I have to admit I'm one of those who has rarely used a hand plane. Every now
and then I'd grab one to smooth a spot etc.

Recently acquired a Stanley 7C jointer and after tuning and sharpening the
iron made a few passes over some oak. I know the iron was sharpened
correctly but I was getting the shavings jammed between the blade edge and
the front of the throat so that after one or two pushes, it wouldn't cut.

Ultimately determined that when I replaced the frog and tightened it down,
it moved back from the opening by a steenth. Reset it to line up with the
edge of the mouth and all is well.

Which brings me to the point - g - What is the purpose of an adjustable
frog. Do you get a smoother cut with a smaller opening?

Just curious.

Vic
--
There are 10 kinds of people - those who understand binary and those who
don't

On 11/5/2009 10:50 AM Vic Baron spake thus:

I have to admit I'm one of those who has rarely used a hand plane. Every now
and then I'd grab one to smooth a spot etc.

Recently acquired a Stanley 7C jointer and after tuning and sharpening the
iron made a few passes over some oak. I know the iron was sharpened
correctly but I was getting the shavings jammed between the blade edge and
the front of the throat so that after one or two pushes, it wouldn't cut.

Ultimately determined that when I replaced the frog and tightened it down,
it moved back from the opening by a steenth. Reset it to line up with the
edge of the mouth and all is well.

Which brings me to the point - g - What is the purpose of an adjustable
frog. Do you get a smoother cut with a smaller opening?

Yes. I'm not even sure why, but the best smoothing planes had adjustable
openings so the opening could be closed as much as possible. I think it
has to do with breaking up the chip; maybe someone else here can explain
the exact mechanism at work here. I do know that my little block plane
with adjustable mouth gives the smoothest cut of all my planes.


--
Who needs a junta or a dictatorship when you have a Congress
blowing Wall Street, using the media as a condom?

- harvested from Usenet

David Nebenzahl wrote:
On 11/5/2009 10:50 AM Vic Baron spake thus:

I have to admit I'm one of those who has rarely used a hand plane.
Every now and then I'd grab one to smooth a spot etc.

Recently acquired a Stanley 7C jointer and after tuning and sharpening
the iron made a few passes over some oak. I know the iron was
sharpened correctly but I was getting the shavings jammed between the
blade edge and the front of the throat so that after one or two
pushes, it wouldn't cut.

Ultimately determined that when I replaced the frog and tightened it
down, it moved back from the opening by a steenth. Reset it to line up
with the edge of the mouth and all is well.

Which brings me to the point - g - What is the purpose of an
adjustable frog. Do you get a smoother cut with a smaller opening?

Yes. I'm not even sure why, but the best smoothing planes had adjustable
openings so the opening could be closed as much as possible. I think it
has to do with breaking up the chip; maybe someone else here can explain
the exact mechanism at work here. I do know that my little block plane
with adjustable mouth gives the smoothest cut of all my planes.


I'ts absolutely about breaking the chip. The blade digs up a chip and
the cap forces it up even further. If there is nothing on the top of
the chip for the cap to lever against, the chip may split farther into
the wood. Setting the frog, and thus the blade, as close as possible to
the front of the mouth forces as sharp a possible bending in the chip,
leading to breaking of the chip. There is a tradeoff, of course. If
the blade is set to cut a thick chip, but the mouth is set to pass a
thin chip, the chips can't pass through the mouth and jam.

"scritch" wrote in message
...
David Nebenzahl wrote:
On 11/5/2009 10:50 AM Vic Baron spake thus:

I have to admit I'm one of those who has rarely used a hand plane. Every
now and then I'd grab one to smooth a spot etc.

Recently acquired a Stanley 7C jointer and after tuning and sharpening
the iron made a few passes over some oak. I know the iron was sharpened
correctly but I was getting the shavings jammed between the blade edge
and the front of the throat so that after one or two pushes, it wouldn't
cut.

Ultimately determined that when I replaced the frog and tightened it
down, it moved back from the opening by a steenth. Reset it to line up
with the edge of the mouth and all is well.

Which brings me to the point - g - What is the purpose of an
adjustable frog. Do you get a smoother cut with a smaller opening?

Yes. I'm not even sure why, but the best smoothing planes had adjustable
openings so the opening could be closed as much as possible. I think it
has to do with breaking up the chip; maybe someone else here can explain
the exact mechanism at work here. I do know that my little block plane
with adjustable mouth gives the smoothest cut of all my planes.


