I believe that professionals and experienced woodworkers can achieve very good results using a scraper and/or hand plane. But for the the novice wood worker, sanding will give the most consistent results that you will not be ashamed of.
You can absolutely set a plane to have no tear out. The video put out recently by Marc on the Wood Whisperer channel is a similar test all on curly walnut. The handplane clearly outperforms the other two. I use my No. 4 in curly red oak and curly maple all the time without problem. Just got to have it set up well.
Exactly. If you were getting tearout, wouldn't you at least try turning the board 180°? 😆 Maybe skew the plane 20° or 30°? Tried taking finer shavings? Sharpened the blade? You know, all the normal handplane stuff? It's not like this was some exotic, highly figured wood.
@ David, I don't want to sound rude, but you are wrong. You can set a plane to have no tearout. It will take very fine shavings, but that is the same as any other tool used to prep wood for finish (sandpaper, scrapers, files, etc.) I know there are times where it can be argued that a plane will be less apt for a given situation, but let's not unjustly represent what it can and cannot do.
Obviously I don't need to mention the plane should have been set/ tuned better. I just thought it was funny using a lie Nielsen and the guy couldn't get a clean cut lol.
36 thousand people have watched this and I wonder how many now think that you can't get finish-ready results from planing?! Popular Woodworking - you really should have Dave redo this test with a properly tuned plane.
I love the channel and what you do but you may want to check your plane. I hand plane quarter-sawn Oak all the time and when it setup correctly there is no tear out. As much as I love the channel and magazine this was not a video that I would endorse.
I very much enjoy your videos but I don't think the tests were completely fair. First, all the boards should have had the same grain patterns. Second, was the prep on sanding 80-120-180- etc. grits? Thirdly, scraping or planing produces excellent results with properly sharpened tools. Card scrapers do a fabulous job with alternating grains. You might consider doing this test over again.
The planing result was invalid due to poor setup and plane use. This video really should be removed, as it is only providing misinformation to new woodworkers who might not understand the reason for the invalid conclusion.
The card scraper is really good for smoothing varnishes. You can get a really shiny and smooth result by using a card scraper. After each layer has cured, you use the scraper. All hollows are filled with varnish. After 6-8 layers, you will get a silken smooth surface. When you apply the last layer, it will be totally blank. Epifanes Clear Varnish is really good for this approach. It beats sanding varnish by miles.
It appears as if your intention was to convince people to not use handplanes, since you didn't try to minimize the amount of tearout that you were getting. Granted, it's likely that some scraping or sanding would still be necessary, but that's no excuse for the way that you presented your "findings."
I'm calling slight shenanigans on this test. When i saw the board that you were going to use the plane on, even through the camera, I could tell it wasn't going to take stain well because of the changing grain direction which neither of the two other boards had. A more definitive test would be to use the same board 3 times. Even that can be fraught with difficulty. I do think this test was performed in good faith, and its likely the results would be similar even starting from like material, so don't take this criticism too harshly. It wasn't meant to be harsh. You have to admit though, the grain on the planed board was all over the place.
Interesting tho I'd hardly call hitting it with the orbital "sanding", I typically go from dimensioned timber to P100, P220, P320, P400, P800 and a 000 synthetic pad before using oil....comes up like glass with amazing grain depth (especially on New Zealand native timbers)
This is a bogus test, in my opinion. It seemed like you dismissed planing simply because you didn't know how to sharpen, setup, and/or use the planer properly.
Good test, poorly executed. Sharpen the blade and set up the plane correctly. Try again and make another video. I like your series and find them useful but you shouldn’t share videos where you teach or give advice to the people while being unsure of what you’re doing. Or even worse - by being confident but ignorant. I hope it was an honest mistake. Also it was a good tip to use card scraper or sandpaper on wild grain wood, but this was quarter sawn oak. Cheers 🍻 (and sharpen up).
Try again please, this time with no tear-out on the planed board. But the real lesson learned here is that sanded/abraded surfaces block some stain from entering the pores of the wood.
Also, this test is fine on flat wood. What about a profiled skirt? I used 000 steel wool only on machine profiled Mahogany skirting board (though it took some elbow grease) and it left a stunning finish when oiled. Plenty of options, depends on what you want and the nature of the material. I also don't think you demonstrated any tricks at all.
