Removing paint over clear coat

[RVA]

Mates,

My dad is giving me this vintage Stanley hand plane. I would like to remove the paint without damaging the underlying finish so as to preserve its vintage character. What is the safest way to do this?

Thank you for any guidance. 

 

[Bizman62]

That can be a tough one as the old plane handles often were finished with shellac. And we all know that shellac works with most every finish available so the blue paint most likely is properly stuck. It would help a bit to know what type of paint that is to choose a solvent to remove it but as shellac dilutes to both alcohol and acetone those are mostly out of question. Xylene might work for the paint without reacting with shellac but you never know. Any chemical may remove more than you'd want to. If you try any solvent or paint remover, don't let it go through all layers. Instead be alert to flush the handles to stop the reaction when you get a start and go with elbow grease from there on.

The original finish might also be nitrocellulose lacquer as it became widely used in industry after its invention in 1921.

So scraping might be the best option at least when it comes to detail work. A plastic scraper might be gentler than a steel one, they even make razor blade type scrapers out of plastic but any piece of plexi should work.

All that said, at least the knob looks like there's no finish left on the top. Also in my experience the original finish tends to flake which makes it very uncomfortable to use as you can get a shard of it under your skin. Thus when I restored four Stanley planes last summer I removed the flaky finish and even used some solvents to get rid of the tiniest chips. I then used some sandpaper/abrasive felt to smoothen the surface, applied some dye to make the pale wood look like rosewood and finished with a few coats of my self mixed TruOil. Guess that's close enough to the original finish. Something I noticed during the process was that even after having sanded the surface smooth and clean the wood felt somewhat impregnated with something that didn't let the dye in. That makes me suspect that the handles have originally been treated with Boiled Linseed Oil or Tung Oil which has filled the outermost cells and sealed the surface. Or maybe even with their own mix of oil and lacquer because that's what Tru or Danish Oil is, BLO/Tung-oil mixed with resin (nowadays poly but originally resin from conifers) and turpentine. Anyhow, the wooden parts can't be peeled to reveal a flawless original finish as parts of it have worn off so refinishing is the best option if you're going to use the tool. The blue paint tells that the original finish had already worn off to the level of sending chips to your palms which also means there won't be much left of the water decal in the rear handle - if there was any in the first place.

Just so you know, the black stuff on the cast iron isn't paint, it's BLO and asphalt which has been baked on the surface. The same finish was used for T model Fords and Singer sewing machines.

 

 

[henrim]

Stanley No. 5 has been made about 150 years now. Although on a quick look they may all look the same, there have been a wide variety of finishes and materials in use. And quality has not always been the same. I’m not deep in to the subject as I’m not a Stanley man myself, but as I have understood they can be dated quite accurately by studying the casting markings and so on. I would start there if I was going to restore the plane. If against all odds, it turned out to be a golden era specimen, I would think twice before proceeding with restoration. If it was from not-so-desirable era, I would just strip all the finish layers and re-coat with whatever clear coat I happened to have in hand. I think it would still make a decent jack plane for fast wood hogging. 

[RVA]

Thank you gentlemen. I guess further inspection is needed. I will post more pics.

[RVA]

I found this video showing amazing results from a mix of three commercially available products.. Unlikely that the finish on the Stanley is the same as this car,, but interesting nonetheless.. 

 

 

[Bizman62]

4 hours ago, henrim said:

I’m not a Stanley man myself, but as I have understood they can be dated quite accurately by studying the casting markings and so on.

That's true only for Made in USA Stanley planes, those made in GB or Australia are more Frankensteinish regarding their details.

The video is interesting but as they say and stress at 1:30 you can only use that method on a clearcoated surface. The clearcoat of cars is most likely 2k poly or at least acryl/alkyd lacquer, not nitro or shellac. That said, as the handles already are "ruined" with the blue paint you won't be doing much further damage by accidentally stripping some of the original finish.

Three of my four Stanleys were made in England made so I wasn't too worried about saving the original crackled finish. The fourth one is a US made from 1925-28 but as the handles apparently weren't original I didn't care about saving their finish either. The story of that one: https://www.projectguitar.com/forums/topic/55200-restoration-of-an-old-hand-plane/?do=findComment&comment=635001 p.  There's another restoration story by @curtisa: https://www.projectguitar.com/forums/topic/53060-stanley-handplane-restoration/?do=findComment&comment=596904

 

[RVA]

7 minutes ago, Bizman62 said:

That's true only for Made in USA Stanley planes, those made in GB or Australia are more Frankensteinish regarding their details.