I'ts absolutely about breaking the chip. The blade digs up a chip and the
cap forces it up even further. If there is nothing on the top of the chip
for the cap to lever against, the chip may split farther into the wood.
Setting the frog, and thus the blade, as close as possible to the front of
the mouth forces as sharp a possible bending in the chip, leading to
breaking of the chip. There is a tradeoff, of course. If the blade is
set to cut a thick chip, but the mouth is set to pass a thin chip, the
chips can't pass through the mouth and jam.


Which is what I assume happened to me originally.

Thanx!

David Nebenzahl writes:
On 11/5/2009 10:50 AM Vic Baron spake thus:

I have to admit I'm one of those who has rarely used a hand plane. Every now
and then I'd grab one to smooth a spot etc.

Recently acquired a Stanley 7C jointer and after tuning and sharpening the
iron made a few passes over some oak. I know the iron was sharpened
correctly but I was getting the shavings jammed between the blade edge and
the front of the throat so that after one or two pushes, it wouldn't cut.

Ultimately determined that when I replaced the frog and tightened it down,
it moved back from the opening by a steenth. Reset it to line up with the
edge of the mouth and all is well.

Which brings me to the point - g - What is the purpose of an adjustable
frog. Do you get a smoother cut with a smaller opening?

Yes. I'm not even sure why, but the best smoothing planes had adjustable
openings so the opening could be closed as much as possible. I think it
has to do with breaking up the chip; maybe someone else here can explain
the exact mechanism at work here. I do know that my little block plane
with adjustable mouth gives the smoothest cut of all my planes.

You want downward pressure on the material as close to to the cutting
edge as possible to avoid chipping out.

scott

On Thu, 5 Nov 2009 12:56:43 -0800, the infamous "Vic Baron"
scrawled the following:



"scritch" wrote in message
...
David Nebenzahl wrote:
On 11/5/2009 10:50 AM Vic Baron spake thus:

I have to admit I'm one of those who has rarely used a hand plane. Every
now and then I'd grab one to smooth a spot etc.

Recently acquired a Stanley 7C jointer and after tuning and sharpening
the iron made a few passes over some oak. I know the iron was sharpened
correctly but I was getting the shavings jammed between the blade edge
and the front of the throat so that after one or two pushes, it wouldn't
cut.

Ultimately determined that when I replaced the frog and tightened it
down, it moved back from the opening by a steenth. Reset it to line up
with the edge of the mouth and all is well.

Which brings me to the point - g - What is the purpose of an
adjustable frog. Do you get a smoother cut with a smaller opening?

Yes. I'm not even sure why, but the best smoothing planes had adjustable
openings so the opening could be closed as much as possible. I think it
has to do with breaking up the chip; maybe someone else here can explain
the exact mechanism at work here. I do know that my little block plane
with adjustable mouth gives the smoothest cut of all my planes.


I'ts absolutely about breaking the chip. The blade digs up a chip and the
cap forces it up even further. If there is nothing on the top of the chip
for the cap to lever against, the chip may split farther into the wood.
Setting the frog, and thus the blade, as close as possible to the front of
the mouth forces as sharp a possible bending in the chip, leading to
breaking of the chip. There is a tradeoff, of course. If the blade is
set to cut a thick chip, but the mouth is set to pass a thin chip, the
chips can't pass through the mouth and jam.


Which is what I assume happened to me originally.

Right, you either moved the frog and inadvertently closed the mouth,
or you had the blade set too deep so the shaving was too thick for the
small mouth. Adjust one or both until you get what feels like a happy
medium to you, Vic.

--
"To compel a man to subsidize with his taxes the propagation of
ideas which he disbelieves and abhors is sinful and tyrannical."
-- Thomas Jefferson

"Vic Baron" wrote in message
...
I have to admit I'm one of those who has rarely used a hand plane. Every
now and then I'd grab one to smooth a spot etc.

Recently acquired a Stanley 7C jointer and after tuning and sharpening the
iron made a few passes over some oak. I know the iron was sharpened
correctly but I was getting the shavings jammed between the blade edge and
the front of the throat so that after one or two pushes, it wouldn't cut.

Ultimately determined that when I replaced the frog and tightened it down,
it moved back from the opening by a steenth. Reset it to line up with the
edge of the mouth and all is well.

