ugly No. 5 rehab

ken werner

Member
Messages
3,377
Location
Central NY State
I picked this No. 5 up at an estate sale. I was scrounging around in a dungeon, and a guy handed it to me, he said he didn't need another 5, but those of you who know me, know I can't pass up an old Stanley. Not even one this ugly.

ugly5.jpg


In case you didn't see that replacement tote, here it is up close and personal:

tote.jpg


But the plane was made in the third quarter of 1937 [the date is stamped on the blade], and it has good bones. It's a type 16, which ain't chopped liver. [Still pretty good.]

date.jpg


So since it needs a new tote, I decided to make tote and knob out of cherry. They are coming along, and the plane has been taken apart, cleaned oiled, and soon to be lapped. I'll post pictures tomorrow of the new wood.
 
Last edited:
That tote is certainly a bit of a rough cobble job, but to be fair, it looks like it works fine.

That is NOT ugly at all, IMHO, just needs a bit of a brush job and it will be a user :thumb:
 
That should clean up beautifully. It doesn't even look all that bad from the pics. Nice score! :thumb:

I bought a pretty rusty Bedrock 605 for $6 a couple of years ago that cleaned up surprisingly well. Looking forward to seeing the end product.

BR605001-1.jpg
Bedrock009-1.jpg
 
Last edited:
Stu, I agree with you, the old tote does feel ok in the hand, though the top is a bit small for its function. I just couldn't leave it be.

Scott, very nice rehab on that 605. Don't you just love bringing these old tools back from rust purgatory?
 
the "after" pictures

Cleaned up, repainted the background on the lever cap, and lapped sole and sides. I left the japanning alone, other than cleaning it. The blade is a little short, but then again, it's 73 years old.

No5T16.jpg


No5T16b.jpg


No5T16sole.jpg
 
Larry, you are on the ball! I had shaped the tote some years ago, but it was rough and had no holes in it, it was kicking around in my box of plane parts. So what I did yesterday was refine the shape with rasp and sandpaper, drill holes and apply finish. I made the knob yesterday.
 
rehabugly No. 5 rehab

Nice job Ken, very nice.

I have an old No.5 that needs attention. It has a good tote and knob, so that's a plus, but it has the plastic adjustment wheel, not all brass like yours. Older or newer?.

I never seem to learn which way the iron should be installed, bevel up or down. The PO had it bevel down, as indicated by all the black paint on it.

I'll look for my pix of it and post them later.

Aloha, Tony (former New Yorker)
 
Tony, the black plastic knob is not a sign of poor quality. During WWII, brass was needed for the war effort, so Stanley used bakelite for the adjusters. You have a wartime era plane there. The bevel goes down.

More info, courtesy of Mr. Patrick Leach:
http://hyperkitten.com/tools/stanley_bench_plane/type_study.php#Type 17
[SIZE=+2]Type 17. [/SIZE] [SIZE=+1] Planes made by Stanley 1942-1945. [/SIZE]
  • All of the features of the previous, except:
  • These are the war production planes, and all bets about what is and isn't proper on these examples, and those made in the years immediately following, are off. This is an area where the type study is very weak, in my opinion. But it's understandable since there are so many configurations of these planes. My observations tell me that any combination of the following features is possible for these planes. And, to make matters worse, some of the examples have the standard features (rosewood, brass) of the previous type in conjunction with some of the features of this type. This all is likely explained by the fact that Stanley was using stock on-hand, where parts made prior to the war were simply being used.
  • Handle and knob are hardwood stained red or painted black.
  • Depth adjustment now is smaller, made either of steel or hard rubber.
  • Oddly, the bottom castings are much thicker and heavier than other models.
  • The type study doesn't mention this, but my experience tells me that nickel plated lever caps went belly-up during the war. The lever cap have a rather coarsely machined surface.
  • The type study also fails to mention this -- the normal two-piece construction of a brass cap and a threaded rod, used to secure the the wooden parts (tote and knob) to the bottom casting, is now a one piece construction (like a long screw).
  • Some examples have no frog adjusting screw. It's strange that on the examples I've seen, the hole is tapped for the screw in the bottom casting, but the frog isn't. It's like they did half the work, but all for nothing. On other examples, neither hole is tapped.
  • Some examples have the old-style hole (keyhole-shaped) in the lever cap.
 
Top