Stanley No 60-1/2 block plane

As I mentioned previously, most of Stanley regular Block Planes are derived from two models:
The No 9-1/2 in the regular 20 degrees bed and the No 60-1/2 in the Low Angle, 12 degrees bed.

Lets have a look at the No 60-1/2, which was introduced in 1902.  Made 1902-1982
I happened to have three (3) on hands.
An original Stanley No 60-1/2, late Type, made in England
a Lie-Nielsen No 60-1/2.  Made in good old Maine USA, and
a Record Marples No 060-1/2.  Made in England.

Incidentally they were acquired in reverse order.  The Record Marples was an early purchase at Lee Valley in Ottawa in the early 90s.  My very first real hand tool purchase :-)

So being all essentially a copy of the original Stanley model, they are all alike?
NO in features, NO in design and material.  Between these 3 samples they span perhaps 50 years.
The LN is a 2005 model, the Record Marples 1994 and the Stanley late 1950-60s at the earliest

From L-R

Stanley, Lie-Nielsen, Record Marples.

Yes the Record is wider.

The LN use a different lever cap design, made of brass not cast iron.

Notice that none has a lateral lever.  More on that later.

All sport an adjustable mouth aperture. Only the Record still has the original eccentric lever design, down turn at the end.  Both the LN and Stanley have the later up turn design.

Which one works better?  Strictly a matter of preferences IMHO

Same cutter adjuster mechanism (Traut patent), slightly different.

All have slop on the main shaft, Record is worse, LN best.

All have issues with rubbing on blade or hood cap, bed etc when adjusting blade.

The big knob on the Stanley is the easiest to adjust and has less issues with rubbing.

But it is also the easiest to knock off its setting accidentally with your hands, and also easier to bend the shaft :-(.

So yes, the design has some issues but nothing too serious.  It is a solid performer.
The No 60-1/2 was a prolific seller and they are a plenty out there.
On any given day, the one you will see on my bench the most are:  The LN, the Record Marples or the Sargent 5302 (20 degrees).  Depending on blade conditions :-)  That Stanley model shown is a new acquisition, has not been inducted into my regime yet.  You see it as found.

The original of this series is the No 60 introduced in 1898 and made until 1950.
The No 60-1/2 came later in 1902.  The difference? No 60 has nickel plated trim while the No 60-1/2 is japanned.  Other than that, same.
No 60 never had a lateral lever since the lower bed angle did not provided enough space to accommodate the mechanism.  The 60-1/2, probably because of its longer run, had one in its later modern incarnation.  It used a very different lever mechanism and thus fit in the space.

The Record 09-1/2 has the lateral lever and so does both the Stanley 9-1/2 and 60-1/2

but not the Record 060-1/2

LV catalog 1996-97

From Top to Bottom

Stanley No 9-1/4, Stanley No 60-1/2, Sargent No 5302, Stanley No 19.

In this line up only the No 60-1/2 is a LA (12).

You can see why it required a different blade adjuster mechanism.

And BTW, the vertical post patented by Leonard Bailey 1867, the horizontal slider, patented by Justin Traut 1897-1900, who also patented the throat lever adjust 1894 and the lever cap in 1897.  Not much Bailey DNAs and royalties left over from his No 9 block plane....  Even the side's figure changed from the Excelsior shape to the centered hump we know today. 

Record Marples never saw a use for the lateral lever (You guessed it Traut's patent 1888) in its models, neither did LN and others would be copy cat.

There was also a Model No 61 which is essentially a No 60 but without the adjustable throat feature.
It also always had a Rosewood front knob, never a metal one. The No 60 debuted with a Rosewood knob, but quickly switched to a metal one.  Ironically having a  shorter production run 1914-1935, albeit less ideal than the No 60-1/2, the No 61 command more $$$ because of its scarcity.

Yes, there is a No 62 (not related it is a bevel up 14 in jack) and the No 63 which is like a No 61 but in a 7 inch long version.  Why?? Why not!

