Wood River V3 bench planes?

[Ray Newman]

Colleagues: does anyone have any input on the Wood River V3 bench planes? Made in China or Mexico?

I am starting to think that I need a #4

[HomerLee]

Colleagues: does anyone have any input on the Wood River V3 bench planes? Made in China or Mexico?

I am starting to think that I need a #4

I have a Wood River V3 4 1/2 and 5 1/2. I also have Stanley Bedrocks, several Veritas bevel up and an LN. The Wood River planes needed minimal tuning out of the box and work as well as anything I have. Advantages of the Veritas are their toothed blade for highly figured wood, their quality, innovative designs, and customer service.

I would recommend a 4 1/2 rather than a four. Some complain that the wider plane is harder to push but you are taking fine shavings with a smoother. It isn't hard for me and I'm 78 years young.

[rwe2156]

Made in China.  Same as the Quansheng sold in England.

I have several: 4, 6, 7 as well as Lie Nielsen planes.

Truthfully, I can't tell that much difference.

The irons are a bit hit or miss, some require more work than others, but overall, not that much.

IMO they are the best value out there for a premium "non-premium" plane.

[Blockplane]

I run mine with the IBC matched blade set and it works very well.

[hbmcc]

People must be tired and worn out from grumbling about "made in china". A hot topic when I first came on the list. I still have some bite, and I despise companies that spam intentionally. Still, the review is un-biased.

Cheap tools are cheap. From the material to the machining, to the quality control, cheap is cheap. I test drove a V3 #4. The blade never quit slipping. Also, lest we forgot, there is a huge price differential between LV/LN made, and China. Because Woodcraft bumped the WR price point does not make those tools any better. 

I really like my LN #4 bronze. It does cut better. And, looks good too.

[bandit571]

I seem to prefer these sort of planes..
 
[attachment=10967]
Stanley no. 4, type 10, and a Sargent No. 408, type 2......
[attachment=10968]

Isn't the other two planes just copies of a Stanley Bedrock No. 604?   including WR ones?    And, L-N ones....

[Admiral]

Isn't the other two planes just copies of a Stanley Bedrock No. 604?   including WR ones?    And, L-N ones....

I can't speak for WR, but as copies go, the LN has slight differences in the frog and yoke design, less slop in iron adjustment, and is simply machined to a higher tolerance than the Stanley 604.  Just like premium cars, to get that extra 5% of performance you have to pay.....

That being said, I routinely get 95% of LN performance out of a normal Stanley #4, or 604 for that matter.  Replacement irons help a lot too.

[rwe2156]

[quote pid='7632919' dateline='1528863962']
Isn't the other two planes just copies of a Stanley Bedrock No. 604?   including WR ones?    And, L-N ones....
[/quote]

The sole castings are modeled after the Bedrocks, but the similarities pretty much stop there. :-D

I could list them but I don't want to raise anyone's blood pressure........................LOL

[Tony Z]

I have a WR low angle block, bought on a spur of the moment, because I like the Stanley 15 knuckle cap (issues with those planes are cracks due weakness behind the mouth, I have three, 1 good, 2 cracked). The WR is an excellent copy, feels more robust than the Stanley 15 (I know this is a thread about bench planes, but, I only have the block). The blade, after sharpening back about 1/4" now takes and holds an edge nicely. My major issue with the plane is the slop, or what some call backlash, in the adjuster. I've been around machinery (wood and metal), tools and hand tools most of my 65 years, and what is in the WR is excessive. I haven't taken the time to see what can be done to fix this, as the cause may be as simple as the blade slots being too large. Bear in mind, the price of $99.00 is still less than an LV or an LN, BUT, also having an LV and an LN, the tactile feel of each of those is superior (I had to take a piece of Sc paper to lessen the sharp edges on the body of the WR.

Would this prohibit me from considering another WR tool? No, but I would look very closely at whatever I was buying. By the way, the sides were square to the sole, and the sole, including the adjustable toe, was flat. WR is getting close to making a premium block plane, but they still have a ways to go. Now if this plane was offered with the edges a bit less sharp, the backlash a bit tighter (you need some backlash, but this is too much) and a Crosman blade, in the $100 to $110 range, this would be the plane to buy.

[Bibliophile 13]

I don't own any WR planes, but I've used one for a couple minutes at a WW-ing show. My first impression was that they were very heavy compared to the vintage Stanleys I'm used to using. The castings are thick. The Woodcraft website lists the #4 as weighing 5 lbs.! The iron-bodied Lie-Nielsen #4 is only 4 lbs., and that's still heavy compared to the old Stanleys.

Some people really like a heavy smoother. I do not. If you're just smoothing down a couple pieces of wood after you've run them through the planer, then the extra weight shouldn't bother you. But if you're going to be using the plane for more than 5 minutes at a time, such as for smoothing down a table top or the top of a workbench, you're going to get fatigued.

Consider getting a vintage handplane from someone down in S&S. You should be able to get an excellent #4 for half the price of the WoodRiver.