Pfeil Chisels

[michael case]

Hi to all Neanderthals,

I'm a powertool guy to be sure. But, I do use bench chisels, mostly to square up mortises or to pare tenons to fit. I have had a set of Two Cherry chisels for a couple of years now. Following advice from you knowing Neander guys I made sure I ground passed the initial edge. They have all had their initial edges well removed. They have been given good hollow grinds on a Tormek and received a secondary bevel bevel on a 6000 Japanese waterstone at 30 degrees. I also got rid of that lacquer coating on the bottom and lapped them flat to 6000 grit. So they are sharp and true. Getting them sharp is not the problem. I'm just not happy with the edge retention. I'm just not doing too well with this. I bought several Sorby registered chisels earlier for good money and their edges just roll over. The Two Cherrys seem better, but they are not great. I like Two Cherry's balance and length. What I'm looking for is a similar Westrern chisel that will hold an edge better than the Two Cherrys. I was thinking of getting a set of Pfeil bench chisels. Any opinions on this? Any advice would be appreciated. Thanks.

[Curt Putnam]

Budget? Reasons for wanting a set as opposed to the few sizes you actually use? The Narex bench chisels from Lee Valley are getting good reviews. I bought my son a set but have not used them myself. Japanese chisels are noted for edge retention (at least the better ones.) If you can spend the money look at the offerings from Blue Spruce and Tools for Working Wood. If you decide Japanese look good, give a shout to Stu Tierny (on this board.) You might also want to wait until the new offerings from LV become available. It seems that they will be made from more exotic steels that promise much greater edge life.

[Rick Fisher]

If you like western style, Blue Spruce are fantastic.. I got mine from the best things.. The acrylic infused handles are stunning and more than tough enough ..

[Russell Sansom]

I suggest you buy a single "touchstone" chisel in a size you'll use. A Lie-Nielsen A-2 dovetail chisel would be my ultimate suggestion. This is a sure thing that won't take more than a few minutes of work on the back to get ready for use. This will show you exactly what is the state of the art. There are a few more that are almost guaranteed to be the best steel out there: The Blue Spruce and Barrs, for instance.


Once you teach yourself how the best steel behaves you can explore the minor league chisels if you want to. I'm not sure why you'd want to, but I'm always curious and have couple sets of myself. Iles and thirty year-old Marples to name a couple. The Two-cherries are a step below those ( I just ditched a set on Ebay recently. I stood at the door and whispered good riddance when the UPS guy took them away. From my point of view, your perceptions and dissatisfaction are right on the money.

George likes the Pfeils but curses the handles.

[Jack Curtis]

I suggest you buy a single "touchstone" chisel in a size you'll use. A Lie-Nielsen A-2 dovetail chisel would be my ultimate suggestion. This is a sure thing that won't take more than a few minutes of work on the back to get ready for use. This will show you exactly what is the state of the art....

Tell me you took at least one class from a former Canadian LN rep. Those are the only people I know of who proclaim LN A-2 chisels are the best, made of the best steel, etc. It may be true that A-2 edges hold better than other western edges; but they are harder to sharpen unless you have particular stones and don't necessarily take the sharpest edge.

In my opinion, pure carbon edges take the best edges which last long enough when made properly. LN is a great vendor, but I think they've made a mistake on their chisel edges.

Jack

[Jack Curtis]

...I was thinking of getting a set of Pfeil bench chisels. Any opinions on this?...

I have a tiny set of Pfeil carving chisels, which I like a lot, take great edges and keep them, but there's no pounding involved. I don't have any of their bench chisels, nor are these my favorite carving chisels (try Dastra and Takahashi). I like Two Cherries bench chisels quite a bit; but not nearly as well as my Japanese chisels from various makers.

I recommend buying one or two chisels from various makers before deciding.

Jack

[John Coloccia]

I really like their new bench chisels. So does the director of our local woodworking school here. I have a set of LN bench chisels that I bought a while ago, but if I had to do it again today I would buy the Pfiels.

If you're going to buy Japanese chisels, do yourself a favor. Talk to Stu. The only thing worse than a cheap western chisel is a cheap Japanese chisel.

[Dale Cruea]

I own a set of Pfeil bench chisels. They are better than the other set I had. The hold an edge OK I think.
My main problem is that they are metric.
I think the Pfeil chisels are better for paring then pounding on.

[Jim Belair]

I have Two Cherries/ Hirsch and have no complaints about their edge retention (and didn't take any extra steps to remove initial edge). I can't say I've used them much on the more exotic woods but they work perfectly fine for me chopping dovetails or whatever on any of the domestic hardwoods.