Then of course we have the 7 inch body versions:
No 65 like a No 61 but 7 in, and
No 65-1/2 like a No 60-1/2 but 7 inch

What we have in essence is
No 9-1/2 (20) = No 60-1/2 (12) adjustable mouth
No 9-1/4 (20) = No 61 (12) fixed mouth

Stanley No 60-1/2 

The No 60-1/2 was made from 1902-1982
Body is 6 in long, 1-3/4  wide with a 1-1/2 in wide cutter
Became 1-3/8 in wide cutter starting in 1914 (1913 for No 60, was always 1-3/8 for No 61)
and cutter was 1-5/8 in wide for the 7 in model (No 63)
Weight  1-1/4 pound (the lightest of these 3)

I gave the body a quick scrub with WD 40.  Japanning is in good shape

Cutter stamped Made in England 

Cutter is 1-3/8 in wide, after 1914

Two steps shaft threads. 

Yes there is a bend in it

Another clue to its origin.

After 1926

The only damages to the bed casting.

Still slides in/out smooth

Now lets have a look at this Record Marples version of the same plane No 060-1/2 

It was produced 1982 to 2004
Body is 6-1/4 long, 2 in wide
cutter solid Tungsten steel is 1-5/8 in wide
Weight 1-1/2 pounds

Same number of pieces, but the adjuster mechanism is slightly different 

Blade is 1-5/8 in wide and will not fit the Stanley's 60-1/2

On the Left Stanley, on the Right Record-Marples

The machining of the slots in the back is the same

But like I said the mechanism is different and introduces more slop than the two other (Stanley and LN)

It is made of a turned and threaded steel shaft screwed in a brass knurled knob.

The slider is retained loosely on the shaft by a smaller dia. portion were the shaft meet the knob

There is only one raised nibs (two on the original Stanley)

but they cleaned up the raised nib by a small machining steps for surer engagement.

The two nibs on the Stanley are left as is 

That slop between the brass knob and the steel shaft is causing quite a noticeable slop.

Seen pushed back.

Seen pushed in forward.

Look at the letter N in England.

Pulled back.

You can see the bottom of the frog showing.

And pushed forward.

The blade is even or sticking out slightly. 

The slop in question is very noticeable view from the adjuster side.

Pulled out.

Pushed in.

So what does it means during operation?  Well if you don't account  for that and always adjusted the blade in,  never outward you are asking for problems.  When you have to back up the cutter always finish by tightening the screw knob back in to take up the slack.  If not the blade will pushed in when it encountered resistance.  And if you attempt to fix that by going Cro-Magnon on the cap lever tightening mechanism all you are going to do is create stress cracks eventually and in some design the cutter edge will slightly flex up at the mouth.  Neither scenario is good.

Look closely at your plane and learn to live with its idiosyncrasies, no big deal and it will be less frustrating :-)

The Cadillac version, Lie-Nielsen No 60-1/2

Truly a premium plane, you are paying for machining and lots of brass.

Body is cast in ductile iron (not breakable like grey cast iron) 6-1/4 long, 1-3/4 in wide
Cutter is 1-3/8 wide by 1/8 thick and come really flat.
Weight 1-1/2 pound
The lever cap used a different mechanism but made of cast brass instead of cast iron, it should not develop stress cracks like cast iron often does (Damn Cro-Magnons...)

It is my all around go to block planes... until it need sharpening :-)

Same number of pieces, except that the cutter adjuster shaft is screwed in tight.

Notice the large landing area for sitting the blade in (frog). 

Machining is up to par on everything.

Notice the single groove milled near the top of blade back.

Look at the size of the eccentric adjuster.  Thick piece of brass with a steel pin.

Should be bomb proof.

And the cutter adjustment mechanism?

The threaded shaft is fixed in the bed casting.

The threaded nut screw in and out on the fixed shaft.

The front of the screw nut has a raised portion which engage in the single slot 

cut into the top of the cutter. 

The only slop in this mechanism is caused by the slightly wider slot than the screw nut ridge.
It it were a tight fit, you could not adjust the screw nut.  The backlash from the threads is minimal, but as always, finish the adjustments going in (blade out).

Mouth close up nicely.

Yes, I'm overdue to show it some love :-)

All three planes had their mouths closing nicely on the blade. Indicating they have the correct eccentric lever. The ones for the 9-1/2 are slightly bigger and wont have the same range if you swapped them. 

All together now...

Top to Bottom

Best Lie-Nielsen

Better Record Marples

Good Stanley

Here is why.