Which brings me to the point - g - What is the purpose of an adjustable
frog. Do you get a smoother cut with a smaller opening?


I am no expert either but it is my understanding that the smaller opening
prevents the wood from splitting deeper, you know how you get chip out on
some boards with wild grain when run through an electric planer?

"Larry Jaques" wrote in message
...
On Thu, 5 Nov 2009 12:56:43 -0800, the infamous "Vic Baron"
scrawled the following:



"scritch" wrote in message
...
David Nebenzahl wrote:
On 11/5/2009 10:50 AM Vic Baron spake thus:

I have to admit I'm one of those who has rarely used a hand plane.
Every
now and then I'd grab one to smooth a spot etc.

Recently acquired a Stanley 7C jointer and after tuning and sharpening
the iron made a few passes over some oak. I know the iron was
sharpened
correctly but I was getting the shavings jammed between the blade edge
and the front of the throat so that after one or two pushes, it
wouldn't
cut.

Ultimately determined that when I replaced the frog and tightened it
down, it moved back from the opening by a steenth. Reset it to line up
with the edge of the mouth and all is well.

Which brings me to the point - g - What is the purpose of an
adjustable frog. Do you get a smoother cut with a smaller opening?

Yes. I'm not even sure why, but the best smoothing planes had
adjustable
openings so the opening could be closed as much as possible. I think it
has to do with breaking up the chip; maybe someone else here can
explain
the exact mechanism at work here. I do know that my little block plane
with adjustable mouth gives the smoothest cut of all my planes.


I'ts absolutely about breaking the chip. The blade digs up a chip and
the
cap forces it up even further. If there is nothing on the top of the
chip
for the cap to lever against, the chip may split farther into the wood.
Setting the frog, and thus the blade, as close as possible to the front
of
the mouth forces as sharp a possible bending in the chip, leading to
breaking of the chip. There is a tradeoff, of course. If the blade is
set to cut a thick chip, but the mouth is set to pass a thin chip, the
chips can't pass through the mouth and jam.


Which is what I assume happened to me originally.

Right, you either moved the frog and inadvertently closed the mouth,
or you had the blade set too deep so the shaving was too thick for the
small mouth. Adjust one or both until you get what feels like a happy
medium to you, Vic.

--
"To compel a man to subsidize with his taxes the propagation of
ideas which he disbelieves and abhors is sinful and tyrannical."
-- Thomas Jefferson


Yes, when I tightened the frog , I inadvertently moved it back from the
opening and the result was that the blade went too deep and also changed the
angle. I realigned the frog and the blade and am getting smooth shavings
now.

I will say one thing though, that long 7C is a bear to push along after a
while!

V

On Thu, 05 Nov 2009 11:16:36 -0800, David Nebenzahl wrote:

Which brings me to the point - g - What is the purpose of an
adjustable frog. Do you get a smoother cut with a smaller opening?

Yes. I'm not even sure why, but the best smoothing planes had adjustable
openings so the opening could be closed as much as possible. I think it
has to do with breaking up the chip; maybe someone else here can explain
the exact mechanism at work here. I do know that my little block plane
with adjustable mouth gives the smoothest cut of all my planes.

I like an adjustable mouth much better than an adjustable frog. Anytime
the frog is not flush with the rear of the mouth, it is unsupported. No
such problem with an adjustable mouth.

And the new Stanley planes have an adjustable mouth on all models, not
just the block planes. I haven't used one of the new ones, but they sure
look a lot better than the regular Stanleys.

--
Intelligence is an experiment that failed - G. B. Shaw

On 11/6/2009 8:48 AM Vic Baron spake thus:

Yes, when I tightened the frog , I inadvertently moved it back from the
opening and the result was that the blade went too deep and also changed the
angle. I realigned the frog and the blade and am getting smooth shavings
now.

I will say one thing though, that long 7C is a bear to push along after a
while!

You are lubricating it by waxing the sole, aren't you?

All you need is a hunk of candle wax on your bench. Rub it on the bottom
periodically. Makes a *huge* difference.


--
Who needs a junta or a dictatorship when you have a Congress
blowing Wall Street, using the media as a condom?

- harvested from Usenet

On Fri, 6 Nov 2009 08:48:34 -0800, the infamous "Vic Baron"
scrawled the following:

Yes, when I tightened the frog , I inadvertently moved it back from the
opening and the result was that the blade went too deep and also changed the
angle. I realigned the frog and the blade and am getting smooth shavings
now.