Jim B

[Rick Fisher]

My main problem is that they are metric.


That sounds really funny...

[Bill Houghton]

That sounds really funny...

Hey, come on...the poor guy has to buy metric lumber now!

A lot of people find their work is more efficient if tools that work related joints - e.g., mortise and tenon - are sized to complement each other. Metric tools are often ever so slightly different in size from imperial/inch tools.

[Dale Cruea]

Hey guys, don't pick on me. :p

The chisels are not standard sizes. You usually have to use a smaller sized chisel to do the work.

And I do buy metric lumber but is doesn't help.

[george wilson]

I screwed up,and planed some wood half way between metric and inch!!!! What to do now???:):):)

[James Owen]

I have a set of older style (bought 4-6 years ago) Pfeil chisels. I like them quite a bit. They get nice and sharp, are easy to sharpen, and have very good edge retention. The only real negative, in my eyes, is that they are metric, but for most of the projects that I've used them for, metric vs Imperial hasn't mattered. Some people find the handles uncomfortable, but they fit my hands very well.

If Imperial sizes are important, take a look at the Ashley Iles bench chisels. Very nice, easy sharpen-ability, and excellent edge retention.

Henry Taylor also makes high-quality (Imperial-sized) bench chisels -- very similar to the Ashley Iles in quality.

Lie Nielsen makes excellent bench chisels. They're available in A-2 or O-1, so you can pick whichever steel you prefer.

The L-N and the Iles bevel edge chisels have very narrow bevel edges, allowing you to get into tight areas without damaging the wood. The Pfeils have thicker edged bevels, but still very usable. I don't know about the Henry Taylor bevel edge thickness, as the only H. Taylor chisels I've used are their socket firmer style timber framing chisels. All of them are reasonably flat -- the L-Ns are probably the best in this regard -- so you'll expend a minimum of time and effort in getting them prepped for use.

The L-Ns are running about $55 each, while the Pfeil, Iles, and H. Taylor generally run about $25 to $45 each, depending on the specific size of the chisel.

Having owned or used chisels from the above four manufacturers, I can recommend any of them them as high-quality, life-time tools that you will enjoy using.

[David Weaver]

Do you turn at all, could you turn handles?

I would buy some chisels of the earlier stanley types or older. Even the later stanley chisels I have (probably 40s) do pretty well.

I had hirsch chisels, I always thought they did OK, but no chisel is 100% consistent.

I like the LN chisels OK, but of what I have left of LN chisels (a couple of mortise chisels), I always feel like they're nice but not quite worth the price when it comes to chisels. Everyone gets to make that decision on their own, and to the person who has zero interest in prep of tools and likes pretty chisels, they may be well worth the price.

I personally would buy A2 steel for mortise chisels (like the LN's), but wouldn't want it on bench chisels where I want to be in the neighborhood of 25 degrees and be quick sharpening. That leaves you spending a big chunk on oil hardening steel chisels, which are out there in droves along with old water hardening steel (stanley, PS&W, buck ....).

That leaves me on vintage, which is what all but my japanese chisels are, and what seemed an issue (edge retention) at one time went away as I got faster at sharpening.

It's not critical whatever your decision is, all of the tools will work, and if you do many projects, the cost will pale in comparison to what it costs to get nice wood, hardware and finishing supplies.

[Ed Looney]

Jack
Why do I detect the resentment toward LN A2 chisels and a guy from Canada? It isn't just a guy in Maine or one from Canada recommending A2. Blue Spruce also produces superior chisels out of the same A2 steel. From my experience an edge that is easily produced is also easily dulled. Getting a super sharp edge on A2 isn't difficult if you get the right sharpening media.

Ed

[Jack Curtis]

...From my experience an edge that is easily produced is also easily dulled. Getting a super sharp edge on A2 isn't difficult if you get the right sharpening media.

My experience is very different. Maybe you, and several others are right, get the "right" media for sharpening A2. Fine. I already have sharpening media that works fine on carbon, which all my Japanese and vintage edges are made of. I see no reason to buy another whole set of sharpening media.

