About 4 years ago, without knowing anything about either Axminster or Luban brands, I considered both "mid-priced" options. I took much time to consider both and eventually decided on Luban, mostly because of the Bedrock frog, the steels it used, as well as the thicker blades. My initial choice was probably a little lucky, but since then, I've acquired many Luban planes: which includes: 3 shoulder planes, #4, #4.5, #5, #5.5, #6, #7, #8, a scraper plane, a LA Jack, the 2 bronze spokeshaves, a LA block plane, a regular block plane and the triple set of 101-102-103 bronze block planes. I've also acquired complete and multiple spare parts for each item for the future. I've probably forgotten a few, but yeah, they've been fun to collect. My Luban experiences match yours basically. I'm of the belief currently, that these planes are actually better than the LN or Veritas brands. Luban shouldn't be expected to be the best, but for one simple reason, I'm convinced that they are: they use regular high carbon steel for their blades, instead of the gimmick known as A2 steel/cryogenic treatments. A2 steel is reasonably sharp, but to be the ultimate plane, well, the sharpest blade is what matters most and that's not A2! Luban plane bodies are stressed relieved, the handles are immaculately crafted and the blades are the best you can get - I can go on about other critical reasons too. Luban is a no nonsense version of the LN/Veritas premium brands essentially. The look of the planes is beautiful/immaculate, and also presented conservatively. They're not trying to impress with flashy frilly looks, or sponsored (but not disclosed) high profile RU-vid posters, or fake/fraud marketing about cryogenic treatments, or hyping duller A2 steel (which is essentially another name for CrV). I got lucky and bought my Luban inventory years ago, when their quality was not known and their prices were crazy/ridiculously cheap. Since then, their prices have increased considerably, but they're still, even now, great value. I think for the years to come, Luban's price increases will continue unfortunately; they're just too good! I've never seen, nor tried an Axminster plane and it was informative to learn about your experiences - this video answers questions about the option years ago, that I never took. A great review and I'll be looking to see what other videos you've uploaded after this. Thank you and take care.
You forgot to mention that their totes are by far the most comfortable, being designed for modern larger hands.😀 I find my number 5 is a bit heavy. I also recommend a fettled Stanley with an upgraded blade as a lighter cheap alternative.
Here's the thing, I have both brands, both are machined well flat! But I see how you are pressings on each plane. This tells me a lot. One you struggle to sharpen a blade properly, two your technique is wrong how you stand and put pressure on plane with fore arms. The sound the planes make as they run over wood, a vey dead sound. Too much down ward pressure. I don't know if this was how you were taught or habit from early times.
The observation about downwards pressure in this video is accurate, though that is more to do with the very low height of my old workbench not allowing me to adopt a comfortable position. It's one of the main reasons that I built a new bench and now that I can adopt a comfortable position, my technique has adapted appropriately. The observation about the sound and sharpness of the plain are however wrong. Firstly, my plains are capable of shavings of around half a thousandth of inch (watch the video where I prepare the Luban no 4 out of the box), unbroken and clean from edge to edge. You don't get that with a dull blade. Secondly, the sound in a video is unreliable as it has been heavily edited to account for my voice in a brick garage, meaning many other frequencies are affected negatively and therefore, may well sound different to real life. As for your planes being flat, I'm glad for you. Apart from the flatness though, which seems to be the luck of the draw with Axminster planes, the Rider planes are just poorly made compared to the Quangsheng planes. Mating surfaces are not ground flat, threads are left sharp, swarf isn't always cleaned out and the adjustment mechanism is cheap and doesn't work well. If the Rider planes were £45 to £50 each, I would have no complaints, but given that they are charging broadly the same price as the very well machined Luban planes, they are simply over priced and not up to standard.