Bueno.


I will say one thing though, that long 7C is a bear to push along after a
while!

It's picking it up and walking back to the start which kills you.

--
"To compel a man to subsidize with his taxes the propagation of
ideas which he disbelieves and abhors is sinful and tyrannical."
-- Thomas Jefferson

On Fri, 06 Nov 2009 13:29:32 -0800, the infamous David Nebenzahl
scrawled the following:

On 11/6/2009 8:48 AM Vic Baron spake thus:

Yes, when I tightened the frog , I inadvertently moved it back from the
opening and the result was that the blade went too deep and also changed the
angle. I realigned the frog and the blade and am getting smooth shavings
now.

I will say one thing though, that long 7C is a bear to push along after a
while!

You are lubricating it by waxing the sole, aren't you?

All you need is a hunk of candle wax on your bench. Rub it on the bottom
periodically. Makes a *huge* difference.

Camellia oil is the traditional lube.

--
"To compel a man to subsidize with his taxes the propagation of
ideas which he disbelieves and abhors is sinful and tyrannical."
-- Thomas Jefferson

On 11/7/2009 9:33 AM Larry Jaques spake thus:

On Fri, 06 Nov 2009 13:29:32 -0800, the infamous David Nebenzahl
scrawled the following:

On 11/6/2009 8:48 AM Vic Baron spake thus:

Yes, when I tightened the frog , I inadvertently moved it back from the
opening and the result was that the blade went too deep and also changed the
angle. I realigned the frog and the blade and am getting smooth shavings
now.

I will say one thing though, that long 7C is a bear to push along after a
while!

You are lubricating it by waxing the sole, aren't you?

All you need is a hunk of candle wax on your bench. Rub it on the
bottom periodically. Makes a *huge* difference.

Camellia oil is the traditional lube.

So do you think that would actually be *better* than candle wax?

Might smell better, I'll grant you that. More expen$ive, though.


--
Who needs a junta or a dictatorship when you have a Congress
blowing Wall Street, using the media as a condom?

- harvested from Usenet

On Sat, 07 Nov 2009 18:27:50 -0800, Larry Jaques
wrote:

Q: Have you ever tried to _finish_ a piece of wood which had candle
wax on it? I try to keep all adulterants out of the shop area.

So what would you consider suitable? I've just bought a new plane so
this would be pertinent to me. How about Lee Valley's Dricote
lubricant which I just happen to already have on hand?
http://www.leevalley.com/wood/page.a...=1,43415,43440

wrote:

So what would you consider suitable? I've just bought a new plane so
this would be pertinent to me.

Think of a hand plane as a potato peeler for wood.

Operates exactly the same way.

Lew

On Sat, 7 Nov 2009 19:12:29 -0800, "Lew Hodgett"
wrote:

Think of a hand plane as a potato peeler for wood.
Operates exactly the same way.

So you're telling me that if I don't lubricate a potato peeler, I
shouldn't worry about lubricating a hand plane?

I have yet to use the new low angle smooth plane because LV didn't
have any A2 blades in stock and are mailing me one. Guess I'll have to
use it first before I can compare its use to the old block plane I
have. Then I can make a practical decision on the difference.

wrote:
On Sat, 7 Nov 2009 19:12:29 -0800, "Lew Hodgett"
wrote:

Think of a hand plane as a potato peeler for wood.
Operates exactly the same way.

So you're telling me that if I don't lubricate a potato peeler, I
shouldn't worry about lubricating a hand plane?

I wasn't sure *what* he was telling you! :-) It did give me an odd
craving for potato chips though...

I use hand planes quite a bit, and I never bother lubing the soles. I
think it would probably make things a bit easier if I did, but I never
find myself taking the time to even think about. Keeping the soles
clean and polished is probably all that's really necessary, and I'm with
Larry on not wanting to take a chance on transferring any lubricants to
the wood.

--
See Nad. See Nad go. Go Nad!
To reply, eat the taco.
http://www.flickr.com/photos/bbqboyee/

On Sat, 07 Nov 2009 21:55:11 -0600, Steve Turner
wrote:

Larry on not wanting to take a chance on transferring any lubricants to
the wood.