Jack

[Rick Fisher]

Most Imported chisels which claim to be " Imperial " are metric.. there is often a little waiver saying sizes are approx or close.. The US made stuff is imperial for sure.. cause .. well.. wood in the US only grows imperial.. Perhaps some metric trees will grow in the future... but .. um.. imagine the extra sku's at the hardwood store.. :)

[seth lowden]

Foreshadowed by the 1973 CITES treaty, ever since the 2008 Farm Bill amendment to the Lacey Act, it is actually criminal to work metric wood within the U.S. Prepare to be raided. :D

I have one Pfeil bench chisel, a 3/16 or so. One of my mentors said it was a must-have, his favorite, because it was one of the few narrow chisels with a low profile. It seems to hold an edge reasonably well, but the handles are downright fugly.

I had a set of early LN chisels, one of the first 100 they sold. I thought mine were O1. They were decent chisels. I sold them and now have Ashley Ilse MK2 chisels. I recently bought a set of Narex from LV, so I will sell the AI chisels. Next step I think will be to upgrade to Menard's Tool Shop chisel-shaped-objects.

[Jack Curtis]

Metric/imperial trees aside, I prefer working in metric because I don't enjoy working in fractions, and it seems like one mm is about as small as I need to go.

Jack

[David Weaver]

Jack
Why do I detect the resentment toward LN A2 chisels and a guy from Canada? It isn't just a guy in Maine or one from Canada recommending A2. Blue Spruce also produces superior chisels out of the same A2 steel. From my experience an edge that is easily produced is also easily dulled. Getting a super sharp edge on A2 isn't difficult if you get the right sharpening media.

Ed

I don't know if resentment is the right word. There is confusion among people who have experience with properly made plain carbon steel chisels as to why a steel with increased wear resistance is necessary in a chisel. Especially when it requires the user to add 5 or so degrees to the effective angle to resist chipout. Chisels don't fail from wear, they fail from chipping or impact related damage.

It is the opinion of some of us that A2 is better suited to plane irons where the wear resistance makes a difference and having a 30 degree final angle doesn't create as much of a difference in feel vs. chisels where there is a large difference between a 25 degree final angle on a bench chisel vs. 30.

[James Owen]

....Next step I think will be to upgrade to Menard's Tool Shop chisel-shaped-objects.

I am in full agreement with you here! I've been trying to get rid of all of my über-quality chisels at yard sales and such, and saving my pennies so that I, too, can get a set of Master Mechanic chisel-shaped objects from my local hardware store!!! :D

[Rick Fisher]

Perhaps only the countries where the populace had trouble with fractions went metric ? :)

I also prefer to work in Metric, especially on smaller projects.

[Jack Curtis]

Ah, sorry for misleading. I was a math wiz (might still be, but who knows? :) ), so my preference for metric is just that, a preference. I still think it's brain dead to stick to a non-digital standard. Who still does that besides the US and GB?

Jack

[Ed Looney]

I still think it's brain dead to stick to a non-digital standard. Who still does that besides the US and GB?

Jack

Jack

It's all math. Some divide by 2 some by 10.

Ed

[Rick Fisher]

I think GB is metric .. So .. um.. yeah.. :)

I really believe its because American's are naturally better at math, they are suited to a more complicated measurement system..

[John Coloccia]

Re: metric vs imperial

There's no reason in the world why you need to work in fractions just because you're working with inches. If you asked a machinist to cut to a dimension of 13/128", he would positively laugh at you, whip out a calculator and convert it to .1016". I work with decimal measurements all the time, despite the fact that I work in inches, so I have no idea why everyone seems to associate imperial units with fractions.

[Jessica Pierce-LaRose]

The only time I really work with measurements anymore is for scale lengths on instruments. Outside of that, I do everything by relative measurements, dividers, story sticks, etc. The only time I care about my chisels being inch or metric is that my mortise chisel is a good match for the bit that I used to drill a hole to start the mortise.

As far as math and measurements; metric is handy for some things, but for the size of work I deal with, I can go either way. In fine work, I've always used decimal inches to fractions. Fractions are handy though - halve something by doubling the denominator. Feet are handy because 12 divides so easily by 3, 4, 2, 6 . . .

[Rick Fisher]

Re: metric vs imperial

There's no reason in the world why you need to work in fractions just because you're working with inches. If you asked a machinist to cut to a dimension of 13/128", he would positively laugh at you, whip out a calculator and convert it to .1016". I work with decimal measurements all the time, despite the fact that I work in inches, so I have no idea why everyone seems to associate imperial units with fractions.

I don't associate people who use the imperial system with fractions.. :)

[Jack Curtis]

The only time I really work with measurements anymore is for scale lengths on instruments. Outside of that, I do everything by relative measurements, dividers, story sticks, etc. The only time I care about my chisels being inch or metric is that my mortise chisel is a good match for the bit that I used to drill a hole to start the mortise...