Take a look at the landing area for the blade...

With the reduced amount of machining thru the years, the Stanley (and most copies) do not have a much wide landing area.  When you over torque the lever cap, the pressure felt at the tip of the lever cap is pushing down in an unsupported area, lifting the blade edge slightly.

Even with the quirk of the adjuster mechanism on the Record Marples, I give it the edge, slightly over the Stanley.   Now if you were to compare with an older Stanley No 60-1/2 before they reduced the machined surface area, the Stanley would won hands down.

Looking at an early No 60.

See the larger machined area?

How do you tell the No 60 from the No 60-1/2?

  The lever cap is plated, making it a No 60.

Pic from Patrick Blood and Gore

Bob, with a seemingly growing pile instead of going smaller...hummm.

Jean is away, hence my messy piles :-)

It's just Rudy and I roughing it tonite.

A tale of Block planes

It has been a while I had some time to devote to some, somewhat, recent acquisitions.
Part of my routine is to identify what exactly I got myself into this time around :-)

Part of that, was an early Excelsior block plane.  I am well aware of the various block planes Type studies (Sellens, Bob Kaune and etc) but I recently came across this table at Timetestedtools which purport to quickly narrow down a "Type" or approx vintage.
And that is how I went down that rabbit hole quickly...  Such a slippery slope they say... :-)

The one topmost is the Excelsior body, the others came out as references.

In the end I ended up with 3 Low Angle (12 degrees) Block planes: 3 variations of the Model 60-1/2

and 3 Regular angle (20 degrees) Block planes: 9-1/4, 5306, 19

What's in a name, Excelsior??

In Stanley block planes parlance we are referring to the side look of the wings.  Your everyday block plane, have the side wings, hump, roughly centered on the sides.
The earliest Stanley, so called Excelsior's, have the hump clearly off centered toward the back.
Roughly from 1888-1898.

Excelsior, off centered side hump.

They did not stamped the model number on this side back then.

Which one is it??

That peculiar look came from Leonard Bailey line of plane's and other tools that he sold the patents to Stanley Rule & Level Co. in 1869.  Leonard came with the package deal to Stanley and was working for them in the plane department.  Any and all tool of Bailey's patent(s) made by Stanley, paid a royalty to Leonard.  If you look at the royalties paid by Stanley to Bailey, it would appear to be a very lucrative deal for Leonard.  Stanley lost no time trying to bring those numbers down.  One way was to introduced new models of their own "design" to compete in sales with the Bailey's original.
That was essentially the basis of the "falling out" between Stanley and Leonard, the amount of royalties.

And thus ensues a variety of seemingly similar block planes from Stanley.  But thank fully they can all be boiled down to two basic type and models; The Low Angle (12 degrees) represented by the Model No 60-1/2   and the regular angle (20 degrees) represented by the model no 9-1/2.
And guess what?  That is essentially which models are shown in that table, so printed and off I go...

What model do I have?

The earliest Stanley's never had their model number stamped on the side.  They were differentiated by the trim and features.  The No 9-1/2 and 60-1/2 represent the fully kitted, adjustable block planes in both 20 and 12 degrees.  Most others are derived from them, some by the material finish (plated), some by omitting some features (throat adj., Lateral adj.) and various Lever cap design.  Other than that? Same, same, down to the casting of bed, with or without the extra machining steps for some adj. mechanism.  Oh, and they came in 6 or 7 inches long beds.

The lever cap is of the earliest knuckle cap, having the patent No on it of Dec 28 1886. Patent would expire in 1903 (17 years patent)

The cup being made of cast iron, often break at the two lugs.  It is also said to be capable to induce stress cracks at the mouth of the plane.  For these reasons, the cap was redesigned in 1913.  It went from two pieces to a complex 4 parts linkage and material changes. The casting was also reinforced near the mouth, used to be thinner.

If you look at the thickness of the lugs which are pulling against the bed screw, you can guess that it would require a longer screw than normally used with the other styles of cap.

On top screw from No 9-1/4 and bottom No 19 as used with knuckle cap.

Notice also the length of the unthreaded shank.

