Stanley #2 ?

  • Advertise with us

« back to Hand Tools forum

Forum topic by adot45 posted 09-22-2019 02:35 PM 307 views 0 times favorited 3 replies Add to Favorites Watch
View adot45's profile


160 posts in 1137 days

09-22-2019 02:35 PM

I picked up a nice little plane yesterday, not without it’s issues, but a little cutie just the same. It’s dimensions are: 7 5/8” long, the body is 1 15/16” wide, and the plane iron is 1 5/8”. The lever cap is 1 9/16” wide. Rosewood knob (low knob) and tote, held on with brass nuts that have a waist. It has Victory logo on the iron that is very hard to see but is unmistakable. The adjustment knob is 1” and has two rows knurling. (no dates)

Patrick’s Blood & Gore describes these planes (2’s) as not following the flow charts very well but using the Hyperkitten one here is what I think…

How many patent dates are cast into the bed behind the frog (toward the tote)? 0

Is a raised ring cast into the bed as a receiver for the knob? NO

Is the plane size number (i.e., No. 4) cast into the bed? NO

Is lever cap back recessed? See picture:
If that is what is meant by “recessed” then the answer is YES

Is the frog receiver a broad rectangular area with an arched rear (toward the tote)? See picture:

Again, I am assuming this is the arch type? YES

That leads to this: Type 4. Planes made by Stanley 1874-1884. But as we all know there is nothing absolute about this…is there any more information I could provide that would help narrow this down? Thank You very much.

-- David -- sent from my linux box

3 replies so far

View KYtoolsmith's profile


88 posts in 373 days

#1 posted 09-22-2019 11:16 PM

From my experience of looking at Stanley No 2 planes and referring to Roger Smith’s Patented Transitional & Metallic Planes in America, the No 2 planes never did have patent dates behind the frog seat and in R. Smith’s original type study he states, “the #1, 2, 10, 10 1/4, and 10 1/2 sizes were never equipped with the raised frog receiver… ”. Your very nice find has the low recesses or grooves in line with the frog screw holes in the frog receiver. A type 4 would be completely flat. This feature began with type 6… Assuming the front knob is original, it could also be as late as a type 11. Of course, the ” Victory” iron is probably a replacement.
No matter what type, good score!
Regards! The Kentucky Toolsmith.

-- "Good enough" is just another way of saying "it could be better"...

View bandit571's profile


23803 posts in 3196 days

#2 posted 09-23-2019 12:33 AM

Lateral Lever was after a type 6 or 7….There may be patent dates on the lever…along with “STANLEY”...

-- A Planer? I'M the planer, this is what I use

View adot45's profile


160 posts in 1137 days

#3 posted 09-23-2019 12:48 PM

KYtoolsmith- Thanks very much for that information, so those grooves started with type 6 bases. That is great, solid information, thank you for sharing. I also didn’t put much weight on the “Victory” iron, ( although type 11’s are my favorite ) and assumed it was highly likely that it was a replacement iron, especially taking into consideration it’s length of 6 1/2”. I thought I would zip over to Amazon and pick up that reference book by Roger Smith….....I think I better wait till I hit the lottery, wow.

bandit571- Thank you for pointing that out…When I was putting pertinent “clues” up I did look very closely at the lateral lever, even using a 25x loupe. Maybe some #0000 steel wool is in order to knock some of the dirt away, the plane is pretty dirty. Aside from looking for any clues stamped on the lever, it didn’t occur to me to investigate just when the laterals first started showing up. Another CSI moment.

OK, went out to the shop and cleaned the lever enough to clearly see “STANLEY” on it, no dates. Amazing that I couldn’t see the name before….

Many thanks to you guys for your help and sharing information!

-- David -- sent from my linux box

Have your say...

You must be signed in to reply.

DISCLAIMER: Any posts on LJ are posted by individuals acting in their own right and do not necessarily reflect the views of LJ. LJ will not be held liable for the actions of any user.

Latest Projects | Latest Blog Entries | Latest Forum Topics