Stanley 50 plough plane blade wobble/rock

[SteveMP]

Have had this plane a long time, and it has always bugged me that the blade wobbles/rocks in usage. Tried showing in pics that the groove in the body is quite abit bigger than the blades. So much so that i can shove a steel ruler into the slot with the blade. This gap lats the blade rock back and forth during use which makes it sometimes kind of gouge the wood and I am guessing slightly changes the attack/bevel angle? Anyone run into this and have a fix?

 

[Mike G]

Have a fix? Yeah, I'm replacing the damn thing. It's a deeply frustrating fault (although mine isn't quite as bad as yours). I'm moving to a screw-adjusted Record variant on the same theme, when I can find one. I missed one at the auctions the other day, which was very frustrating. I can end up having the blade-holding screw so tight it feels on the point of snapping, and still holding the adjusting lever with a spare finger/ thumb. When it works it works well, but getting it adjusted really shouldn't be such a struggle, and it's mainly due to the slop of the blade in the slot.

 

[SteveMP]

Have a fix? Yeah, I'm replacing the damn thing. It's a deeply frustrating fault (although mine isn't quite as bad as yours). I'm moving to a screw-adjusted Record variant on the same theme, when I can find one. I missed one at the auctions the other day, which was very frustrating. I can end up having the blade-holding screw so tight it feels on the point of snapping, and still holding the adjusting lever with a spare finger/ thumb. When it works it works well, but getting it adjusted really shouldn't be such a struggle, and it's mainly due to the slop of the blade in the slot.

haha, yeah. I have been wanting the new Veritas Boxmaker's plow plane since it came out , but don't want to spend $180 at the moment.

 

[jimhanna]

I used to have a 50, long ago sold, but I don't remember that amount of slop.
Is it an original Stanley blade? Later 50s had a blade adjuster which worked on notches in the bottom of the blade, I can't see any notches in the bottom of the blade but that might just mean you have an early model.
Original blades would have been 1/8" thick, you may have a replacement made by an owner from 3mm steel.
Or it may just have been rusted and suffered some enthusiastic sanding.

On the other hand a second look at your picture made me pause. The blade isn't protruding much out of the slot, doesn't look as if there's a lot for the sliding section to butt against. Do you have the same problem with wider blades. The 50 had a different method for holding smaller blades. Blood and gore explains it better than I can.

The Superior Works - Patrick's Blood & Gore: Planes #46 - #54

Quote "There is one slight problem with this design of sandwiching the cutter between two castings to hold the cutter in place, and that is that the narrowest two ploughing cutters (1/8" and 3/16") aren't wide enough to be secured in this manner. A holding screw was added when these two cutters were provided starting ca. 1936. The holding screw has a head that measures 3/4" in diameter, and it's this wide head that holds the cutter in place; the sliding section is removed, and the holding screw is substituted. The same wing nut that pulls the sliding section up against the left edge of the cutter also pulls the holding screw's head against the left edge of the cutter. The holding screw is normally MIA."

 

[AndyT]

The Record version of the Stanley 50 was the 050.

Mine has a slot which is a much better fit, but it also has a little lug above the cutter, threaded to take a screw. You can tighten the screw down onto the cutter.

It wouldn't be a difficult bit of metalworking to drill a hole through the plane body and mount an equivalent little bit of steel with a tapped hole in it, to add this feature to your plane.

 

[SteveMP]

I used to have a 50, long ago sold, but I don't remember that amount of slop.
Is it an original Stanley blade? Later 50s had a blade adjuster which worked on notches in the bottom of the blade, I can't see any notches in the bottom of the blade but that might just mean you have an early model.
Original blades would have been 1/8" thick, you may have a replacement made by an owner from 3mm steel.
Or it may just have been rusted and suffered some enthusiastic sanding.

On the other hand a second look at your picture made me pause. The blade isn't protruding much out of the slot, doesn't look as if there's a lot for the sliding section to butt against. Do you have the same problem with wider blades. The 50 had a different method for holding smaller blades. Blood and gore explains it better than I can.

The Superior Works - Patrick's Blood & Gore: Planes #46 - #54

Quote "There is one slight problem with this design of sandwiching the cutter between two castings to hold the cutter in place, and that is that the narrowest two ploughing cutters (1/8" and 3/16") aren't wide enough to be secured in this manner. A holding screw was added when these two cutters were provided starting ca. 1936. The holding screw has a head that measures 3/4" in diameter, and it's this wide head that holds the cutter in place; the sliding section is removed, and the holding screw is substituted. The same wing nut that pulls the sliding section up against the left edge of the cutter also pulls the holding screw's head against the left edge of the cutter. The holding screw is normally MIA."

Thanks, yeah its original blade. All the blades in the box are 1/8” thick as mentioned. And this is the 1/4” cutter so it does span past both sides.

 

[SteveMP]

The Record version of the Stanley 50 was the 050.

Mine has a slot which is a much better fit, but it also has a little lug above the cutter, threaded to take a screw. You can tighten the screw down onto the cutter.

It wouldn't be a difficult bit of metalworking to drill a hole through the plane body and mount an equivalent little bit of steel with a tapped hole in it, to add this feature to your plane.

View attachment 57239

Interesting your casting has a lot more mass than mine. Not sure i could really drill anywhere on this thing. The only chunky section is the part that holds the threaded rod to tighten the 2 sections together.

 

[Dr.Al]

I was curious so I went to have a look at mine:





According to my feeler gauge set, the gap on mine is 0.35mm.

I can't comment on how problematic it is with that gap as the #50 is probably my least often used plough plane: I can't remember the last time I used it. I tend to default to the Record #43 or my home-made fixed offset grooving planes and if I need something heavier duty then the #45 comes out.

For yours, one bodge solution would be to buy a cheap feeler gauge set, find the gauge that fills the gap nicely & cut a bit off to fit with the cutter as padding. If it works well, superglue the feeler gauge bit to the casting (where your steel rule is in the photo in the first post). Feeler gauges are hard, but they're thin enough you can still just about cut them & they can be bought for much less than a stock of shim steel.

 

[SteveMP]

I was curious so I went to have a look at mine:

View attachment 57240

View attachment 57241

According to my feeler gauge set, the gap on mine is 0.35mm.

I can't comment on how problematic it is with that gap as the #50 is probably my least often used plough plane: I can't remember the last time I used it. I tend to default to the Record #43 or my home-made fixed offset grooving planes and if I need something heavier duty then the #45 comes out.

For yours, one bodge solution would be to buy a cheap feeler gauge set, find the gauge that fills the gap nicely & cut a bit off to fit with the cutter as padding. If it works well, superglue the feeler gauge bit to the casting (where your steel rule is in the photo in the first post). Feeler gauges are hard, but they're thin enough you can still just about cut them & they can be bought for much less than a stock of shim steel.

Thanks, judging by your pic, it looks like your blade is thicker than 1/8" too, but could just be the photo. My biggest feeler gauge is .762 mm and it fits with ease.

 

[AndyT]

A few more measurements, in case it helps.

I have relatively modern Record cutters - probably from the 80s or 90s - and they are about 3.06mm.

I have some Stanley 50 cutters which look older, possibly pre war - and they are thinner, at around 2.75 - 2.82mm.

With a Record cutter in the groove of the Record plane, the thickest feeler gauge I can insert is 0.1mm or 4 thou.

The groove is 3.18 mm according to my M&W caliper, which is 0.125" or 1/8".