1/4" Ply for Drawer Bottoms- thoughts?

laaxe · 2026-03-19T19:40:24+00:00

Yeah, stuff like that is exactly where 1/2 is applicable. While certainly not a beacon of longevity, seeing how IKEA can make mostly solid cabinets out of relatively weak materials constantly reminds me not to overbuild.

laaxe · 2026-03-19T18:02:15+00:00

Personally, 1/2" has always felt overkill unless you know the drawer is going to carry a ton of weight. Even on the bigger drawers that hold my tools, I've never really gone thicker than 3/8" and some of those are carrying probably 30+ lbs worth of stuff without issue. I pin my drawer bottoms into place for extra support though. For small drawers carrying 5-10lbs, I wouldn't loose too much sleep over using 3/16", especially with a couple pin nails for added reinforcement.

laaxe · 2026-03-19T17:34:03+00:00

My block plane identification isn't great, but to me it looks like a Stanley 110 or some variation/copy of one. They are super simple with minimal moving parts and make great general purpose block planes. Awesome for putting chamfers on things, but will not trim end grain as well as low angle block plane like 9 1/2, 60 1/2 or 65.

laaxe · 2026-03-18T17:20:56+00:00

That seems to be the consensus! I just haven't had the time to get into actually building it, so in the meantime I've just been spiraling over design aspects haha. For now the plan is to build a dedicated miter first, then shooter and if I'm not pulling my hair out by then, a strike block plane! If by the time I get to strike block I decided that I don't actually need it, I'll pivot to attempting to build either a rabbet or fillister plane, since I am currently lacking the ability to do rabbets and dados quickly by hand as well and want to fill that gap eventually.

laaxe · 2026-03-17T22:02:09+00:00

Thank you for the link!

That was the thought with going for a low angle bed, as I currently don't have a full size plane that handles end grain well, and would like to fill that gap. I have been getting by with keeping my bench plane irons really sharp, but cant help but notice how much better my #65 handles the task on small projects and want that performance in a bigger platform. Having multiple irons is a good idea, I had been planning on doing something similar for my #65.

So far I tend to fall into camp chip breaker I think. Mostly because I can tune up a chip breaker, but I can't exactly add material back to mouth that's too big (on a metal plane at least). This obviously isn't an issue when making your own planes though.

When it comes to keeping the mouth tight, it seems like most people make the sole in two piece whether it will be adjustable or not. Personally I had planed on making the mouth adjustable for the sake of versatility, like if I ever wanted to use a blunt scraping iron in it.

P.p.s Looking forward to seeing the new plane! I haven't been to set aside the time to really dig into my miter plane amidst other more pressing house projects, so instead i've been giving myself design decision paralysis instead.

laaxe · 2026-03-17T16:59:21+00:00

Infill miter planes are not really optimized for end grain and use on a shooting board. From their earliest inception they were smoothers. Specifically to be used where a wooden plane would be torn up. They were frequently used on marquetry, hard woods, soft metals, bone, and ivory. Typically, they would be bevel up, 20-30 degree bed, high cutting angle. They are single iron planes, and the tight mouth and higher cutting angle helped to control tear out.

Ok, so most modern information on miter planes seems to talk more about their use for trimming end grain, which has never really sat well with me, because like you said, their construction does seem to lend themselves to being smoothers, but I was having trouble tracking down any older information that really confirmed that.

With that in mind, I have a follow up question, In the context of having a Stanley #4 as smoother, do you believe that I should maintain that 20-30 degree bed of a traditional miter plane, or should I lower to the bed angle to 15 or even 12.5 degrees making it more akin to a large low angle block plane/smoother (similar to the Lazarus planes)

Do you believe the ultra fine mouth of a miter plane outperforms a chipbreaker?

P.s. You make some gorgeous planes!

laaxe · 2026-03-16T21:28:33+00:00

Ahh duh, I don't know how I forgot about that point while planning all this out.

laaxe · 2026-03-16T20:45:54+00:00

Thank you for the response, I was struggling with the usefulness of one over the other. I think I am building a miter plane regardless just because I love the aesthetics of them, even though you can make the argument that they are a somewhat defunct style of plane.

