I'm curious about the potential downsides of using a Stanley Defiance Plane. Specifically, what should I be aware of in terms of quality and performance compared to other models?
3 Answers
Honestly, the Defiance isn't on par with the flagship Stanley models from the same timeframe. I had a Defiance No. 5 as my first plane, and while it did the job, I find I rarely use it these days—I've switched to a transitional plane as my go-to for heavier tasks. It's functional but just not as nice overall.
One major downside is that your fellow hand tool enthusiasts might give you a hard time about using a Defiance instead of a classic Bailey. It's like an unspoken rule among some that anything less than a certain standard just doesn't cut it. But hey, as long as you're getting the job done, right?
Haha, it's true! I get some side-eye for my choice in planes too, but I care more about practicality than prestige.
The Stanley Defiance Plane is designed as a more budget-friendly option, which means the materials might be cheaper. For instance, the wood used for the handle may not be top-notch like you’d find on other higher-end planes. Also, the casting tends to be thinner, making it lighter, which might not be ideal for everyone. I've noticed that the frogs aren't machined with the same care as the classic Baileys, which can lead to performance issues, especially with some models that have too much flex in their irons, causing chatter when in use.
I feel you on that! The transitional planes do have their perks. I'm still fond of my Defiance for light tasks, though.