@@MatthewSmall this is un like my rider planes, I have 60 1/2 block, no.4, 41/2 ,5, 51/2 6, 7, bevel up 5, luban plow plan,rabit plane ,no 4 smoother, stanley 4 handyman No5 Acorn. 51/2 stanley pre ww11,falcon popes4 and 5.all tuned well and plane flat. So what am I trying to say mm the riders did need more work to blades out of the box but hell I shapen everything trust no one lol the stanleys acorns falcons are all 50 years plus except stanley handyman 1988. Othe planes I have 1921 no55 plow 1923 no45, lie nielson routers etc every one requires adjustments to get them running well. But again the riders are dead flat. I am sorry if yours are not I have no explanation to explain this. But the up side is you have found luban planes good, so you can buy more and enjoy your wood working because that's the only thing that matters not including my thoughts they are just mine. Cheers
I fully understand that everyone's experience and thoughts are their own. The Rider planes have had a lot of good reviews online, which is why I initially bought them. As with you, I don't expect manufacturers to sharpen them or prepare them for work particularly well so I always at least test the blades for flatness and sharpen them properly, and usually flatten the backs. Due to the positive reviews though, I was disappointed to find the soles so far out of flat. Axminster also don't offer them with a guarantee of flatness (though they do imply it... but it is not specifically stated), whereas the Luban planes are guaranteed to be within British Standards... and so far, mine have all been about half that at less than 1.57 thousandths of an inch in total devitation from absolute flat. The blade adjustment mechanisms on the riders is admittedly functional, but completely unrefined. At their price, I hoped for better, and the Luban planes are better in all of these respects. As I said, from my own experience of Rider planes, I think they are worth about half what they cost and share more in common with cheaper planes like Silverline and Faithful than they do with premium planes. I could have just had a bad batch in terms of sole flatness, frog machining, bowed blades and chip breakers, but that simply speaks to a lack of quality control and doesn’t explain why their planes at this price point also have pressed metal lateral adjusters, poorly made and pressed steel two-part yokes and coarsely made and unrefined threads for the adjustment wheels. And the big problem with this is, if it just a lack of quality control and they are normally much better, the planes are still technically functional and there are no guarantees placed the flatness or quality of finish besides functionality, so returning them for these reasons could prove difficult and you could easily end up with replacements that are the same or worse. Luban on the other hand, even taking in to consideration that I might have had a bad batch, are just better designed, better made and come with the appropriate guarantees. The lateral adjusters are far more substantial, the yokes are single piece, the depth adjusters are far more refined and take significantly fewer turns before they take effect, the frogs are completely flat and very well machined and… a small point, but they use a lever cap, rather than a screw cap. They’re just easier and more pleasant to use because you can fell the difference in quality. As I said in the video though, the Rider planes can be made to work very well… It's just that my experience of them is that they take more work than they should at this price point.
Matthew Small Thanks for sharing your thoughts. Again I have no answers to give you on your plane. Lever cap I like, the screw on the rider takes getting use to but veritas uses this and on other plane types and brand also, but I do like conventional type lever irons. Keep on enjoying your wood work and your plane of choice as again it's really the only thing that matters cheers.
Ive got a riderr plane and its great, im a career bespoke joiner, and I smile every time i use it, the funny thing is most career joiners do a great job and half their tools are rubbish, sometimes i wander if its the hobbyist woodworkers who are overly analytical, or looking for the perfect tool.
I sent my Axminster rider plane back. Really wasn't happy with it for the money. The casting was misaligned, the threads half stripped, and both blades were cupped. The pressed steel components are just naff. It's a cheap plane with a midrange price tag.
I flattened the sole of my Stanley no 7 as it was terrible. To do it by hand would have taken hours. I used my belt edge sander with a worn out belt. It was magic and transformed the plane. I find my Luban (Qiangsheng) no 5 great but a bit heavy. The low angle Jack is much more expensive than the rider.
Have you noticed the rider planes have been reduced a fair bit recently maybe standards have dropped so they’ve reduced them I found it strange as everything else in the catalog has gone up
Thanks for highlighting this. That's very interesting as they all appear to be 25% cheaper from the prices I last remember seeing. I think at these prices, it the quality has remained consistent, they would be worth a punt for this on a tighter budget. I think they're still over priced, but probably not by much now.
I bought a couple Axminster plane Irons I liked the thickness ,they needed a lot of work to get them flat and sharp but I like the o2 steel its a bit more durable , im disappointed with Axminster though I was going to buy a forstner bit set it was 40 quid but they put the price up to 60 pounds too much of a jump for me , when I asked why the price shot up so much they didnt have an answer .