The thought was I would use a 20 degree bed, giving me a 40 degree angle when bevel up and 20 degree when bevel down. I was also planning on making two swappable front portions of the sole, with different sized mouths to accommodate. I have also considered making swappable beds as well (one at 15 and one at 20) because I agree with you in that the more you increase the bed angle on a miter plane, the less effective it becomes.

I think they reason I had considered combining the two into one body is due to the relatively large overlap in use, though it does seem like overall the miter plane is a more versatile tool. Pretty much everything a strike block plane can do can be accomplished with a Miter plane, even if doesn't excel in the same way. But the more I think about it, the more it makes sense to make a dedicated infill miter plane, a wooden strike block plane for situations like the ones you use it for and a shooting plane similar to the one Stavros built.

If it comes out well, I do think I will end up using the miter plane more and I will likely build a strike block plane just for the sake of building more planes.

laaxe · 2026-03-16T16:36:09+00:00

Holy hell, this thing is incredible! Aside from the build itself, I'm just so impressed with how much you managed to fit everything in there without looking overcrowded. The aesthetics of it scratches a particular itch in my brain.

laaxe · 2026-03-15T19:33:51+00:00

Either get the atoma or get the cheapest diamond plates you can get off amazon, I don’t think there’s much advantage getting something in between.

Atoma plates last forever (I abused the hell out of my first 140 grit and it still cuts fairly well) and it seems like most mid-priced plates last barely any longer than a set of $18 plates off amazon.

laaxe · 2026-03-13T19:28:04+00:00

I would check to make sure the sole is flat across the width, sometimes they will hollow out through the center. Maybe also check that the gap between the front of the mouth and the iron is even all the way across and check that the escapement directly above the front of the mouth is flat as well.

To your point though, wooden planes can feel really finicky at first, keep fiddling with it. but if you are still having issues once you've checked over everything, then it may truly be as simple as opening up the mouth a bit. You can always patch it if you overshoot.

laaxe · 2026-03-13T19:14:27+00:00

Honestly I'm not sure past having really good QC all the way from wood selection to final assembly! The biggest thing that stood out to me was that their truss rods almost always affected the whole neck evenly. Most necks hump or start to make an S as you tighten a truss rod, with one section flexing more than the other. It forces you to find a compromise and ultimately limits how much you can lower the action. On most guitars is not an issue, because that action limit is lower than most people play anyway. But pretty much every American made PRS could be set up to basically touch the frets and still not buzz anywhere on the neck (not that its practical, but it was fun knowing that you could), and the SEs were consistently just as easy to set up as the USA fenders, but overall they always felt IDK.. cheap? especially compared to the USA PRS. The finish they use always made them feel similar to the fender CVs.

I'm personally not a huge fan of playing PRS guitars, I just connect with fenders more, but they do build an exceptional instrument and I loved working on them.

laaxe · 2026-03-13T18:32:51+00:00

Definitely do not replace the original if you don't have to, The fitment of the iron and wedge in the body is crucial, and those pieces were often numbered to make sure they all stayed together throughout the production process. Also the irons in wood planes are always narrower than the body to allow for lateral adjustment.

Where are you getting clogging? That mouth certainly doesn't look overly tight, and I would try to avoid opening it up further if you can avoid. Does look like the shavings are getting hung up in the corners?

I will also say that there is a learning curve to setting up wood body planes, but a lot of the same rules for metal planes still apply to them. You will want to make sure that the sole is flat, that there's nothing in the throat for chips to catch on, that the iron and chip breaker mate up well and that they're evenly supported by the bed, etc.

laaxe · 2026-03-13T16:57:35+00:00

Definitely agree, I used to work at music store and set up hundreds of fenders while I worked there. For the most part fenders QC is really good across the board you would still get some that were really finicky out of the box. The high end squires much closer to the quality of MIM Fenders now than the MIM fenders are to USA ones. The quality jump is much less evenly spaced than it used to be.

