Galoots,

I decided I wanted to do another infill plane. I had in my stash an unusual
plane with only marking of "US Pat No. 1914609 (or J914609)-- hard to see.
The reason I chose this plane (No. 3 size) was because there was no
adjustment knob sticking out back toward the tote like most Stanleys have.
I used osage orange, walnut, and cherry for the infill. The plane iron is
rather thin. I'm trying to decide if I want to try to exchange it for a
thicker iron. As is, it planes fairly well. There are my usual flubs which
I have tried to cover up, sigh.. I had a good time with the build when I
wasn't frustrated with myself.

Best,
Phil E.

Link to photos:
https://flic.kr/s/aHBqjBndpK

Here is your patent, and as you can see, it was used on Shelton planes
https://www.datamp.org/patents/displayPatent.php?pn=1914609&id=5553

Kirk Eppler in Half Moon Bay, CA, who attended a very disappointing PAST
sale , and an interesting speaker attended, George Anderson, an infill
plane collector.

On Sun, Apr 21, 2024 at 1:52 PM Phil E.  wrote:

> Galoots,
>
> I decided I wanted to do another infill plane. I had in my stash an unusual
> plane with only marking of "US Pat No. 1914609 (or J914609)-- hard to see.
> The reason I chose this plane (No. 3 size) was because there was no
> adjustment knob sticking out back toward the tote like most Stanleys have.
> I used osage orange, walnut, and cherry for the infill. The plane iron is
> rather thin. I'm trying to decide if I want to try to exchange it for a
> thicker iron. As is, it planes fairly well. There are my usual flubs which
> I have tried to cover up, sigh.. I had a good time with the build when I
> wasn't frustrated with myself.
>
>
>


-- 
Kirk Eppler in Half Moon Bay, CA