Planes Outside Any Type Study
Occasionally you find a plane that is configured in a way that does not fit into a standard that was set for that time period. The obvious reason is that one or more excess parts from the previous type are used in the new type known as crossover parts. A second reason would be that a user simply swapped out a part from a different plane that did not match the original type for a custom look. Then there is the third example that leaves you in a quandary as to how one of the parts on a plane was made putting that plane in a type of its own.
Note. Selecting an image below will open a gallery slideshow for a closer look of the image with more detail.
A No. 8-ish
Sometimes it is easy to see when a part has been swapped out on a tool. This plane is the exception to that rule. The plane below is a 1-3/4 equivalent to a No. 8.
When I bought it, I asked the previous owner if any parts were swapped out and he told me the only work done on the plane was a general cleaning, new paint on the frog and the wood was refinished because it was in poor condition. Now let’s look under the hood.
The bed does not have any ribs under the knob. Behind the knob is a tall support rib found on the type 1 body. The body casting number 301 is found on the upper frog seat surface. The body is tapped for a frog adjusting screw. There is a raised tote receiver found on the type 1 body, but the bottom of the heel extension is even with the sole found on all bodies after the type 1. Confusing, there’s more! The frog is a type 1A which means there is less metal around the lever cap screw which signals an early type 1 plane. The cap is also a type 1, but it has a patent number on it. This would be seen on later type 1 planes. The iron has a separate non touching triangle which is found on all type 1 and some type 2 planes. The last inconsistent part is the front knob. The knob has the groves used for a ribbed bed.
If you have five people look at this, you will get five different answers. I’ll narrow it down to four left.
At the factory in 1930 they needed a body for the premium line and pulled one from the Fulton 5272 process line, drilled and tapped it for the frog adjusting hardware and called it a day. They did not stamp type 1 planes on the cheek. This accounts for all the changes except for the lever cap and knob. OK, the lever cap; the owner had two No. 8 planes before the 1936 change; one with a patent and the other without the patent number. Back then, these tools were used all the time and were not considered collectables like we think of them now. So, the owner took them apart to sharpen the irons and put the wrong cap on this plane which would not have mattered to the owner. The ONLY other reason for the later cap would be a Stanley owner “borrowed” the cap around 1935 and the MF plane owner ordered a new cap from MF with a patent number on it. The knob must have been that same Stanley owner at it again between 36 and 40. I know, I know, you can drive a truck though that one. Give it a shot, four left!
A Custom No. 9-ish
This plane looks like a No. 9 but there are several features on the plane that show it is a mix of different models across several years. I am going to break it down and describe each part as to what type it is and how they came together.
When it is together it looks like a type 2, but when you look under the hood this is one different plane. The frog has the features on a type 1 with a casting number 317, a folded lateral adjustment lever, no yoke pin recess, no frog face relief, brass depth adjusting nut, fillister frog locking screws and a frog adjuster tab. This type 1 frog should have a cast iron yoke, but we see a steel yoke on it. It could be a late model original, or the original cast iron yoke broke and was replaced with a steel yoke. The threaded adjuster rod has a slot cut on the end by a previous owner. Moving onto the body, the bed under the knob has no ribs but the heel tab is level with the sole. Also, there is no name and number on the body either cast or stamped. The early Mohawk Shelburne (type 1A), Fulton and Craftsman bodies match this one perfectly. The lever cap has a patent number on the front and interlocking tabs on the back which makes this a late type 1 cap.
There are three parts that do not match the early type 1 features: the knob, iron, and waist nuts. The knob has rib impressions and is clearly a replacement from either a type 2 or type 2 second release. The iron on this plane was stamped “Millers Falls Co. Greenfield Mass.” The iron was a user add-on because this iron was produced between 1944 to 1948 when the new Millers Falls Co. trademark irons replaced the Mohawk Shelburne trademark irons. The nickel waist nuts were first seen on the No. 900/814 starting around 1948/1949.
In summary, this plane has a body with no defined type, surrounded with parts from different models over a fifteen year range.
An Early No. 9-ish
This plane has a timestamp of the mid-thirties with a body in an identity dilemma.
The frog is an early type 1 without the yoke pin recess or the frog face relief. It has a folded lateral adjustment lever, cast iron yoke and the thinner walls around the lever cap screw. The lever cap is a later type 1 cap with the interlocking tabs, large rivet head on the cam lever spring and the patent number stamped on the cap face. The iron has the type 1 trademark with the no touch triangle and the knob and tote look like the wood found on a type 1 plane.
All the parts on this plane except for the body have a type 1 No. 9 definition. If the body is not a premium type1, what process in the factory was its source? I will entertain two possible scenarios. If a number of bodies were needed to fill a type 1 order, the bodies from the Fulton, Craftsman and Mohawk Shelburne line match the features found on this body. These bodies would have been drilled and tapped for a frog adjuster screw to fit the type 1 frog. The plane would have no embossed name and would be missing the model number on the bed. A second thought on this body is that Millers Falls sold replacement parts for several of its tools. If you look at the hand drawn illustration of the bench plane body in the 1929 catalog, there are no embossed features shown. Could this body be a replacement part sold through Millers Falls before the start of the premium type 2 release?
A Late 40’s No. 9-ish
A couple of years ago I bought what I thought was a corrugated No. 9C type 2 bench plane on eBay. Turns out it was not a No. 9C or anything on the books. I will try and break down all the parts in a timeline and see if this came from MF or someone created their own unique masterpiece.
This plane has rosewood tote and knob with brass waist nuts. The frog has a casting number 5A/496A with a recessed nickel depth adjusting nut but does not have the frog adjusting hardware. The iron has the trademark stamp “Millers Falls Co.” with a “C” stamped on the back. The hinge cap is a type 3/4 with a casting number 1/334. The body has no name or number on the cheek and has a casting number P/302/P3/G.
OK, now for the fun part. The wood with the brass nuts eliminates the type 3 years. The casting number on the body was also found on a type 2 second release, so around 1949 to 1952. The 496A 2” frog casting number started during the type 3 years and was replaced with the 334 casting number in 1958. The 334 cap started sometime in the type 3 years and went to the end of the hinged cap. OK, still in the 4-year window. The iron has a stamp used on the No. 900/814 after the transition from the Mohawk iron. This iron had a range from around 1945 to 1948. The “C” on the iron is also found on the STS irons starting in 1949.
So, what is it?
All the parts match a very narrow 1948/1949 transition window. The base, frog, brass waist nuts, and wood match a Craftsman 3742. The iron may be a late transition to the STS iron because the “C” stamp found on the back of the iron was also used on the STS irons. The fact that it does not have a cheek stamp tells me it was not put together by a user. Millers Falls almost always used a corrugated plane in a government contract, but if this was not built under contract then an employee at MF had a rip-roaring weekend and this was a Monday morning plane.
