Esteemed Galoots,
   I was in Ohio over the 4th and got in a minimal amount of tool hunting.  I
did hit one antique mall and found a Millers Falls plane that fits the Type 1
description according to Randy Roeder's type study.  The plane is only in
good condition since it has a small chip from the top of the horn and maybe
only 50% of the japanning left.  What caught my eye was the presence of a
cast Y-lever.  My other M-F planes all have stamped steel Y-levers.  A second
feature, which may be more significant, is the presence of the two-part,
hinged lever cap without a patent date.  I have not seen another
Millers-Falls plane with the hinged lever cap that did not have the patent
date "pat. no. 1822520" stamped on the front of the lever cap.  The "PAT
APLD. FOR" is cast into the back of the lever cap as with later examples.
 Thus, I assume that Millers-Falls produced some planes prior to issuance of
the patent or very close in time to the patent date.  A third feature is the
presence of "Millers Falls" cast into the bed in a semi-circle around the
base of the front knob. A fourth feature is the lack of the model number
stamp in the side of the casting.  The othe M-F planes I have seen have the
model number (say 'Millers Falls No 14C') stamped into the side of the plane
low on the left side.  This plane has "No 14" cast into the bed behind the
tote.  Although it has a corrugated sole, it is not indicated in the model
number (similar to Stanleys).  Later M-F planes did indicate the presence of
a corrugated sole in the model number.  I would like to know if anyone else
out there has a M-F plane generally matching this description.  This one is a
14C; the number 9's share the same lever-cap size. As you ramble through the
highways and byways in the never-ending hunt for old tools, please be on the
lookout for other examples of Type 1 M-F planes as I have described.  I am
trying to get a sense of how common they may be.

I have become a fan of M-F bench planes.  Perhaps this is because I usually
root for the underdog or I like things that are a bit different from the
norm.  The ones I have work well and I have not been disappointed thus far.
 I wouldn't trade my Type 4 9C for anything.  It is a fine tool.  Although
they resorted to stamped steel parts for the Y-lever and the lateral
adjuster, they stuck with the old style frog design (as in the Type 9
Stanleys) right up to the bitter end.  My Type 9 M-F #9 (1960's) has a
generous (and flat) milled surface on the frog at a time when the equivalent
Stanleys had changed the frog design to reduce the necessary milling.  The
lateral adjuster, although it looks a bit cheaper than the older Stanley
designs, is better made and more attractive than the butt-ugly stamped
adjusters on later Stanley planes.  They never did produce a straight clone
of the Stanley design.  They added the innovation of the hinged lever cap and
the planes were different in other, more subtle, ways.  Besides, the hinged
lever cap with the 'Millers Falls' cast into a semi-circle is just plain
cool.
****************************
Tom Price (TomPrice@a...)
Still A User Who Is In Grave Danger Of Becoming A Millers-Falls Plane
Collector