and short. The size corresponds with an iron of about 2-2 1/8″, I think. It’s been a long time since I made a coffin smoother, but the rules for iron size judged from width are a little different because the plane bed behind the widest part of the body. If you’re try planing or jointing faces or rails, there won’t be much to do with the smoother, and the text uses the words “used in cleaning off the finished work”. That’s somewhat key as you can gather from it tearout from “rougher” planes before the smoother really isn’t accepted.
On to the next:
The Compass Plane: You might be familiar with the stanley 114 or the #020, but there are really a lot of coffin shaped compass planes out there with an adjustable boxwood, toe. They may seem a trick to use, but if you learn to set the cap iron, they work well. These are specified, of course, to plane out inside curves in work – such as in a drawer front. These days, people tell us to plane across the grain everywhere, but that’s usually incompetence. The compass plane is designed to plane downhill with the direction of the curve from both sides or concave trim.
The Straight Block: By its description, it’s used for smaller miters and edge striking where using the jointer would be cumbersome. The plane is still specified to be quite wide, 12″ long and just under 3″ high. This is not a dainty little block plane, and it’s not meant to put in a carpenter’s pocket. The iron angle is described to be a little bit more acute.
Nicholson describes a plane with a more acute angle and thus a smaller arris (more acute sharpening angle). You can assume that you either have a shallower angle double iron plane or a single iron plane with a lower bed and an iron set to cut around 60 degrees effective. Anything else, and you’ll in no-man’s land for actual work. Low angle and tight mouth is torturous shooting narrow edges- it will still allow tearout, and nothing in these older texts suggest that planing torn surfaces was OK. Maybe more on that from my point of view in a future post. Short and to the point – if you are experiencing tearout, you are losing productivity and accuracy, and it’s not tolerated if you’re dimensioning.
Strange concept there for the average person to fathom – that you need to control the shavings and the surface to some extent to be accurate on *rougher* work.
Too, you will get nowhere if you try to make this group of planes with single irons. I’ve used a single iron setup – it’s intolerable with current wood. If you’re like me, go ahead and try it so you can compare. Time operations that you do and weigh shavings vs. your perceived effort. Measure sharpening intervals vs. the volume of wood planed, and so on. Single iron planes generally suck after the introduction of double iron planes. If you wear tights for recreation, and a clip on pony tail, maybe they look more appropriate, but you probably also need to go to a rare private woods with an axe and get old growth timber to make those planes work right. It’s not to be when you’re gluing up FAS cherry or Walnut and facing a board.
My opinion – this write up by Nicholson is excellent, though some things aren’t quite as clear. It could be because it was written very close to the turn of the 19th century. Planes and tidy slim profiled all steel cap irons are typically more mature in the mid 1800s.
Of Making by Hand with Wood and Steel 
One thought on “Nicholson on Bench Planes”