This "test" didn't tell me anything other than if you don't know to leave the hand plane on the shelf for this wood then this must have been the first time you've stained figured wood. What a waste of bandwidth.
This video doesn't actually make any comparison for the planed board. The board was planed incorrectly and had obscene tear out! This may be a case where you choose not to plane the wood because it is difficult to plane. Bottom line it's crazy that this video released with with a blanket statement of "since I was unable to hand plane this board well you should not hand plane a board before finishing."
Let me add my voice to the sad fact that this demonstration experiment shows that you do not know how to set up, sharpen, and/or use hand tools. I apologize for my bluntness, but hey.
If you plane you need to burnish. Actually need to burnish all of these before finish. And also if you plane badly then what is the point. Wow first BAD wood working video in a while haha.
I could plane that board and you could see reflections in it before adding a drop of finish, and I'm not kidding. I bought my first plane about a year ago (it's 100 years old) so there really is no excuse for that much tear out (on one of the best planes money can buy).
I believe that professionals and experienced woodworkers can achieve very good results using a scraper and/or hand plane. But for the the novice wood worker, sanding will give the most consistent results that you will not be ashamed of.
You can absolutely set a plane to have no tear out. The video put out recently by Marc on the Wood Whisperer channel is a similar test all on curly walnut. The handplane clearly outperforms the other two. I use my No. 4 in curly red oak and curly maple all the time without problem. Just got to have it set up well.
Exactly. If you were getting tearout, wouldn't you at least try turning the board 180°? 😆 Maybe skew the plane 20° or 30°? Tried taking finer shavings? Sharpened the blade? You know, all the normal handplane stuff? It's not like this was some exotic, highly figured wood.
@ David, I don't want to sound rude, but you are wrong. You can set a plane to have no tearout. It will take very fine shavings, but that is the same as any other tool used to prep wood for finish (sandpaper, scrapers, files, etc.) I know there are times where it can be argued that a plane will be less apt for a given situation, but let's not unjustly represent what it can and cannot do.
This is why people often have a plane specifically for "smoothing"
@@andrewcoleman5095 i dont think that guy uses a hand plane very often
Yeah, that’s nonsense. Sharpen your plane! Even I, a newbie woodworker, would know that can’t be the finish given by a bench plane.
Obviously I don't need to mention the plane should have been set/ tuned better. I just thought it was funny using a lie Nielsen and the guy couldn't get a clean cut lol.
36 thousand people have watched this and I wonder how many now think that you can't get finish-ready results from planing?!
Popular Woodworking - you really should have Dave redo this test with a properly tuned plane.
I don't think he even understands how to use a plane
I love the channel and what you do but you may want to check your plane. I hand plane quarter-sawn Oak all the time and when it setup correctly there is no tear out. As much as I love the channel and magazine this was not a video that I would endorse.
James Wright Oak is life lol show em how it's done. Or just show him your shop lol
Yea literally looked like someone attacked it with a scrub plane with no sensitivity
I very much enjoy your videos but I don't think the tests were completely fair. First, all the boards should have had the same grain patterns. Second, was the prep on sanding 80-120-180- etc. grits? Thirdly, scraping or planing produces excellent results with properly sharpened tools. Card scrapers do a fabulous job with alternating grains. You might consider doing this test over again.
Am I the only one who thought the plane looked best? It makes the wood look distressed / not brand new. 😍
The planing result was invalid due to poor setup and plane use. This video really should be removed, as it is only providing misinformation to new woodworkers who might not understand the reason for the invalid conclusion.
Another week, another demonstration by PopWood that shows they hate hand planes.
I'd like to see the same test on softer wood like pine.
The card scraper is really good for smoothing varnishes. You can get a really shiny and smooth result by using a card scraper. After each layer has cured, you use the scraper. All hollows are filled with varnish. After 6-8 layers, you will get a silken smooth surface. When you apply the last layer, it will be totally blank. Epifanes Clear Varnish is really good for this approach. It beats sanding varnish by miles.
It appears as if your intention was to convince people to not use handplanes, since you didn't try to minimize the amount of tearout that you were getting. Granted, it's likely that some scraping or sanding would still be necessary, but that's no excuse for the way that you presented your "findings."
