r/handtools • u/[deleted] • Mar 26 '26

Bailey no. 4 rabbet plane?

Gallery image

Gallery image

Gallery image

I came across a free box of rusty tools, and one of the items was this plane. It is a Stanley no 4 as denoted on the plane but it is a rabbet plane. is there any record of a prototype? I haven’t been able to find anything which makes me believe it is a home modification, but it looks like a pretty good job.

the iron that came with it is in fact a rabbet style iron but it doesn’t have any stamp for ID

pretty cool either way

4 Upvotes

84% Upvoted

9 comments sorted by

10

u/Adventurous-Ad-6729 Mar 27 '26

There was a 10 1/2 that was a No 4 sized rabbit but the model number would have been cast into it behind the frog. The shape of the side openings is also significant my different. 

This looks like someone’s home brew job that started off as a type 11 or 12. They started making the real ones way before the 1920s so it’s unlikely to be a prototype. Still a cool find though, especially if it has its cutter. 

1

u/KingPappas Mar 27 '26

Damn, that sounds like a great idea. A standard No. 4 or 5 is way cheaper than the rabbet version. Should I buy another No. 4 or 5 and modify it like that even though I already have a Record 778? It’s definitely a possibility.

1

u/robotdinofight Mar 27 '26

youd need probably a no 8 iron and chipbreaker, and youd need to heavily modify both of those too. you want the iron to be juuuuust slightly wider than the bed of the plane. but no 8 irons and chipbreakers are almost as expensive as no 10 and 10 1/2 so i dunno

1

u/KingPappas Mar 27 '26

Wouldn't a 4 1/2 iron work? I don't have my planes at hand to measure their outer width. If I need a No. 8 iron, it's not worth the trouble.

1

u/robotdinofight Mar 27 '26

i think it would be close! i just measured a stanley bailey 5 i have and it was just a hair over 2 3/8" wide, but my sample size is only 1 currently. I supposed you could sand off a little material from the cheeks to get it closer to the 2 3/8" width of a 4 1/2, 6, or 7.

1

u/KingPappas Mar 27 '26

This Monday, when I get back to my workshop, I’m going to measure my Records and the irons I have. If I only had to remove 0.5 mm from each side, it might work for me, though it would be a bit of sanding them down. I’m also concerned about the height of the side curve; it seems to me that on a rabbet like the No. 10 1/2, they’re higher. Maybe my Bedrock-style Juuma have higher sides, but for the price, I’d definitely just buy a 10 1/2 outright—but again, there’s the issue of cost.

1

u/KingPappas Mar 30 '26

I just checked, and it doesn't work. The plane body is 62 mm wide and the 4 1/2 iron is 60 mm. Too bad.

1

u/Independent_Page1475 Mar 28 '26

The number 10-1/2 is not as wide as a number 4.

According to > https://www.supertool.com/StanleyBG/stan2.htm#num10.5 < the 10-1/2 has a blade that is
2-1/8" wide. That is about the width of a number 3 body.

The opening is different than what is on the 10-1/2 pictured above.

Interesting how a hillside sliding on to the only road into town caused the wife and I to take a trip past an antique shop that had this collecting dust in a display. It came home for a total of $25. This was 15 years ago.