The video is interesting but as they say and stress at 1:30 you can only use that method on a clearcoated surface. The clearcoat of cars is most likely 2k poly or at least acryl/alkyd lacquer, not nitro or shellac. That said, as the handles already are "ruined" with the blue paint you won't be doing much further damage by accidentally stripping some of the original finish.

Three of my four Stanleys were made in England made so I wasn't too worried about saving the original crackled finish. The fourth one is a US made from 1925-28 but as the handles apparently weren't original I didn't care about saving their finish either. The story of that one: https://www.projectguitar.com/forums/topic/55200-restoration-of-an-old-hand-plane/?do=findComment&comment=635001 p.  There's another restoration story by @curtisa: https://www.projectguitar.com/forums/topic/53060-stanley-handplane-restoration/?do=findComment&comment=596904

 

Thanks for the advice. I am looking forward to reading those threads.

 

This plane will be used, not sold, so I will do my best to make it attractive and comfortable. I will post pics as I go. 

[henrim]

4 minutes ago, Bizman62 said:

That's true only for Made in USA Stanley planes, those made in GB or Australia are more Frankensteinish regarding their details.

Ok, good to know.

5 minutes ago, Bizman62 said:

The fourth one is a US made from 1925-28 but as the handles apparently weren't original I didn't care about saving their finish either.

That’s how it goes. Old tools can be a bit like the ship of Theseus. Although the sole in your plane is probably original

[RVA]

Well, I jumped all over the Stanley tonight as soon as I got it. Since I gave up on the underlying finish, I am taking the handle down to bare wood. There is some nice grain there. 

 

[RVA]

Oh, bonus plane! My dad gave me an old Sargent plane too, also with blue paint

 

 

[Bizman62]

Just out of curiosity, have you tried to estimate the age of the Stanley? I know it's less than a hundred years old since it has the raised ring in the front but the lateral adjustment lever looks odd. This is the simplest tool I know of to identify US Stanleys: https://woodandshop.com/identify-stanley-hand-plane-age-type-study/

It seems Sargent planes are quite well documented as well: https://www.sargent-planes.com/sargent-plane-type-study/

[RVA]

3 hours ago, Bizman62 said:

Just out of curiosity, have you tried to estimate the age of the Stanley? I know it's less than a hundred years old since it has the raised ring in the front but the lateral adjustment lever looks odd. This is the simplest tool I know of to identify US Stanleys: https://woodandshop.com/identify-stanley-hand-plane-age-type-study/

It seems Sargent planes are quite well documented as well: https://www.sargent-planes.com/sargent-plane-type-study/

Thank you. That flowchart is very helpful for the Stanley.  The  "Made in USA" puts it after 1930, but I have to inspect it more closely with the chart on front of me to be more precise. 

As you said, the Sargent was easier.  It appears to have been made between 1920-1940, I think.

 

Edited February 11 by RVA

[RVA]

The wood seems to be Brazilian rosewood. I a, going to try to seal it with Tru-oil and see if it cures properly. I will start with a test area.

[RVA]

Good Stanley plane history video

 

 

[Bizman62]

3 hours ago, RVA said:

That flowchart is very helpful for the Stanley. 

Oh yes, they do have a flowchart. I've used the interactive version more as it makes you to concentrate on one step at a time without fear of getting lost to another lineage.

[RVA]

It is a type 16 1933- 1941. Pretty cool 

 

https://woodandshop.com/identify-stanley-hand-plane-age-type-study/stanley-bailey-type-16-hand-plane-1933-1941/

[Bizman62]

Cool indeed. Did you notice that the photo on the page is not the plane in question?!? There's no rib on the toe and heel. Had to double check and found this little plethora of Stanley plane information: https://www.timetestedtools.net/2016/01/27/stanley-type-16/  . According to that there's something that don't match with your plane: The size of model 16 should be in the front and the Made in USA should be in the rear section. And it should read Bailey behind the front knob. Strange... Not saying you're wrong, though, as it could be a Frankie with bits and pieces from other planes. Or a wartime "use what's in the stock" model.