I'm calling slight shenanigans on this test. When i saw the board that you were going to use the plane on, even through the camera, I could tell it wasn't going to take stain well because of the changing grain direction which neither of the two other boards had.
A more definitive test would be to use the same board 3 times. Even that can be fraught with difficulty.
I do think this test was performed in good faith, and its likely the results would be similar even starting from like material, so don't take this criticism too harshly. It wasn't meant to be harsh.
You have to admit though, the grain on the planed board was all over the place.
They should have used a high angle frog . . .
Interesting tho I'd hardly call hitting it with the orbital "sanding", I typically go from dimensioned timber to P100, P220, P320, P400, P800 and a 000 synthetic pad before using oil....comes up like glass with amazing grain depth (especially on New Zealand native timbers)
This is a bogus test, in my opinion. It seemed like you dismissed planing simply because you didn't know how to sharpen, setup, and/or use the planer properly.
I think the plane could have been adjusted better and maybe sharpened. There is not way a properly tuned plane has tare out like that.
Good test, poorly executed.
Sharpen the blade and set up the plane correctly. Try again and make another video.
I like your series and find them useful but you shouldn’t share videos where you teach or give advice to the people while being unsure of what you’re doing. Or even worse - by being confident but ignorant.
I hope it was an honest mistake.
Also it was a good tip to use card scraper or sandpaper on wild grain wood, but this was quarter sawn oak. Cheers 🍻 (and sharpen up).
Did you really tried to compare handplane to sand paper using quartersawn oak?
That's quarter sawn oak and it requires a higher degree angle cut to avoid tear out when using hand planes.
Sanding to different grits makes a lot of difference.
Yeah I don't think he executed sanding method very well nor went to a high enough grit
I couldn't believe, what your plane delivers as a result. I had expected a much more interesting surface of the planed piece.
Alfred Neumann that’s because they haven’t sharpened it properly. A sharp plane doesn’t do THAT.
When hand planed is worse than a thickness planer on oak someone cannot use a hand plane properly.
Try again please, this time with no tear-out on the planed board.
But the real lesson learned here is that sanded/abraded surfaces block some stain from entering the pores of the wood.
Buen día. Una pregunta. Qué es mejor para preparar el acabado: lijar o la lana de acero (steel wool), gracias.
pre-stain conditioner makes all the difference
You should invite Mark Spagnuolo onto your channel to redo this test
I think for the point they were making, it was a good video, thumbs up,
Also, this test is fine on flat wood. What about a profiled skirt? I used 000 steel wool only on machine profiled Mahogany skirting board (though it took some elbow grease) and it left a stunning finish when oiled. Plenty of options, depends on what you want and the nature of the material. I also don't think you demonstrated any tricks at all.
of course he showed a trick. he managed to use a no. 4 as a gouge lol.
This "test" didn't tell me anything other than if you don't know to leave the hand plane on the shelf for this wood then this must have been the first time you've stained figured wood. What a waste of bandwidth.
The planing. Lol
This video doesn't actually make any comparison for the planed board. The board was planed incorrectly and had obscene tear out! This may be a case where you choose not to plane the wood because it is difficult to plane. Bottom line it's crazy that this video released with with a blanket statement of "since I was unable to hand plane this board well you should not hand plane a board before finishing."
Dude it's just oak. It had some grain movement but this was just inexperienced (like really, really inexperienced) planing
If your plane was properly sharpened and set up, and you had good planing technique the result would have been far different.
Let me add my voice to the sad fact that this demonstration experiment shows that you do not know how to set up, sharpen, and/or use hand tools. I apologize for my bluntness, but hey.
Who is this guy? How do you get this job and be that bad with a smoothing plane? If James Wright sees this he's going to flip shit!
He did leave a comment here hahaha
If you plane you need to burnish. Actually need to burnish all of these before finish. And also if you plane badly then what is the point. Wow first BAD wood working video in a while haha.
stupid test. you can't wipe off a soak finish within 2 seconds of applying. planing is most definitely the cleanest surface. ask japan.
A lot of negative comments here, whereas I found it really useful.
I could plane that board and you could see reflections in it before adding a drop of finish, and I'm not kidding. I bought my first plane about a year ago (it's 100 years old) so there really is no excuse for that much tear out (on one of the best planes money can buy).
Weird and false observation
👍