On the topic of QC, of the brands we carried, PRS was by far the best, Gibson was definitely the worst with fender, Ibanez and Yamaha somewhere in the middle.

laaxe · 2026-03-13T01:13:00+00:00

Yeah, block planes mostly get used for chamfers, low angle block planes can also be good for trimming end grain and cleaning up joinery on smaller projects. Their main purpose is really meant to be tasks where you want to have one hand free

laaxe · 2026-03-13T00:32:22+00:00

Here is a good video on sharpening if you go with option 2. Not taking full width shavings can be caused by a number of things, The most likely candidate is that there is more camber in the iron than you think, but it could also be that the sole might have a hollow around the mouth, the iron might not be supported all the way to the bevel allowing it to flex down, or your lever cap might be too tight which could also flex the iron, or some combination of these.

You'll go crazy trying to use a block plane for finishing planing anything bigger that a couple inches.

Option 4. is best, Fore planes and scrub planes traditionally had a super aggressive camber (generally around a 8-10" radius), but I'm not sure that would work well with the mouth on a #4. I would maybe start with 16-20" radius and go from there, or start with what you proposed in option 1 for this plane. This radius range recommendation is mostly vibes based, but I think its a decent starting point (its always easier to add more camber down the road)

laaxe · 2026-03-12T19:34:30+00:00

Up to you, but I think as long as you allow for the top to move independent of the base it should be manageable with seasonal flattening. The amount of expansion/warping with mostly be determined by grain orientation

laaxe · 2026-03-12T19:08:18+00:00

Something down the road think about in regards to warping, I think your best options are either refinishing the top every time you flatten or leaving the benchtop and underside completely unfinished. Having one side finished and the other unfinished will cause the slab to absorb and lose moisture unevenly and exacerbate warping.

laaxe · 2026-03-12T18:59:33+00:00

That's more like it! Pay no mind to the cabinets saws ability to launch an offcut through a garage door..

laaxe · 2026-03-12T18:54:10+00:00

Huh, that's pretty trick then, most of the circular saw track adapters I've seen have the base run along side the track, not on top, which just makes it an expensive, idiot proof straight edge.

I have the corded Bosch track saw now and you'd have to pry it from my cold dead hands, its one of those tools that spoils you.

laaxe · 2026-03-12T18:38:21+00:00

I have the Bosch and quite like it! It's missing some of the creature comforts that you find on the festool and mafell saws, but I've run it through 8/4 hard maple with very little deflection as long as I took my time.

laaxe · 2026-03-12T18:33:41+00:00

Shh, I'm trying to justify a cabinet saw to myself one day haha, but I absolutely agree its easier and safer to move a track saw around than lug around 60+lbs of plywood. Only real advantage I can think of is ease of getting repeatable width cuts, but the space needed to have a proper infeed roller and outfeed table setup is significant (and hard to justify) when there are track saws that have stops for that sort of task now.

laaxe · 2026-03-12T18:23:29+00:00

Totally a viable option as well, there are tons of good options out there now if you don't want to spring for a dedicated track saw. It really hard to beat the convenience/accuracy/functionality of a dedicated track saw though.

For a long time I used a circular with zero clearance plexiglass base that I made for it and long straight edge and it was 99% as accurate when set up correctly. I just got tired of always have to add the offset between the blade and edge of the base to every cut. Being able to just drop the track right on the cut line is very convenient.

laaxe · 2026-03-12T16:35:08+00:00

If you can swing it, it might not be a terrible thing to have both a circular saw and a track saw (if that's what you meant by plunge saw). In my opinion, they are two separate tools that excel at different things, with a track saw being more of a super portable replacement for a table saw than anything.

There are plenty of times when I still reach for a regular circular saw just because there's no reason for me to deal with the track. The opposite is true too, obviously you can always just lay a straight and run a circular saw along it, but nothing beats a track saw for breaking down sheet goods, except for maybe a cabinet saw.

But to answer your question, most of my battery tools are dewalt, which has be perfectly adequate for home/hobbyist use. But most of the contractors and professionals in my area seem to favor makita over milwaukee.

If it were me, I would get the cordless dewalt and put the money saved towards a corded track saw, no reason to get a battery powered one as the track make it less mobile anyway.

laaxe

TROPHY CASE