 

[RVA]

8 hours ago, Bizman62 said:

Cool indeed. Did you notice that the photo on the page is not the plane in question?!? There's no rib on the toe and heel. Had to double check and found this little plethora of Stanley plane information: https://www.timetestedtools.net/2016/01/27/stanley-type-16/  . According to that there's something that don't match with your plane: The size of model 16 should be in the front and the Made in USA should be in the rear section. And it should read Bailey behind the front knob. Strange... Not saying you're wrong, though, as it could be a Frankie with bits and pieces from other planes. Or a wartime "use what's in the stock" model.

 

I did see that. I attributed that to the fact that there is a significant date range and they may have changed as to the particulars. I could not find any type that fit my specs precisely. I even looked on E-Bay.  At this point, I am willing to take their word for it!

[Bizman62]

17 minutes ago, RVA said:

I could not find any type that fit my specs precisely.

Being not able to see all the specs I tried the good old hit or miss method, meaning I chose what I could see and looked at all the options and you're right, it doesn't seem to fit precisely. Let's assume it's a type 16 from '39 to '41, that would explain a lot as it's a known fact that the wartime models had all sorts of modifications to save materials.

Has the lateral adjustment lever been repaired? It looks like there's a hard solder joint and the shape sure isn't standard.

[RVA]

A very good catch!  There is no obvious repair there. I will hunt around and see if I can find any other Stanley with that lateral adjustment lever

[Bizman62]

The frog looks like a Stanley starting from Type 16, the "ogee" type with the holes instead of being flat. So it's definitely not any earlier version. Lots of information about the changes type 16 introduced here: https://youtu.be/cBpOQn69lIA?feature=shared.

That lever sure looks odd, I tried to find a similar one but no cigar. Stanley seems to have done it with a separate thumb piece hammered into a square slot until 1962 when they changed it into a bent one similar to your Sargent.

Doesn't this Union lever look similar to yours? Stanley bought Union in the early 1920's and used their stock as long as it lasted. At least there's the washer with a rivet and another rivet right above it:

[RVA]

7 hours ago, Bizman62 said:

The frog looks like a Stanley starting from Type 16, the "ogee" type with the holes instead of being flat. So it's definitely not any earlier version. Lots of information about the changes type 16 introduced here: https://youtu.be/cBpOQn69lIA?feature=shared.

That lever sure looks odd, I tried to find a similar one but no cigar. Stanley seems to have done it with a separate thumb piece hammered into a square slot until 1962 when they changed it into a bent one similar to your Sargent.

Doesn't this Union lever look similar to yours? Stanley bought Union in the early 1920's and used their stock as long as it lasted. At least there's the washer with a rivet and another rivet right above it:

 

Thank you for the search and the pic. 

It does look similar, as if mine was that version but twisted. The twist could have been caused by a woodworker frustrated by a board that fought back!!

[Bizman62]

5 hours ago, RVA said:

It does look similar, as if mine was that version but twisted.

So yours has a twist downwards as well? I saw those too but yours looked straight in the picture so I let it be. But here it is: https://mvflaim.com/2021/03/13/oddball-smoothing-plane/

As many planes are more or less copies of the same design many parts can be interchangeable. Your frog sure looks like a Stanley Type 16 and up but the lever may have broken and been replaced.

[henrim]

Fascinating stuff.

That twisted adjuster is a brilliant design, in terms of cost-effectiveness. Simple to make and uses only one piece of material. Not the most elegant solution but does the job just fine. Could it be that they reverted to a simple and cost efficient design during the war time? Don't know, but there is a whole page about lateral adjusters here:
https://www.timetestedtools.net/2016/01/26/quickly-identify-your-hand-plane/

[RVA]

5 hours ago, Bizman62 said:

So yours has a twist downwards as well? I saw those too but yours looked straight in the picture so I let it be. But here it is: https://mvflaim.com/2021/03/13/oddball-smoothing-plane/

As many planes are more or less copies of the same design many parts can be interchangeable. Your frog sure looks like a Stanley Type 16 and up but the lever may have broken and been replaced.

Good find! Mine also has a seat for the tote like Stanley, the Stanley lever cap, the lip in the front and back, and a Stanley blade (FWIW). I think you may be right about the lever replacement. The only other major discrepancy is the Made In USA placement. I have still not found a Stanley with this behind the front knob.