What happened to the value of MF planes.

http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=6113572958&ssPageName=ADM
E:B:EOAS:US:3

Watch the word wrap. I don't know how to ues tiny url's.

Bill Rittner
R & B ENTERPRISES
Manchester, CT

"Don't take this life too seriously.......nobody gets out alive!" (unknown)

Bill and All,

I can't speak for others, but this is the later MF production that was not
really up to their quality standard and was, I believe, the lower priced
Value line.  The only Value line plane I like and use is the block plane I
call Montana Mouth.  It has *huge* mouth and yet works beautifully.

Just my opinion.

Bruce Z.
Kearney, MO

Bill asked:
> What happened to the value of MF planes.

What happened to the value of MF planes?

The plane in question is an economy class, rather than a premium plane. The
example pictured is better than some of the worst Stanley Handyman models,
but is by no means as good as the premium M-F planes from 1928 to the early
1960s.

A lot of the economy class M-F planes sell for more on eBay than they would
at a tool meet. At about $15 this one would be pretty much at value. The no.
814 and no. 900, while ok for standard carpentry work, were the bottom of
the line. There were also middle grade planes, such as the no. 90 and no.
140, which, in a rational world, command somewhat higher prices than the 814
and 900.

Randy Roeder    Repaint houses, not old tools

On 26 Aug 2004 at 11:32, Steve Reynolds wrote:

> The quality stuff is selling, and it is selling for good bucks. Look
> at the Buck Rogers planes, they are off to infinity and beyond. Good
> examples of the rarities are selling well and I think may be
> outperforming the general classification of tools. Common stuff in
> common condition goes
for average prices. However, Randy shares may observation about SOME of
the economy class tools selling for more on the bay than in tool meets
or fleamarkets. If they look cool, they are selling on ebay for
hard-to-understand prices, and this calls into question that quality
axiom. Maybe the quality here is the looks and not the performance? My
problem is now that I have decided to acquire a few, they have
disappeared from the fleamarket. Gotta get to a tool meet soon.

Considering that most sellers on duh bay can't even spell Millers Falls
correctly, it doen't surprise me that they can't distinguish between the
normal bench planes (named for their length) and the cheapo value line
stuff. If you don't know what you're doing, you end up paying too much.
"Oh, I heard Millers Falls made good planes so this must be worth a lot"
despite it being a lowly 814, which wouldn't make it in the door of my
shop. The other MFs would just kick it right out again, and there are so
many of them that they wouldn't have any trouble either.

Not just having an MBA morning (that's Mr. Bad Attitude) but I saw one
listing strongly suggesting that Fulton planes are really good quality
stuff. Now, we know that Fulton planes were made by lots of good makers,
including my beloved Millers Falls. But good gracious people - it was
the lowest of the three lines sold by Sears, or at least the lower of
the two before Dunlap got invented by Mr. Dunlap of the Marketing
Department to fill a niche.

The ability to distinguish between high quality lines and economy
lines is clearly in somewhat short supply in the marketplace. No
offense to any new galoots who have not yet learned this stuff; we all
started out knowing essentially nothing. But it just goes to prove the
value of study.

-Ken, who paid way too much for his first bench plane dut to general
cluelessness at the time

Ken Greenberg (ken@c...) 667 Brush Creek Rd., Santa Rosa, CA 95404
http://www.calast.com/personal/ken/wood.htm Visit the oldtools book list
at http://www.calast.com/personal/ken/booklist.htm

Quality sells.

The corollary to that is that non-quality doesn't sell. Not that it
won't sell at all, but will sell for less, usually. I agree that the
plane in question didn't sell for much, but it didn't sell for less than
most handyman quality tools sell for (especially bench planes). I have
been observing the market for Millers Falls tools on the bay and have
some observations.

The quality stuff is selling, and it is selling for good bucks. Look at
the Buck Rogers planes, they are off to infinity and beyond. Good
examples of the rarities are selling well and I think may be
outperforming the general classification of tools. Common stuff in
common condition goes for average prices. However, Randy shares may
observation about SOME of the economy class tools selling for more on
the bay than in tool meets or fleamarkets. If they look cool, they are
selling on ebay for hard-to-understand prices, and this calls into
question that quality axiom. Maybe the quality here is the looks and
not the performance? My problem is now that I have decided to acquire a
few, they have disappeared from the fleamarket. Gotta get to a tool
meet soon.

Bottom line is that Millers Falls prices are just fine, and doing better
than fine in some areas. Thou must knowest thy areas.

Regards, Steve

-----Original Message----- From: Randall Roeder 
Subject: RE: [oldtools] Millers Falls Plane Value?

What happened to the value of MF planes?