Most of the time I work with relative measurements, too, measure directly off a chisel edge and the like; but when things have to get more precise, say when mating pieces for joinery, it really is easier to do metric without pesky conversions and/or resorting to pencil and paper. But I'm not proselytizing, just describing one method.

Jack

[John Coloccia]

Why is metric easier?

[Jack Curtis]

Mostly because you're always dividing/multiplying by 10 rather than 12, 8, 16, or 32; and there are never any lowest common denominator conversions required for addition/subtraction.

Jack

[John Coloccia]

Why not just use decimals with inches? There's no reason in the world to use fractions. Only woodworkers use fractions. Everyone else uses decimal and it's exactly like metric except an inch is 2.54 times bigger than a centimeter.

[Jack Curtis]

Why not just use decimals with inches? There's no reason in the world to use fractions. Only woodworkers use fractions. Everyone else uses decimal and it's exactly like metric except an inch is 2.54 times bigger than a centimeter.

But it's not. An inch is pretty big, and it always needs dividing. Why would you want to work with 0.25" rather than 6mm?

Jack

[David Weaver]

Why would you want to work with 0.25" rather than 6mm?

Jack

Well, if 6mm wasn't quite big enough, i might try 0.25" :p

[John Coloccia]

I usually work in thousandths, so that's 250 to me. If you wish to work in centi-inches, that would be 25 (this is common in precipitation measurement, I believe). Again, I fail to see any difference. It's common to talk about 25 hundredths, 125 thou, 10 thou, 3 hundredths (though most would say 30 thou), etc. If you choose to work in centimeters, then you would be talking about .6cm, which is hardly less awkward than .25". You just have to choose the correct units for what you're working on. If everything you do is less than an inch, and quite a few measurements are, it makes sense to work in thousandths.

[Chris Griggs]

This is an interesting conversation. I suspect most of us work with the system that we do simply because it is what we are used to. I work in imperial out of habit, but have always thought metric to be a superior system as it is built wholly on our base 10 number system. If you think in terms of feet imperial is pretty strange since it is essentially a base 12 system at that level. However, once you start subdividing inches by base 10 values the difference in the two systems is completely moot - as John points out. That said, I can see a convenience to using metric since the standard metric subdivision found on most measuring devises are already base 10. If you had a ruler with dec- and centi-inch marking it would be the same thing.

Of course, if most your measurements are taken from the piece you are currently working on, little numbers don't matter much at all. One piece simply has to fit the other piece. Most of my actual measurements are used for gross initial sizing.

Anyway, you both (John and Jack) make very good points, that have given me something to think about. Math is fun! (says the former middle school math teacher)

[Rob Fisher]

... it's exactly like metric except an inch is 2.54 times bigger than a centimeter.I personally use inches with fractions because that's what I learned and have always done. Also how do you measure decimal inches? I guess you could get a tape or rule that is inches base ten. That said I think metric is superior because it is consistently base ten. Inches are base 12 until 1 foot. Then they are base ten above 1 foot. Below an inch it is base 2 with fractions or base ten with decimals. Then there are yards and acres. It just gets rather difficult, were metric is consistent the whole way. I wish I had learned metric and that it was common in the US.

[Jack Curtis]

Smiling with delight. :)

Jack

PS This would have been much shorter, but the forum requires 10 character minimum message size.

[John Coloccia]

I personally use inches with fractions because that's what I learned and have always done. Also how do you measure decimal inches?

With my calipers that read in decimals and my rulers that are graduated in 100ths, 50ths and 10ths. There's no trick to it or anything sneaky like that. It's how every discipline I know other than woodworkers use imperial measurement.

Anyhow, we're consistently missing the point that you may have a PREFERENCE for metric units but that there's no reason on Earth that imperial measure somehow implies fractions other than you CHOOSE to use fractions. Newbies reading this should take away that they have a choice to use decimal and it's only because of quirkiness that woodworkers, and maybe a handful of other disciplines, stubbornly insist on fractional instead of decimal measure.

[george wilson]

I'm just used to the inch system.When someone mentions that an object is 250 centimeters long,I have to mentally convert it to feet to get an idea how big it is.

I remember when I was quite young there was much talk about converting to the metric system. Never happened. Probably way too much machinery around that would be obsolete if we had converted. These days,with most things being made by CNC equipment,which can do both,the conversion would be easier,industrially speaking.

