There are two problems, as I see the matter.

First, I don’t think one should have to fix up a new, expensive tool like that.

Second, once flattened, variability remains an issue. One must reproduce the wheel tension that was in place during the flattening operation. Now, if the bed is reasonably stiff, then there would be a sufficient range of wheel tension that would retain the flatness without being unduly sensitive.

But Lee Valley is, in effect, acknowledging that the bed deflection is VERY sensitive to wheel tension: they suggest using the wheel tension as an auxiliary method to adjust the cutting depth! With all due respect to the wonderful folks at Lee Valley, I think that is a poor way to design a plane.

Why not just make the bed stiffer and much less sensitive to wheel tension? Then if the sole of a new plane needs a bit of attention, flatten it as David recommends, but knowing that then the sole will maintain its flatness through a reasonable range of wheel tension.

In short, the Veritas plane sole is simply TOO sensitive to deflection by pressure from the lever cap. It is a matter of degree.

And there is, to my mind, no advantage gained by the more flexible 15° bed.

I think they should redesign the bed of an otherwise excellent tool. Some time ago, I had an amicable conversation about the whole matter with a major person at Lee Valley but the person did not agree with me. (I say “person” to keep a private conversation private.)

Rob

For what it’s worth, David Charlesworth recommends setting a shoulder plane to appropriate compression/deflection, but with the blade withdrawn, and then lapping it for a few strokes on a fine abrasive. That way the deflected metal is removed and it will be flat when under compression/deflection. I tried this and it wasn’t much removal at all, but it was at least a shaving’s thickness — so something that definitely is worth doing.

Hope this is an interesting idea!