Thank you for sharing your experience with these planes! I have only recently heard the name Luban when I visited my local tool shop - Bill's Tool Store, in Glasgow - I was looking for a new, low angle block plane, and the assistant suggested the Luban, which he said was very similar to the Lee Nielson. I have to say, it did look and feel amazing compared to my 30-year-old Stanley, but as it was only £55 pounds, I have to admit to being rather sceptical. Your review, among others, of the Luban products has convinced me to take the plunge and make the purchase. The old Stanley has never let me down. It did, however, take hours to get up and running, and is a real pain to adjust. Once you get the hang of it, though, it does everything you want. However, the idea of using a tool that works straight out of the box, and is easy to adjust sounds like heaven.
I hate the backlash on plane adjuster knobs. The Qiangshengs / Lubans are a lot better than most. I have a second hand Rider block plane. It is large and heavy but I’ve got used to that and rather like it. The blade stays sharp and both adjusters work well.
I must have been lucky. I got an Axminster #4 ~18 months ago (before I knew about workshop heaven) and I can only just get a 0.15mm feeler gauge under the rear right and front left corners
Thanks very much. Very usefull, as I was going to buy a few Rider planes. I do have about 4 Lie Neilsen planes. But not a 4, 1/2 smoother or a good 5 or 5, 1/2 Jack. Am going to look at the Lu Bonn. You recommend. Not sure if thats spelt correctly. But your review was very appreciated. Kind regards Martin
My experience with them is limited, and yet so different to yours. I have just recieved a Low Rider 62 from Axminster. Both irons are flat, the sole is flat, the machining is fine and so is the japanning. I honed the irons and tried them both. I couldn't be more pleased. It works straight out of the box.
I use a straight edge tested against float glass and feeler gauges, then use the straight edge and feeler gauges on the sole of the plane. If it's less than 1.5 thousandths of an in across and along the sole, I don't touch it. British standards state 3 thousandths total, so 1.5 either way. As for grinding, wet and dry on float glass.
Hello, given that a No 4 smoother is about £75 for the Rider and £150 for the QS with their current prices. Would you say the QS is worth double the price? Thanks, I appreciate your time and effort.
Excellent review.i have 4 Lubans which I love.and had wondered if the riders were as good for a bit less money.now I know to stick to quang sheng luban in future .thanks
I currently have the number 5, 62, low angle block, low angle rebate, large shoulder, standard chisel and plough planes from quangsheng. My 4, 7 and small shoulder planes are rider and despite the fact that I've got them working great, I'm tempted to swap them out with quangsheng ones.
Hi Matthew I totally agree with your review. I made the mistake of buying an Axminster Rider No 4 plane and got rid of it soon after as the quality was so low. I also purchase a Rider No 80 scraper which was so bad, but it was very cheap. I spent a couple of hours flattening the sole and dressing all the rough edges and in the end it did perform reasonably but no where near as good as my old Stanley No 80. I have studied the Quangsheng Luban planes and they are well engineered and far superior quality. The only thing that puts me off buying more of their range is after a particularly bad winter and in an unheated workshop my Luban No 3 rusted very badly even though I kept it in it's box. None of my Record or Stanley planes suffered with rust at that time which made me wonder if the cast iron on the Luban was not as good. All of the planes were in the same cupboard but the difference was unbelievable. I was very disappointed to find that when I cleaned off the rust it had left pits which are quite deep and spoil the surface finish. I must say that the Luban still planes beautifully and better than my Stanleys but a lot of that is due to the thickness of the blade. I have since replaced some of my Record and Stanley plane blades with thicker after market blades and the performance is so much improved. I cannot fault the Luban planes as they are beautifully finished with totally flat soles and a great Bedrock frog, all the edges are broken and smoothed right out of the box, but I do worry about the casting material. I keep dressing my planes with oil between uses so the problem hasn't got any worse but it is a shame.
