Saturday, November 24, 2007

Veritas Small Plow Plane - an opinion

Forgive me the long, long delay on this one, folks. T'was not laziness, honest. The blog doesn't really lend itself to such long-winded stuff, so it has a page all to itself here. At the least I hope the pics will prove useful for the would-be long-distance purchaser - from observation thus far I'm fairly sure my opinion is very personal and all alone in the world. ;-)


  1. Very interesting review, Alf. The three points you make (no where to rest your finger; fixed fence rods which limit capacity - particularly with wooden face fitted; and square edges to the blades which can, therefore, bind) are all issues which caused me concern. I'm sure less experienced users won't pick up on the blade issue and won't realise the cause of the binding.

    However, as you say, beautifully made and finished and some very nice features.

    Let's hope it's a test bed for a combination or multi plane.


    Paul Chapman

  2. I think it is possible that properly relieved cutters would have gone a long way to making the actual ploughing similar to your vintage boat anchors. Less binding, better ploughing rhythm. I think that the binding/lifting/lack of rhythm would create uncertainty.

    Of course, I ain't got one so have no real idea if that would be my general feeling. Still, I'll end up with one. If needed, a modification to the irons and/or the tote don't bother me. The cutter relief makes a difference in the pushing as well as the drag back.. As for the fence rods--depending on the size, a bit of drill rod can cure that.

    Thanks for the review, Alf. If it wasn't for incurable plough sickness, it *might* have encouraged me to pause before buying [g].

    Take care, Mike

  3. Alf,

    Another thorough, tactile, and objective review. Thank you, they're rare.

    My thought was exactly like Mike's--that perhaps relieved cutters would have allowed things to 'flow'.

    Wiley....who just picked up a 1860-90 era W. Marples & Sons plough off the evil bay. Needing cutters.

  4. Thanks, gents; for the record I did try an old cutter in the LV and while it did confirm me in my opinion that the cutters were causing some problems, the difference wasn't enough to reconcile me entirely. I wish it had, 'cos my default state of being is to like all ploughs and combis and it bothers me that I don't!

  5. Alf,

    Thanks for the review. I'd been patiently waiting for it before I decided to make a purchase. I guess I'll pass on the LV Plow for now. I had a horrible experience with an ECE plow that I purchased brand new. It had some of the same issues you pointed out with the LV. The fence was kind of strange and the cutters were not tapered, so it was hard to control and tore out the groove unless you really tensed up as you say. I sold the ECE on Ebay and finally found a nice old Mattheison Wooden Plow which works beautifully. The irons are tapered in both length and width, and it's operation is a smooth as silk. Plus the wood plane makes a most satisfying sound as each shaving perfectly curls out the side of the plane. Modern metal plows tend to choke up.

    Thanks again for such an honest and thorough review.

    Preston in TN, USA

  6. Nice review Alf. Glad to see you come out of retirement.

    The lack of relief on the edges of the blades seems like a bit of an oversight on the part of Lee Valley.

    I was tempted to buy one of these planes, but I keep telling myself that it can't really do anything my Record 043 can't already do (except perhaps for the wider blades). So far so good.

    Ian S.

  7. Alf,
    What matters to me is your honesty, and your clear determination to treat the plane and it's designers fairly. Right on! You did! And for one, this shallow pocketed reader is grateful.
    So thanks, many, many thanks!


Owing to vast quantities of spam this blog is getting, I'm afraid only registered users can post. All comments are moderated before publication, so there may be some delay. My apologies.