My neighbor,who ran the machine shop at NASA,was given drawings in the metric system. He would always go through them,and convert everything to inches. And,he was a lot younger than I am.

I work in thousanths most of the time,too.

[Russell Sansom]

The way I see it, there are good reasons for each system. An obvious point that seems to get swept up in the "debate" sometimes is that one system uses floating point and the other uses rational numbers.

We are quite adept at visually dividing by two. The base-2 English system is very useful when that's important. You run out of handy, folksy, divide-by-twos in a hurry with base ten. It's an "evolved" system that has a lot to do with our animal capabilities and our daily lives.

I know from experience that I am very familiar with the integers. They have deep-rooted meaning and familiarity. And, rational numbers contain TWO integers, sometimes quite meaningful entities. For example, the change from .00048828125 to .0009765625 is the change from 1/2048's to 2/2048's. In once case I can see immediately that I've doubled the number of "2048's." In the other I would have to do some really, really heavy processing just to confirm that I've doubled something, and a lot more to figure out that it's "2048's"

In a typical aircraft display system, just as in this example, there are places were a floating point number is gibberish and a rational number makes instantaneous sense to a pilot. In other places, a floating point number makes more sense because it's the language of the machine. Out of context, neither is intrinsically better than the other.

[Jack Curtis]

I'm just used to the inch system.When someone mentions that an object is 250 centimeters long,I have to mentally convert it to feet to get an idea how big it is.....

...My neighbor,who ran the machine shop at NASA,was given drawings in the metric system. He would always go through them,and convert everything to inches. And,he was a lot younger than I am...

It's pretty easy, 40" per 100 cm, 4" per 100 mm. Your neighbor probably caused a lot of problems at NASA, mismeasures being a prime reason for bad parts/performance.

Jack

[Bill Moser]

It's pretty easy, 40" per 100 cm, 4" per 100 mm. Your neighbor probably caused a lot of problems at NASA, mismeasures being a prime reason for bad parts/performance.

Jack

Jack, if you're willing to throw out roughly .4mm per inch when you convert, I definitely hope *you're* not working for NASA :) Personally, I hardly ever use rulers except for very coarse measurements. story sticks are much more accurate, and no need to worry about what system the tick marks are in...

[Rick Fisher]

The metric system is actually much simpler than imperial..

There are 1000 meters in a Kilometer.
Or 10,000 decimeters in a kilometer
or 100,000 cm in a kilometer
or 1000,000 mm in a kilometer..

Relevant in woodworking ? not really, but that simple principle repeats.

The biggest issue for me is that a large percentage of the really high end machinery and hand tools are made in Europe or Japan, and are metric.

I grew up in Canada, which means knowing both systems.. We are a metric country, but 88% of our trade is imperial ( USA ) .. so most of us can do both..

The great thing about Metric is its super easy to learn.. Imperial not so much .. If you grow up in Russia or Taiwan, learning the Imperial system makes little sense..

You can certainly do just fine working in Imperial.. and in a way, its better for your brain cause its more complicated.. lol

[Jack Curtis]

Jack, if you're willing to throw out roughly .4mm per inch when you convert, I definitely hope *you're* not working for NASA :) Personally, I hardly ever use rulers except for very coarse measurements. story sticks are much more accurate, and no need to worry about what system the tick marks are in...

That was just a quick estimating conversion device, not something to work by. I also prefer story sticks and the like.

Jack

[Zach Dillinger]

Buy some good, vintage chisels. You'll be extremely impressed with how sharp an edge they can take. Edge retention shouldn't be an issue, as you should be honing your chisels frequently, a couple of passes on a finishing stone quite often throughout the work process. Your work will be easier and your chisels will stay sharper, longer. When the modern steel edges fail (finally), they really fail and you've got more work to do, honing with coarser grits to start. Plus, you'll be using a chisel that isn't as sharp as it could / should be for longer, waiting for the edge to fail. Read Adam Cherubini's new column in the latest PW. He'll tell you all about it.

[Terry Beadle]

Back on the subject of your chisels...you set the primary at 30 or a micro at 30..my suggestion is to up the micro to 35.

It also depends upon the wood you are using them on. Cocobolo will dull even the sharpest of blades where as you could pop chips on basswood all day and not affect the edge much.

I bought a set of Ashley Isles, London pattern, and they curled on cherry at 30. I put a 35 micro bevel on them and they have stayed sharp through out several projects and only needed the occasional stropping.

Just me being too cheap to give up on Pfeil I guess, but they have a reputation as a very good German steel.