Hi and thanks for the comment. Luban planes are not made from cast iron but 5140 (CR40) steel. In it's natural state, this will have slightly more corrosion resistance than cast iron due to the addition of chromium, but not much as it's typically less than 1%, where a good stainless is around 12% to 18% chromium, though stainless is nowhere near as strong or tough. The reason why your older planes didn't rust is because they have had years of care and probably have a fair amount of oil or wax embedded in the surface as well as a well developed protective patina, whereas the new plane won't have that. If you oiled it before you put it away and it still rusted, it either had some surface moisture trapped under the coat of oil, or the oil is contaminated. This is not a fault of the plane but simply a lack of materials knowledge on the part of the end user. That's nothing to be embarrassed about though as not everyone has engineering knowledge and not everyone should be expected to have it. The problem is that Quangsheng don't include a materials data sheet or care instructions. You just get a plane in a box and if you're not aware of how to care for it properly in the environment in which it is going to be used, that's not the user's fault. It's exactly the same for all ferrous metal tools; older ones are significantly less likely to rust for two reasons: years of being oiled and the protective patina that develops on them with years of use. If you sanded down your old planes back to shiny new metal, they would rust too. My workshop isn't all that humid, but I have had rust on tools. Now, every few days I clean and oil every ferrous metal surfuce in there; my table saw, thicknesser bed, planes, chisels, saws etc and I no longer have an issue.Don't let the one instance of rust put you off. They are truly excellent planes and if cared for correctly, will last a lot longer than either of us.
@@MatthewSmall Hi Matthew Thanks for getting back to me. As a retired aerospace engineer with 52 years experience, I must say that I hadn't considered that these planes were not made of cast iron. I bought mine some years back when Workshop Heaven had only just started to stock them. When I received it, I only had time to check it over before I went away on business so I hadn't removed the original oil coating from the plane. On my return I had all but forgotten it as I was so busy with work, so it was a shock when I opened the box to find it covered in rust. I did complain to WH but they were not really interested. I have been collecting my Record and Stanley planes for over 50 years and I have never felt the need to protect the surfaces even after periodically re flattening the soles and sides, but I have never had rust on them like that which I found on the Luban. Most disappointing was how far into the metal the pits had gone. The other thing is that older cast iron is much better than that used on more recent tools. What I do know for sure is that Chinese metal rarely meet the specifications they apply and many times materials which have failed in service have been found to have been sourced from China. One classic case is Chinese Stainless steel which will often stain and pit and when tested will often be just outside the specification. At the end of the day I do appreciate the engineering quality of the Quangsheng planes which straight out of the box are far better than most Stanleys and Records. I only purchased the No 3 as it was the only plane I didn't have and there were very few old ones available. The thing is I have all the planes I need now so I am unlikely to purchase further Quangshengs. I just wanted to warn people that this is an issue and one which has put me off for good. I love using the No 3 but it does disappoint that the sole and sides are tarnished and way too deep to polish out. I do smother it in Camelia oil now that I know the problem. The other thing is that as these planes are so beautifully machined any flaws do stand out more. Keep up the good work. Regards Dave
@@davidjennings9253 Thanks for the well thought out response. My degree is in materials engineering so I'm fully aware of the quality control standards in China. They are getting better though, and with Quangsheng in particular, they have been focusing on continuous improvement and design as fundamental attributes for the company in recent years... At least, as far as I can tell from what I've read. They've been working closely with British and American companies to improve their quality. I have read that older models were not quite up to par, but the modern ones are significantly better. I have 7 of their planes in my tool cabinet and have not had an issue with any of them. It does seem odd at first glance that they would choose steel over cast iron, but the reality of the situation is that is makes no real difference, and if the steel is manufactured properly, it is far less likely to fracture if anything untoward were to occur. Regardless, not everyone has the trust in them as a manufacturer yet, but going from old samples is a little unfair in this situation. They are every bit as good as the veritas tools I have, but at a fraction of the price. Also, as a retired engineer, you will realise that any ferrous material will rust if there is oxygen and an electrolyte present, unless the material is protected from one or both. It doesn't matter how high the quality of the metal is, it will rust. Your old cast iron will have a patina from both age and the sweat and grease from your hands from the past few decades of use.
@@MatthewSmall Hi Matthew - Thanks for your reply I do appreciate what you are saying and I would probably give them another chance if I needed another plane, but I have other things to worry about for now. Shortly after receiving your reply the heavens opened and my village was hit with a deluge that we have never seen the like of before and we have lived here for 32 years. It burst through our front door and flooded our lounge and dining room. My workshop also got flooded but luckily only 20mm deep so most things were above that, including my bench complete with all my hand tools. However, I will now have to go around all my machine tables and tools with a healthy dose on Camelia oil to protect everything whilst the floor dries out. It never rains but it pours!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! regards Dave
@@davidjennings9253 it's a bugger that you got flooded. A few days ago we had the hardest rain I've seen in more than 20 years. I was sure we were going to flood but thankfully, it stopped before that happened.
