Hock or Lee Valley A2 Plane Blades?

Vaughn McMillan

Administrator
Staff member
Messages
36,054
Location
ABQ NM
I'm cleaning up the Bailey No. 3 that I recently discovered in the shop, and I want to replace the blade (and possibly the chip breaker). Do I want the Hock blade or the Lee Valley A2 blade? What's your preference?

I see Woodcraft sells a Hock chip breaker. Is it a worthwhile addition? Is there another one you'd recommend? Is there a better source for these things than Woodcraft or Lee Valley? I'd prefer to buy both parts from the same vendor, to save a few bucks on shipping. (Unfortunately, I don't see that Lee Valley sells chip breakers.)
 
I bought a couple of LV A2 blades and have been quite satisfied. They were a bit less expensive than the Hock.

I kept the same chip breaker - never felt the need to replace it. If you keep yours, you just need to make sure it fits well against the blade. I can tell you how to do that if you need me to.

Mike
 
Last edited:
You might want to consider Lie Neilson blades, too. They also make a good chip breaker. If you do go their site, be sure to click on the section for 'Stanley Replacement Blades' because the regular LN blades are a shade too thick to work in the old Stanleys. The Stanley Replacement blades are just a tad thinner. I have a couple of them, and really like them.

I also have several Hock blades that I like. Haven't tried Lee Valley blades yet, other than the ones in my LV planes. Those are good, so I'd guess their other blades are, too.
 
I've got Hock, LV, and LN replacement blades. No discernable differences among them. They're all quite good and (i'm no metalurgist, but they seem) amazingly similar - do you shave with Remington or Schick?
If the original blade is a laminated steel blade (Stanley made these for several years) you might consider just replacing the chip breaker and leaving the original blade on the plane. You can tell the laminated blades after you hone a fresh edge. The bevel will clearly indicate a line down the middle where the high carbon steel is laminated to the softer tool steel. It will look like you put a micro bevel on the edge. The high carbon steel takes and holds an edge well and is laminated to the softer steel to keep it plyable. I have one of these laminated blades on one of my smoothers - i'm as happy with it as i am with my thicker A2 cryo blades.
If you stay with a thin laminated blade, i really would upgrade the chip breaker. I'm partial to the 2 piece Clifton model, but the LV, LN, and Hock one piece versions are a huge improvement over the thin orignals as well.
Have fun making shavings.
Paul Hubbman
 
Either will work fine!

When I restored my 604 I left the SW blade in there and just sharpened it. It worked pretty well. BUT after I installed a new Hock blade in it I was totally amazed at the difference! It is now my go to plane. I absolutely love using it. :thumb:

I also installed a LV A2 blade in my restored Union No7. This blade worked as well as advertised. Maybe even a bit better. Of course, a well tuned hand plane helps. But you get the idea.:thumb:

Either of these fine replacement blades would work well in your hand planes. And as Jim said, don't forget the LN replacement blades. Just be sure to get the type that will fit in with your plane's frog & chip breaker. Some planes can't handle that think of a blade without filing the mouth (something I have avoided doing so far).:D

Unless I miss my guess, Craftsman Studios has the best prices on Hock blades. They also offer free shipping.

http://www.craftsmanstudio.com/html_p/H!BENCH.htm

Good luck!

See ya around,
Dominic
 
Last edited:
Thanks guys...I ended up ordering a Hock A2 from Craftsman Studio, and the 2-piece Clifton chip breaker from these guys:

http://www.dilegnosupply.com/

The rest of the plane is cleaning up well:

Before:

Bailey No. 3 - 1 800.jpg

And a couple poor "in-progress" shots:

Bailey No. 3 - 2 800.jpg Bailey No. 3 - 3 500.jpg

While I'm here, another few questions...I would like to lightly lap the surface of the frog showing in the last pic above. Is there a safe and reliable way to remove the lever? I'm making the rank assumption that making this surface smooth will help make adjustments smoother. Should I bother worrying about it?

Also, based on the patent dates on the plane body in the second pic, any idea when this plane was made, or the type? Based on earlier pics that weren't as clear, Mike Henderson guessed it was a type 11. How does one determine the type on this plane? Since the lever cap has the oblong (not kidney-shaped) hole, I gather it's from the early 30s or before. (Been reading Patrick's Blood and Gore site.)
 
...I would like to lightly lap the surface of the frog showing in the last pic above. Is there a safe and reliable way to remove the lever? I'm making the rank assumption that making this surface smooth will help make adjustments smoother. Should I bother worrying about it?

