The Ethics of Buying Tools

Unmistakeably Veritas and unmistakeably Clifton

This is a rather incendiary area of woodworking. And while nobody has asked for my opinion on this, I’m going to share it anyway.

Anyone that’s been around woodworking for a while will know there are great tools being made to very high standards. A few companies you might be familiar with are Clifton, Veritas, Lie-Nielsen, Woodpeckers etc.

Those brands and others just like them, began making tools as an antidote to the decline and eventual failure of stalwarts such as Stanley and Record to produce tools that were fit for use. Sure, there were, and still are, an almost never ending supply of quality used tools, but there was a void for those people that wanted new.

Some companies chose to take very close inspiration from previous manufacturers. Lie-Nielsen’s bench planes are a version of the ill fated Bedrock line of Stanley planes and are proudly made to high standards in Maine USA. They have a huge range of other tools as well.

Others chose to try and be original thinkers. Veritas have a much more contemporary feel to their designs although some of their DNA is still derived from the past. Veritas make most of their woodworking tools in Canada.

The bevel up jack is a used purchase and needs work. Veritas tools are distinct and unique.

I think we all understand pretty clearly that manufacturing in “Western Countries” is expensive. And that’s represented in the prices you have to pay for the tools made in the west. For example, £300 for one smoothing plane. That’s a lot. It’s fair though. That’s the cost of making things in the West. But it’s an expensive purchase that not everyone can make.

For a good while, that’s how the landscape looked. Expensive well made tools and the used market. During this time, magazines, journalists and bloggers really started to pour fuel on the fire. Articles and information were presented that the new “Premium Tools” as they became known, were far superior than anything that had come before.

This overlaid with the same people using these premium tools within their articles, blogs and lifestyle pieces. It wasn’t long before these same people were presenting project or instructional videos for some of the tool companies. This was not a conspiracy to sell more tools. It was I think all very well meaning stuff. A tight nit group, all working together.

But in my opinion they had created a serious problem. The impression given was that if you don’t have these tools then you’re doomed. If you don’t have “flat backs” (a silly term that means nothing) to your chisels they won’t work. Tang chisels split. Plastic handles are too heavy. A Stanley No.4 is too light and will chatter etc, etc. All nonsense but I understand if you’re all confirming each others bias, this can happen.

People that have the recourses and those that only buy tools with the right cachet keet the the whole train moving forward. This is a fine thing.

And then things changed. The establishment (not meant negatively) had created FOMO (fear of missing out). People couldn’t always afford the Lie-Nielsen option so a new alternative emerged. After all, you need a bedrock right? If you don’t you won’t be like your woodworking heroes! The Wood River planes were the first alternatives. These versions of Bedrock planes are made in China and for about half the cost of a Lie-Nielsen.

This is where the topic becomes very controversial, but let’s pause. The reality is that hand tools are mainly an evolution. Example. When Record started making planes in the 1930’s, the parts were completely interchangeable with Stanley planes of the same era. Even the Marples, I.Sorby versions were merely paint jobs and branding. They were all based on the Bailey pattern and shared the same silhouette.

Perfect planes that work as well as any modern plane. The only difference is a paintjob.

Back to Wood River. Understandably many people were angry about the modern situation where Bedrock planes were now made in China. Many felt sure that Wood River’s bench planes are just close copies of Lie-Nielsen (you can research and decide for yourself). From my understanding there is more to this particular story but I’ll park it there.

One thing I find very amusing is some of the people who were/are most vociferous about this issue have committed the same sin that angered them so, but in furniture form. They even have the brass neck to say their version of the piece is not historically correct and not even a close copy when it blatantly it appears near the same. They should be honest and say their item of furniture was as near copy and paste as the tools they seem to detest.

Even with some tools. The celebrated Tite-Mark is an evolution from Jim Kingshott’s gauge shown in “Making and Modifying Woodworking Tools”. I’m not saying Glen Drake didn’t work hard, I’m not saying he did anything wrong. But I see no mention anywhere from any retailer about the genesis of the design. Anyway, I digress.

There was never any issue for Clifton, even though they used the Bedrock system. Partly because they are a much smaller player, but mainly I think because their offering at least looks different. And I think that’s the bit that rubs people up the wrong way.

I admire Clifton for this. They avoided mistake by creating their own identity. Their tools have the same general silhouette as classic versions, but they are clearly their own brand.

Although it’s a bedrock pattern plane, Clifton created a unique identity, not an exact copy.

Ultimately, as a tool seller, unless your design is registered as unique, patented and you’ve enough time and money to pay lawyers and monitor the market, at some point there will be something in the market you’re not happy with.

If Wood River were smart, they would have tweaked the look and detailing just a bit. After all, there isn’t much you can tweak on a template that’s been around in different guises for 150 years or so, but it can be done. And let’s face it, those that can afford domestic or want the cachet won’t buy Wood River. But creating their own identity should have been their top priority. But, mistakes are made. They made some changes. When they added their block planes, shoulder planes and side rebate planes they patterned them after different tools so they look “Wood River”. From a purely functional standpoint Wood River and their derivatives work perfectly well.

Ultimately, you’ll need to be the judge of what you buy any why. It’s not my job to preach heavily on the rights and wrongs of hand tool purchasing. The world has bigger problems and I trust you to make choices you are comfortable with. But, and there is a but, things have taken another step forward.

YouTubers (again, not a dig, I make videos too) and people who have large social media followings want to earn more money. There’s nothing wrong with this! Improving one’s situation is an excellent goal. But, how do you want to do it? Wood River is a lesson that should have been learned by now, but I think those same mistakes are being repeated.

There’s a router plane doing the rounds at the moment that looks very similar to a Veritas casting and handle proportions sold under the “Katz-Moses” brand. You can get the same tool via Ali Express and Dictum in Europe but without the Katz-Moses branding. What’s different here is you get someone who appears made for presenting a shopping channel hawking their product.

The product is different to the Veritas, the adjustment mechanism being the most clear difference. But to me it looks too similar. I feel Katz-Moses made a mistake. People would buy his router plane regardless of how it looked. It didn’t need to be totally original but Katz-Moses could at least “do a Clifton” or learn the lesson from Wood River and create your own identity.

What’s curious with the Katz-Moses router plane is that it’s near the same price as the Veritas. I think buyers should be careful here. I’ve never met Katz-Moses and I’m unlikely to, but those seeking cachet, you want to have a Katz-Moses? Those wanting known resale value (Veritas and Lie-Nielsen will often go for more second hand) would you want a Katz-Moses? And to claim the tool makers of the Katz-Moses contraption are the “best of our time” is at best subjective with very little proof.

As mentioned, it’s your money. I’m not here to judge. You spend how you wish and chose freely what works well in your situation. The truth can be found from practical people that have decades of experience, not lifestyle bloggers. It can also be found with people who actually make things, not shopping channel/infomercials masquerading as woodworking content.

Me? I overwhelmingly prefer old used tools. They come from practical people who knew what was effective in practical situations. But I own and use tools made domestically and in the East.

Oh, my router plane? Veritas.