Realistically, I can't see it being much difference than using Top
Cote or non silicone paste wax that everyone is always recommending
for a table saw. The only difference is that with one the wood is on
top and with the other it's on the bottom with the wood movement being
reversed.

wrote in message
...
On Sat, 7 Nov 2009 19:12:29 -0800, "Lew Hodgett"
wrote:

Think of a hand plane as a potato peeler for wood.
Operates exactly the same way.

So you're telling me that if I don't lubricate a potato peeler, I
shouldn't worry about lubricating a hand plane?

I have yet to use the new low angle smooth plane because LV didn't
have any A2 blades in stock and are mailing me one. Guess I'll have to
use it first before I can compare its use to the old block plane I
have. Then I can make a practical decision on the difference.


I've never seen the need to use any form of lubricant on my hand planes. I
occasionally (once or twice a year) polish the soles by hand with steel
wool. Works for me.

diggerop

wrote in message
...
On Sat, 07 Nov 2009 21:55:11 -0600, Steve Turner
wrote:

Larry on not wanting to take a chance on transferring any lubricants to
the wood.

Realistically, I can't see it being much difference than using Top
Cote or non silicone paste wax that everyone is always recommending
for a table saw. The only difference is that with one the wood is on
top and with the other it's on the bottom with the wood movement being
reversed.


It's a Neander thing. In which case use Camellia Oil!

wrote:

So you're telling me that if I don't lubricate a potato peeler, I
shouldn't worry about lubricating a hand plane?

Clean & sharp, along with thin cuts, gets the job done.

Lew

LDosser wrote:

wrote in message
...
On Sat, 07 Nov 2009 21:55:11 -0600, Steve Turner
wrote:

Larry on not wanting to take a chance on transferring any lubricants to
the wood.

Realistically, I can't see it being much difference than using Top
Cote or non silicone paste wax that everyone is always recommending
for a table saw. The only difference is that with one the wood is on
top and with the other it's on the bottom with the wood movement being
reversed.


It's a Neander thing. In which case use Camellia Oil!

I've been using Johnson paste wax for years. It has never affected the
finish. I've always used a plastic glove to apply it because I hate the
feeling one gets after handling a waxy rag. I may have to check out the
Camellia oil, a rag dampened with it may go on more quickly and with less
fuss. I'm assuming one must treat the oil-soaked rag as one would linseed
or tung oil soaked rags?

--

There is never a situation where having more rounds is a disadvantage

Rob Leatham

On Sat, 07 Nov 2009 23:21:23 -0700, Mark & Juanita
wrote:

I may have to check out the Camellia oil,

I'm wondering how if any it effects the application and retention of
finishing products.

"Mark & Juanita" wrote in message
...
LDosser wrote:

wrote in message
...
On Sat, 07 Nov 2009 21:55:11 -0600, Steve Turner
wrote:

Larry on not wanting to take a chance on transferring any lubricants to
the wood.

Realistically, I can't see it being much difference than using Top
Cote or non silicone paste wax that everyone is always recommending
for a table saw. The only difference is that with one the wood is on
top and with the other it's on the bottom with the wood movement being
reversed.


It's a Neander thing. In which case use Camellia Oil!

I've been using Johnson paste wax for years. It has never affected the
finish. I've always used a plastic glove to apply it because I hate the
feeling one gets after handling a waxy rag. I may have to check out the
Camellia oil, a rag dampened with it may go on more quickly and with less
fuss. I'm assuming one must treat the oil-soaked rag as one would linseed
or tung oil soaked rags?

Hadn't thought about it. I use the red stripe Johnson wax.

In article ,
says...


I will say one thing though, that long 7C is a bear to push along after a
while!

Which is why craftsmen need apprentices.

On Sat, 07 Nov 2009 22:03:31 -0500, wrote:

On Sat, 07 Nov 2009 18:27:50 -0800, Larry Jaques
wrote:

Q: Have you ever tried to _finish_ a piece of wood which had candle
wax on it? I try to keep all adulterants out of the shop area.

So what would you consider suitable? I've just bought a new plane so
this would be pertinent to me. How about Lee Valley's Dricote
lubricant which I just happen to already have on hand?
http://www.leevalley.com/wood/page.a...=1,43415,43440


I don't use any wax on tools. Hand planes may not ride smoothly if
the surface is not absolutely clean. For cleaning I use mineral
spirits. You could use acetone, but don't allow it to touch plastic
or handle finishes. For storing any length of time, I wipe all iron
parts with a rag very slightly dampened with kerosene (or WD40) to
prevent rust.