The bed casting being the same as No 9-1/2 and No 18 (6 in beds), some would attempt to swap a cap to make a common No 9-1/2 into a more valuable No 18.  If the screw is not engaging much, it's the shorter ones with a knuckle cap (wrong)

That knuckle cap would make it either a No 18 or 19.
The difference?  No 18 is 6 in long, No 19 is 7 in long.  Mine measured 7 inches, making it a No 19 (1888-1949)

The side wings do not have the Hand-y feature milled.  Pat in 1897 introduced in 1900s

Both the bed casting and the throat plate have the "S" marking. (1880-1900)

The bed has some damages, but nothing to hurt its performance.

The iron seems proper, according to its markings.

It has the throat adjuster but no lateral adjuster (?).  Supposed to have one.
Being a loose piece it is M.I.A. :-(

The nut for the depth adjuster is RH threads (before 1898)

Top plane is No 19 RH threads, bottom is 9-1/4 LH threads.

Stanley switched threads directions around 1898

This type of cutter adjuster was patented by Leonard Bailey in 1867

Throat adjuster patent Feb 20 1894

John Walter book

Antique and Collectible Stanley Tools

Being introduced in 1894, I would had expected this cam lever to be showing the patent date.

Does not appear to have any markings...or does it?

Lateral adjuster patent 1884, 1888 (disk)

Which one of the two styles of lateral lever would it had?
The first one with the curved lip or the later one with the disk?

John Walter book

Antique and Collectible Stanley Tools

The introduction of the rotating disk at the end of the lateral lever, necessitated a bigger cut out in the web between the screw and the blade advance mechanism casting.  Was 3/16 of an inch now 3/8 in.
I was not quite sure what that meant, so I gathered a 3/16 and 3/8 drill bit stock.  It became quite obvious...

The 3/8 bit fit nicely, therefore we have the disk type of lateral adjuster.

There are only two styles of lateral lever but they were various patents dates combination on them.
- First one LL1 1888 had 3 patent dates: Pat Feb. 8, 76. Pat Oct. 21, 84 and Pat Jan. 17, 88 and STANLEY stamped on the bent down part of the lever end.
- Next one with the disk LL2 1890-1894 had 4 patent dates at first: Pat. 2-8-76, 10-21-84, 1-17-88 and 7-24-88, STANLEY stamped as before.
- Next change LL3 1898 now marked Pat, 10-21-84, 1-17-88, 7-24-88, 8-3-97 and STANLEY as before.
 - Next change LL4 1901-1904 Only three patents dates; Pat. 1-17-88, 7-24-88, 8-3-97 and STANLEY as before
- Next change LL5 1908-09.  One date remaining Pat. 8-3-97 and STANLEY  as before
- Next change LL6 1910-19 All patent dates eliminated.  STANLEY eliminated in later versions

Everything seems to point to around the turn of the 20th century.  Late 1890s to early 1900s
What does our previous table came up with?
- Excelsior body 1888-98
- Hand-y grip after 1898
- Casting marks S 1889-1902
- Lateral lever  Guessing LL3 with 4 patent dates 1898-1901
- Eccentric throat lever 1894 patent date is from 1894-1907
- Lever cap knuckle joint with pat date 1886,  1888-1904

I would then date this tool from 1894 to 1898.  Would had been nice to have original lateral lever to pin point it.

The only sticky point remaining is the eccentric lever with no markings.  Could there be some remnants of some markings??

I got this inexpensive USB microscope for about $20.  Well worth the price. It does capture snap shots or video.  Let's see what we can unearth with it.

Looking at the blade logo with it.  The logo was stamped

Part of RULE

Part of LEVEL Co

Now that we know how stamping looks like, let see that lever again.

Hard to see but I think I make up a 0 ?

As in Feb 20 94

The lever is plated and flaking heavily obscuring much.  Ill look at it again after its bath in Evaporust.

Since we had the microscope out, lets take a look at the blade edge.
It shows signs of recent sharpening.

The top part is pitting on the blade surface, lower shinier part is the bevel

Edge has some damages but is in pretty good shape

Would be curious to look at it later after its Evaporust bath.

All in all, even with the missing lateral lever, not a bad find.  Especially considering I found it at a yard sale table for $5 :-)  Should make a fine user.

Bob, with a growing pile that need to be put away...