The plane in question is an economy class, rather than a premium plane.
The example pictured is better than some of the worst Stanley Handyman
models, but is by no means as good as the premium M-F planes from 1928
to the early
1960s.

A lot of the economy class M-F planes sell for more on eBay than they
would at a tool meet.

Hi all
Ken suggests :
"I saw one listing strongly suggesting that
Fulton planes are really good quality stuff. Now, we
know that Fulton planes were made by lots of good
makers, including my beloved Millers Falls. But good
gracious people - it was the lowest of the three lines
sold by Sears, or at least the lower of the two before
Dunlap got invented by Mr. Dunlap of the Marketing
Department to fill a niche."

Every bit of printed matter I have suggests that all Sears planes
were marked "Fulton" at least for the early years (at least until the 1920's 
or later) and were made by Sargent. And although I am certainly much more a 
collector than user I believe that the early Sargent bench planes were solid, 
quality tools.
I guess what I am saying is that I would not write off anything with Fulton
on the label as second quality. And yes there are many Fulton marked planes 
that
are better left behind.
Regards
Chuck Zitur
Billings, MT

On Thursday, August 26, 2004, at 12:30  PM, Ken Greenberg wrote:

> Not just having an MBA morning (that's Mr. Bad
> Attitude) but I saw one listing strongly suggesting that
> Fulton planes are really good quality stuff. Now, we
> know that Fulton planes were made by lots of good
> makers, including my beloved Millers Falls. But good
> gracious people - it was the lowest of the three lines
> sold by Sears, or at least the lower of the two before
> Dunlap got invented by Mr. Dunlap of the Marketing
> Department to fill a niche.

Ken et al:

I have a Fulton (#5 jack) in my basement and it is a dead ringer for an 
M-F.  Has rosewood where rosewood ought to be,and the tote even looks 
and feels more  like a Stanley than those relatively straight M-F 
totes. The blade is even shaped like an M-F.  Doesn't appear to be any 
different anywhere.  The only ID on the whole plane is the Fulton on 
the blade.

Ed Minch

On Thursday, August 26, 2004, at 05:17  PM, Ed Minch wrote:
> I have a Fulton (#5 jack) in my basement and it is a dead ringer for 
> an M-F.  Has rosewood where rosewood ought to be,and the tote even 
> looks and feels more  like a Stanley than those relatively straight 
> M-F totes. The blade is even shaped like an M-F.  Doesn't appear to be 
> any different anywhere.  The only ID on the whole plane is the Fulton 
> on the blade.

	I have a Craftsman brand (i.e., the name Sears still uses for its 
tools) plane, from the era with the name in blocky letters in a 
blue-background oval on the lever cap.  Except for the lever cap being 
"waisted" like the Stanley design rather than straight-sided like most 
Millers Falls lever caps, the plane has the look of MF, down to the 
red-painted frog.  Tom Price, aka Dr. D-8, he of the shelf-o-planes, 
was visiting after an upstate New York Galoot Gathering at my place, 
back in the summer of '99 I b'lieve it was, and I showed him this 
plane.  He passed on a tidbit for identifying planes with other brand 
names but made by Millers Falls.  The givaway is a lozenge-shaped 
depression, maybe 3/8" long, cast into the underside of the frog, on 
each side, close to the top.  If your Fulton, Craftsman, or other 
brandname plane has those dimples in the casting, the word it that it 
was made my Millers Falls.
	HTH,
		Tom Holloway,
glad the baseboard is installed, and the furniture can be put back in 
its place.

  T&J Holloway wrote:

>  He passed on a tidbit for identifying planes with other brand names 
> but made by Millers Falls.  The givaway is a lozenge-shaped 
> depression, maybe 3/8" long, cast into the underside of the frog, on 
> each side, close to the top.  If your Fulton, Craftsman, or other 
> brandname plane has those dimples in the casting, the word it that it 
> was made my Millers Falls.

GG

i think a quick ID is attained by looking at the brass depth adjuster - 
Stanley, Sargent, and M-F all had distinctive shapes.

Ed Minch

	Well, yeah, sort of.  But to use this method you would already have to 
know what the various configurations of depth adjustors looked like, 
for comparison.  In case of the "Craftsman" (Sears) plane I wrote 
about, it has a depth adjuster nut that is not brass, but "white 
metal."  I have another MF plane with the same general design of hollow 
adjuster nut, but it is brass.  On other MF planes, the brass adjuster 
nut is not hollow, but "filled."  That is, they vary.
	For MF (and planes they made for others), the lozenge-shaped 
depressions in the back of the frog seem to be consistent, through 
older and newer, black paint or red.
		Tom Holloway