I do wax my tablesaw top (Johnson's Paste wax), but the surface is
thoroughly buffed out with a dry clean terry cloth.

On Sun, 08 Nov 2009 07:09:20 -0500, phorbin wrote:

In article ,
says...


I will say one thing though, that long 7C is a bear to push along after
a while!

Which is why craftsmen need apprentices.

Nope - #7 feels light, and underpowered, after using my #8 :-).

--
Intelligence is an experiment that failed - G. B. Shaw

Larry Jaques wrote:
A quick rinse would likely fail to get rid of a chunk of candle wax,
which is why I don't use candles.

The wife always seems to have candles going in the house with kind of exotic foo-foo stinky
or other. I try to tell her they're stealing my oxygen, but she doesn't listen. :-)

--
"Even if your wife is happy but you're unhappy, you're still happier
than you'd be if you were happy and your wife was unhappy." - Red Green
To reply, eat the taco.
http://www.flickr.com/photos/bbqboyee/

"Larry Jaques" wrote in message

I clean and Johnson Wax my planes at least once a year (when I
remember) for rust control, but that doesn't seem to transfer.

I clean and wax my Johnson every year too. On my table saw and tools
though, I've gotten better results with Boeshield.

On Sun, 8 Nov 2009 17:10:28 -0500, "Ed Pawlowski"
wrote:


"Larry Jaques" wrote in message

I clean and Johnson Wax my planes at least once a year (when I
remember) for rust control, but that doesn't seem to transfer.

I clean and wax my Johnson every year too. On my table saw and tools
though, I've gotten better results with Boeshield.

Is there a trick to applying Boeshield? Stock doesn't seem to slide
as freely on my saw with it. I use it, but am not entirely happy with
it.

Ed Pawlowski wrote:
"Larry Jaques" wrote in message
I clean and Johnson Wax my planes at least once a year (when I
remember) for rust control, but that doesn't seem to transfer.

I clean and wax my Johnson every year too.

Whether it needs it or not.

Thank you, Ed and I will be here all week.

--
Free bad advice available here.
To reply, eat the taco.
http://www.flickr.com/photos/bbqboyee/

krw wrote:
On Sun, 8 Nov 2009 17:10:28 -0500, "Ed Pawlowski"
wrote:

"Larry Jaques" wrote in message
I clean and Johnson Wax my planes at least once a year (when I
remember) for rust control, but that doesn't seem to transfer.
I clean and wax my Johnson every year too. On my table saw and tools
though, I've gotten better results with Boeshield.

Is there a trick to applying Boeshield? Stock doesn't seem to slide
as freely on my saw with it. I use it, but am not entirely happy with
it.

You have to buff it off, just like wax. After all, what you're really
doing when "waxing" a top, is filling all the micro-pores in the metal.

You want something really slick, try Super Lube Dri-Film. Someone in
here mentioned it a while back and I tried it. Spray and ignore, nothing
else to do.



--

-MIKE-

"Playing is not something I do at night, it's my function in life"
--Elvin Jones (1927-2004)
--
http://mikedrums.com

---remove "DOT" ^^^^ to reply

"Ed Pawlowski" wrote in message
news

"Larry Jaques" wrote in message

I clean and wax my Johnson every year too.

Hell Ed, theres coffee all over my screen and through my keyboard now ; )

diggerop

"krw" wrote in message

On my table saw and tools
though, I've gotten better results with Boeshield.

Is there a trick to applying Boeshield? Stock doesn't seem to slide
as freely on my saw with it. I use it, but am not entirely happy with
it.

I just spray it, le tit set a few minutes and wipe down with a paper towel.
Not as slippery as wax, but seems to last much longer.

On Sun, 08 Nov 2009 16:58:32 -0600, -MIKE-
wrote:

krw wrote:
On Sun, 8 Nov 2009 17:10:28 -0500, "Ed Pawlowski"
wrote:

"Larry Jaques" wrote in message
I clean and Johnson Wax my planes at least once a year (when I
remember) for rust control, but that doesn't seem to transfer.
I clean and wax my Johnson every year too. On my table saw and tools
though, I've gotten better results with Boeshield.

Is there a trick to applying Boeshield? Stock doesn't seem to slide
as freely on my saw with it. I use it, but am not entirely happy with
it.

You have to buff it off, just like wax. After all, what you're really
doing when "waxing" a top, is filling all the micro-pores in the metal.

