New Stanley #7 Jointer Plane Review

WmZiggy · Post by **WmZiggy** » Sun Oct 19, 2014 12:47 pm

The first weekend of this month (October) I was in Rockford, Illinois for the Fall meeting of the Mid-West Tool Collectors (http://www.mwtca.org/) - a group that I recommend to all woodworkers who use this forum. Among the tools available for trade or sell, I found a new and unused Stanley #7 Jointer plane, it's new number being G12-007. I am told the 'G' means it was made after 1983. The Stanley #7 plane was offered from 1869 to 1984. Then there was a period of unavailability until several years ago. I think it's rebirth was prompted by Lie-Nielson's success and others on the high end market.

[ATTACH]26529[/ATTACH]

Now I usually try to purchase pre-WWII vintage planes. I have a 1900 vintage Stanley #8 that works beautifully, so I didn't REALLY need another jointer, but that is part of the disease of collecting planes and a topic for another thread. Also, the price for this baby was $70 (retail is roughly $200) and I couldn't pass it up, especailly since it was unused. I have a number of Lie-Nielson planes and wanted to see how Stanley's craftsmenship compared.

First thing you notice are the cast ribs designed to stiffen the plane bottom, as well as it's cast model numbers and that it's made in England. Stanley shifted it plane making division to England in 1937, some 80 years after they were established in New Britain Conn USA. They acquired the firm of J.A. Chapman in Sheffield and I think they've now moved out of Sheffield to a newer plant.

I found that the plane bottom was flat and the sides were 90 degrees to the bottom, an important feature if you shoot boards with the plane on it's side. The grey casting was nicely executed as was the japanning. The adjustment knob is brass and frog adjustable to open and close the throat. Since my plane had never been used the blade only needed to be honed which I did on diamond plates. The blade was ground to 40 degree angle, which is what you want. The chip breaker was properly ground so there were no gaps between the blade and the cap edge. All good.

My only complaint is the handles are composite, not real wood. Lie-Nielson uses apple wood, a plus in my opinion. I will look for a set of hardwood handles and replace these. Lie-Nielson also uses a thicker blade and patterns his frog mounting system after Stanley's Bed Rock, a very firm design.

So how did this Stanley test out. It took a paper thin shaving off the edge of a two foot, 3/4" red oak board without a moments hesitation, rolling it up nicely as it curled out of the mouth. I will grab this plane when I need to joint an edge quickly and don't have my SS jointer ready go.

At $70 a steal. At $200 it is still great buy when compared to a Lie-Nielson #7 which lists for $425. This is a good working tool and thought I would offer a review as several threads of recent have questioned whether these English made Stanley planes are any good. Well, in the case of this #7 it is a good user, well made for the price.

beeg · Post by **beeg** » Sun Oct 19, 2014 1:11 pm

Thanks for the review. I've kinda LOST confidence in Stanley lately.

WmZiggy · Post by **WmZiggy** » Mon Oct 20, 2014 9:01 am

beeg wrote:Thanks for the review. I've kinda LOST confidence in Stanley lately.

Stanley has been in business now for 165 years. Nothing to sneeze at when most companies only last a generation or two. In other words, they are survivors in a tool and hardware manufacturing business that has to change and market, market, market. They have always made questionable - or as another person has expressed it - "gutter tools". Take for example their #193 series of fiber board planes, or the Handyman series. Crap! Likewise their planes made of aluminum, the miracle metal of the 30's. They leave black marks on wood and woodworkers dropped them like hot potatoes (which makes them valuable to collectors since not many were made. I watched a #45A auctioned off in Rockford and it brought $1200, and it was a low bidding auction!)

As with SS, Stanley has produced great, good, and crap. I can't think of a SS example off the top of my head,

but I am sure someone here can name a few items in the crap category.

dusty · Post by **dusty** » Mon Oct 20, 2014 9:47 am

WmZiggy wrote:Stanley has been in business now for 165 years. Nothing to sneeze at when most companies only last a generation or two. In other words, they are survivors in a tool and hardware manufacturing business that has to change and market, market, market. They have always made questionable - or as another person has expressed it - "gutter tools". Take for example their #193 series of fiber board planes, or the Handyman series. Crap! Likewise their planes made of aluminum, the miracle metal of the 30's. They leave black marks on wood and woodworkers dropped them like hot potatoes (which makes them valuable to collectors since not many were made. I watched a #45A auctioned off in Rockford and it brought $1200, and it was a low bidding auction!)

As with SS, Stanley has produced great, good, and crap. I can't think of a SS example off the top of my head, but I am sure someone here can name a few items in the crap category.

Shopsmith, Inc has marketed some "crap" but I don't believe they have produced any.

In this type discussion I attempt to separate out the Magna/Yuba products that carry a Shopsmith logo from those that were manufactured by Shopsmith.

JPG · Post by **JPG** » Mon Oct 20, 2014 10:55 am

dusty wrote:Shopsmith, Inc has marketed some "crap" but I don't believe they have produced any.

In this type discussion I attempt to separate out the Magna/Yuba products that carry a Shopsmith logo from those that were manufactured by Shopsmith.

So which of the separated entities have produced the crap?

dusty · Post by **dusty** » Mon Oct 20, 2014 11:01 am

JPG wrote:So which of the separated entities have produced the crap?

Crap is in the eyes of the beholder. If you have purchased crap - you don't need to be told. If you believe you have not purchased crap - telling you would probably not change your mind.

I have purchased crap!

JPG · Post by **JPG** » Mon Oct 20, 2014 11:24 am

dusty wrote:Crap is in the eyes of the beholder. If you have purchased crap - you don't need to be told. If you believe you have not purchased crap - telling you would probably not change your mind.

I have purchased crap!

So have I, but not from the earlier 'group'.

Now there have been some things 'close'.

WmZiggy · Post by **WmZiggy** » Tue Oct 21, 2014 9:23 am

dusty wrote:Crap is in the eyes of the beholder. If you have purchased crap - you don't need to be told. If you believe you have not purchased crap - telling you would probably not change your mind.

I have purchased crap!

You and JPG have me laughing till tears came. Shades of Supreme Court and pornography coupled with "Who's on First". Maybe "crap" was a poor choice of four letter words. Let's go with "junk". Oh I forgot, you can't use that anymore as it is now all over television shows for the male sexual organ. Maybe "gutter tool" wasn't so bad, although "tool" has connotations too! I got it - "poorly designed". Remember, the Titanic was designed by engineers. It happens. Now if I added an 'sh' to that we'd all have the picture.