On Friday, August 27, 2004, at 03:57  PM, Michele Minch wrote:
> T&J Holloway wrote:
>
>>  He passed on a tidbit for identifying planes with other brand names 
>> but made by Millers Falls.  The givaway is a lozenge-shaped 
>> depression, maybe 3/8" long, cast into the underside of the frog, on 
>> each side, close to the top.  If your Fulton, Craftsman, or other 
>> brandname plane has those dimples in the casting, the word it that it 
>> was made my Millers Falls.
>
> GG
> i think a quick ID is attained by looking at the brass depth adjuster 
> - Stanley, Sargent, and M-F all had distinctive shapes.
>
> Ed Minch

OK, so maybe I didn't get in on the early part of this conversation and if
I'm duplicating what someone else said, please accept my apologies...  But
my main method of identifying Millers Falls planes when produced for the
mass marketers is two distinct characteristics of MF.  The raised portion
around the knob and the half turnover on the lateral.  I may be wrong, but I
feel this identifies the better made planes and if they made planes with any
other features, they just aren't the same quality.

Is it possible that Stanley or Sargent made the planes that have the double
folded lateral and the flat toe?  This has been my belief, but maybe I'm
wrong?  I know it is hard bor me to accept that possibility, but, well,
SWMBO says it does happen from time-to-time.

Bruce Z.
Kearney, MO

> On Friday, August 27, 2004, at 03:57  PM, Michele Minch wrote:
> > T&J Holloway wrote:
> >
> >>  He passed on a tidbit for identifying planes with other brand names
> >> but made by Millers Falls.  The givaway is a lozenge-shaped
> >> depression, maybe 3/8" long, cast into the underside of the frog, on
> >> each side, close to the top.  If your Fulton, Craftsman, or other
> >> brandname plane has those dimples in the casting, the word it that it
> >> was made my Millers Falls.

Bruce said:
  The raised portion
> > around the knob and the half turnover on the lateral.  I may be wrong,
but I
> > feel this identifies the better made planes and if they made planes with
any
> > other features, they just aren't the same quality.

Then Steve wrote:
>     The toe on Type 1 planes has the  "Millers Falls" cast into it.
> The successive types have the radiating ribs from the knob boss.  Both
> are unique and distinct, but the radiating ribs are not viewable until
> the knob  is removed.

I guess this is what I'm referring to.  The raised portion of the toe where
the knob sits has been consistent on the planes I've seen.  I would think it
would be cost-prohibitive to have a second casting that did not have this
raise.  I don't remove the knob to look for the ribs, just look around the
knob for the raised area.  I'm not disagreeing that the frog has the gap you
have all mentioned, just that if the plane in question I'm looking at
doesn't have the raised area, I dismiss it as a second rate plane.  And you
are absolutely on target that lateral levers do get changed over the years
and are not reliable indicators of manufacture. OTOH, there is always the
question in my mind if I want a plane that has had that much monkeying.  I
buy to use or resell.  As a user, it may have other problems, and as a
resale item, it loses value to the potential purchaser if not original.

Just my opinion, and that is worth what it cost you. (chuckle)

Bruce Z.
Kearney, MO
Who really enjoys the different points of view we have on the Porch.....

Bruce said:

>  But
> my main method of identifying Millers Falls planes when produced for the
> mass marketers is two distinct characteristics of MF.  The raised portion
> around the knob and the half turnover on the lateral.  I may be wrong, but I
> feel this identifies the better made planes and if they made planes with any
> other features, they just aren't the same quality.
>
> Is it possible that Stanley or Sargent made the planes that have the double
> folded lateral

    Laterals of all persuasions are out there.  The big boys made
planes to the specifications of hardware chains and the like for
resale. My observation is that lateral levers were sometimes changed.
Also, in the past hundered years, a lot of lateral levers were swapped
around to replace missing or broken ones.  Add on that some small time
makers used similar levers to those of the big boys.  That adds up, to
me, to be not so good an indicator of who made the plane.

 >and the flat toe?

    Whazzat den?

    The toe on Type 1 planes has the  "Millers Falls" cast into it.
The successive types have the radiating ribs from the knob boss.  Both
are unique and distinct, but the radiating ribs are not viewable until
the knob  is removed.  This can pose a problem for the prospective
buyer if the seller is reluctant for him to start unscrewing things
from his planes.  That is why the recognition of the frogs is such a
good technique.  It takes but a moment to site down the back and tell
if the frog belongs to the makers you are familiar with.  All it takes
is a little investment in time to fix these search targets in the old
cranial storage device.  I have the working assumption that the makers
changed a lot of things when they were the OEM, but changing the
castings would have been prohibitively expensive and they did not do
it.  Therefore, the frog and frog recievers stayed the same and are
the best test of manufacturer.

Regards,
Steve