I thought I did that. The first time I put it on evidently it went on
too thin because there was rust showing up on the top. The directions
said to leave it on longer before buffing down, for more protection.

You want something really slick, try Super Lube Dri-Film. Someone in
here mentioned it a while back and I tried it. Spray and ignore, nothing
else to do.

Does it protect the surface? My saw is in the garage, in Alabama. It
gets rather humid out there.

krw wrote:
You want something really slick, try Super Lube Dri-Film. Someone in
here mentioned it a while back and I tried it. Spray and ignore, nothing
else to do.

Does it protect the surface? My saw is in the garage, in Alabama. It
gets rather humid out there.

It's doesn't purport to, like Boesheild, but it seems to.

I'm in TN, and like you, the tools are in the garage.
When I first got the Dri-Film, I had just picked up an older 14" bandsaw
with cast iron table.
The table still had the goo they put on at the factory to keep in from
rusting during transport and storage. I used spirits to remove the goo
and when it all evaporated, I immediately sprayed on the Dri-Film.
That was several months ago and there's not a spec of rust on it.

In any case, it's worth the money to pick up a can.
It's by far the best "can't tell it's there" lubricant I've ever
used.... and I've tried dozens.


--

-MIKE-

"Playing is not something I do at night, it's my function in life"
--Elvin Jones (1927-2004)
--
http://mikedrums.com

---remove "DOT" ^^^^ to reply

On 11/8/2009 9:04 AM Larry Jaques spake thus:

On Sat, 07 Nov 2009 23:09:32 -0500, the infamous
scrawled the following:

On Sat, 07 Nov 2009 21:55:11 -0600, Steve Turner
wrote:

Larry on not wanting to take a chance on transferring any lubricants to
the wood.

Realistically, I can't see it being much difference than using Top
Cote or non silicone paste wax that everyone is always recommending
for a table saw. The only difference is that with one the wood is on
top and with the other it's on the bottom with the wood movement being
reversed.

Candle wax is a lot messier to put on. It cakes on up to 1/8" and then
crumbles off. Pieces go everywhere and you won't notice them until
the glue or finish starts to go on, and then it's too late.

Bull****. Just plain bull****.

I've been using candle wax to lubricate cutting tools (planes, saws, my
tablesaw table, etc.) for *years*.

No *way* is it ever going to cake up to 1/8". Not even 1/64".

When you swipe a piece of wax across the sole of a plane, you're
depositing a schmear of wax that's *maybe* 0.003-4" thick. Once you take
the first stroke across the workpiece, the wax is distributed across the
sole of the plane in a microscopic film.

*Most* (not all, but most) of the wax stays on the sole of the plane.
Whatever miniscule amount transfers to the wood is of no consequence to
later glue-up or finishing operations.

This is just so much ado about nothing.

I guess if you only buy $900 planes, then you ought to buy camellia oil
or whatever. Otherwise, use candle wax (or beeswax, or whatever else is
handy.)

One thing I would definitely *not* use is silicone, which can mess up
finishes badly (fisheye, etc.).


--
Who needs a junta or a dictatorship when you have a Congress
blowing Wall Street, using the media as a condom?

- harvested from Usenet

"David Nebenzahl" wrote

When you swipe a piece of wax across the sole of a plane, you're
depositing a schmear of wax that's *maybe* 0.003-4" thick. Once you take
the first stroke across the workpiece, the wax is distributed across the
sole of the plane in a microscopic film.

*Most* (not all, but most) of the wax stays on the sole of the plane.
Whatever miniscule amount transfers to the wood is of no consequence to
later glue-up or finishing operations.

Sometimes I've seen a fringe of wax on the leading edge of the workpiece,
indicating that much of the surplus was has been sraped away.

The lubrication is still effective all the same.

Jeff

--
Jeff Gorman, West Yorkshire, UK
email : Username is amgron
ISP is clara.co.uk
www.amgron.clara.net

On Sun, 08 Nov 2009 11:49:50 -0600, Steve Turner
wrote:

The wife always seems to have candles going in the house with kind of exotic foo-foo stinky
or other. I try to tell her they're stealing my oxygen, but she doesn't listen. :-)

Guess you're going to have to come into the house some time, gasp for
air and then fall motionless to the floor.

After you've been laying there for two hours, you're free to get up
and be satisfied that your point was properly demonstrated.