Be VERY careful in trying to remove the lateral lever. The frog casting is very brittle, and also pretty thin where the lever attaches. The lever is riveted on, so grinding off any mushrooming on the underside, then drifing the rivet out with a properly fitting pin punch is the way to do it. If you do this, make sure the surrounding area of the frog is well supported by wood, an anvil, etc. I've done it by carving out a wood block to allow the lever to fit into the carved recess and the flat surface to support the frog.

Replacing it means finding or making a new rivet. I've used brass rod, which is soft and peens over well - again, using much caution. As an aside, I once bought a plane at a flea market that had a small (2d ?) nail being used as the rivet. Sure not pretty, but it worked...
 
Last edited:
Hmm...based on your warnings Jim, I'm wondering if I should even attempt it. Might be more prudent to try it on another plane or two at least before I try doing it on this one. I also need to see if the brass rod I have on hand is the right size to make a new rivet. Thanks for the info, Jim. :thumb:
 
I agree with Jim. Do not try to remove that rivet. Especially since you're going to use that plane and not "show" it. It's very easy to break the frog and then you'll be into search mode looking for a new one.

One of the plane type studies is here. A better one for your needs is here.

Incidently, if your plane is a type 11 that's perhaps the most desired type for both collectors and users.

Mike
 
Thanks for the links, Mike. Based on the patent dates, it looks like it's either a type 11 or type 12. In the type 11 description, they say:

A new trademark is adopted, where "STANLEY" "NEW BRITAIN" "CONN." "U.S.A." forms a v-shaped logo.

Where is this logo found? The original iron (blade) has remnants of a stamping at the top, and appears to have the text in the quote above, but I can't make out anything v-shaped about it. I've been looking for a photographic example, but haven't found one yet. On the other hand, it doesn't appear to have the heart shaped logo that would indicate it's a type 12.

Oh, and you guys have convinced me to leave the lateral lever alone. ;) Thanks for the advice. :thumb:
 
Thanks for the links, Mike. Based on the patent dates, it looks like it's either a type 11 or type 12. In the type 11 description, they say:



Where is this logo found? The original iron (blade) has remnants of a stamping at the top, and appears to have the text in the quote above, but I can't make out anything v-shaped about it. I've been looking for a photographic example, but haven't found one yet. On the other hand, it doesn't appear to have the heart shaped logo that would indicate it's a type 12.

Oh, and you guys have convinced me to leave the lateral lever alone. ;) Thanks for the advice. :thumb:
The "V" logo is on the blade. There's actually no "V", it's just that the outline of the words on the blade is a "V". Attached are a couple of pictures of one of my V blades.

The blade may have been replaced in your plane - it's not uncommon. If you post a picture of the logo I may be able to tell you its age.

Mike

[Here's a site that gives info on the logos.]
 

Attachments

  • Stanley-blade-V-logo-001.jpg
    Stanley-blade-V-logo-001.jpg
    97.1 KB · Views: 13
  • Stanley-blade-V-logo-002.jpg
    Stanley-blade-V-logo-002.jpg
    80 KB · Views: 12
Last edited:
Thanks, Mike. Mine's much more worn than the examples you showed and difficult to read, but that's indeed the stamp on my blade. Here's a picture with the contrast and sharpness bumped up a bit to make it stand out better:

Bailey No. 3 - 5 800.jpg

Even though I've got a new blade on its way, I'll definitely be keeping this one, too. So it's official...this is a type 11. Very cool. My dad was very pleased last weekend when I told him I was cleaning up and planning to use his dad's old plane. I suspect my granddad's smiling somewhere, too.
 
Hmm...based on your warnings Jim, I'm wondering if I should even attempt it. Might be more prudent to try it on another plane or two at least before I try doing it on this one. I also need to see if the brass rod I have on hand is the right size to make a new rivet. Thanks for the info, Jim. :thumb:

hi vaughn

heres another vote for leaving it alone, those lateral adjusters were never meant to be removed . and also a quick vote for hock blades , they work fantastic and hold an edge very very well .
 
Thanks Griz. I got the Hock A2 blade...now I'm waiting on the Clifton chip breaker to arrive. Still need to sharpen the Hock and flatten the sole, but it's all coming together nicely.
 
hi vaughn

i know its been a while , but this is what i did with my #6 and #7 with hock replacement blades in both ........:D:D
 

Attachments

  • loll's table 8.jpg
    loll's table 8.jpg
    37.4 KB · Views: 13
  • loll's table 9.jpg
    loll's table 9.jpg
    34.7 KB · Views: 18
  • loll's table 10.jpg
    loll's table 10.jpg
    36.8 KB · Views: 14
Nice pics, Griz. Gets me chompin' at the bit to get mine finished up. I just need to get a slot of spare time. I've got the new iron and Clifton cap iron, but I need to spend some quality time with the sharpening and flattening stuff before putting all the pieces together.
 
Top