Convex Bevel sharpening

[Jim Barrett]

Paul Sellers on how he sharpens....

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a6ykVzL2VAM&feature=player_embedded

Anyone sharpen this way...?

Jim

[Don Dorn]

No, but I've used many of Paul Sellers tricks with great results. My own system doesn't take much longer and uses a strop, but I'm considering trying it using some old HF chisels I bought for such experiments.

[Tri Hoang]

I converted probably half of my chisels to convex bevel, mostly the smaller sizes. My technique is a little different but the end result is the same. For me, the primary benefit is speed - both the initial honing and subsequent stropping. I can use an incredible amount of pressure to reshape a typical damaged edge when needed and virtually eliminate the grinder. The smooth convex bevel also allows me to feel/hear very accurately when the very tip of the bevel edge is touching the stone.

[Jim Koepke]

I am a little bit reluctant to try this. Many times my chisels are used bevel down for cutting and this seems it might cause a loss of control in such situations.

There is one video, at least, showing a person who rocks the blade while sharpening. I guess if it cuts that is what counts, but I will stick with what I know works.

jtk

[Mark Dorman]

That's a good point to ponder Jim. I'll have to watch the next time I'm bevel down and see if I use the flat to register
like I think I do or not.

[Greg Gregoire]

As a chairmaker i have for years sharpened with a convexed bevel on my scorp and drawknife. This allows me to use the bevel down and come out of the cut when needed. The same is true with my chisels. I can register the heel and gently come into the cut and exiting cleanly.

Greg

[Russell Sansom]

Barr Chisels come with a convex bevel. I've just gone along with it through the first couple retouchings. But my system and my perceptions are optimized for a concave bevel and water stones.

Is it common for framing chisels? The idea feels right for use in the field, chopping joints for a frame and timber barn. Quick to sharpen without needing the precision and the almost laboratory setting to regrind and hone a new edge on a flat or convex chisel. I'd say in this case that the rounded bevel would be perfect for modulating the depth when chopping bevel down.

[Don Dorn]

I tried this method on four cheap HF chisels thrown in a cabinet. They were originally purchased for grinding practice rather than good ones. After digging them out, I tried Mr. Sellers method and was amazed how fast they turned convex with a 260, 360, 600, 1200 with no more than 30 seconds on each. I gave it that long because they started with a concave bevel but think it would just take a few strokes to maintain the convex bevel. I ended with the strop just as Mr. Sellers did and was amazed at the sharpness. Those cheap chisels of which I've never bothered to flatten the backs caused a section of my arm to go bald - and with very little effort.

That said, they are not quite as sharp as my good chisels using a concave primary and slight secondary, but then in fairness, I didn't try Mr. Sellers method with a quality chisel. In any event, they come out very sharp in a short amount of time. The method works!

[Shaun Mahood]

I've now fully converted over to this method. My original hope with sharpening was that I would be able to get everything sharp, quickly, with no jigs, no grinder or hollow grind, and without having to soak any stones. I was able to sharpen plane blades and chisels on the weekend in about a minute each, and had them coming out sharper than before.

My setup before: coarse diamond stone, medium spyderco ceramic, super fine spyderco ceramic. No strop, using micro bevels with Veritas Mk2 jig.

Now: coarse diamond stone, medium spyderco ceramic, super fine spyderco ceramic, and leather strop with same setup as Paul Sellers. No jig, faster to sharpen and sharper (I assume from the strop).

I'm extremely happy with this, left it set up with a removable vise to hold the strop and the barrier to sharpening became basically nothing for my chisels.

[Greg Berlin]

I converted to this method too, I was scared to try freehand sharpening with the fear I was gonna screw up! But as it turns out, the worksharp 3000 and the honing jig are in the boxes and every chisel I sharpen comes out with a nice polished convex bevel that cuts everything I need. I think sometimes we tend to make more out of things than they really are. Maybe we have over thought the sharpening process and it took Paul sellers to bring us back to reality! Haha

[Roderick Gentry]

Worst case if you sharpen freehand with a flat bevel you end up with a slightly rounded one. You can correct any mess with the jig one is hoping to leave. So I don't really see where this method is less of a trial. In any case I could get a razor sharp bevel on e Blue Chip chisel rubbing it on my pants. :) I do like his vids, and I enjoy watching an approach like this that I could us on my English mortise chisels that come with convex bevels in any case.

[David Weaver]

No, hollow grind. If I need a tool with a convex bevel, then I'll have one. I don't want to be spending that much time sharpening a chisel every time one needs to be sharpened.

[Chris Griggs]

I'm an "if it works, work it" kinda guy and don't want to be a naysayer here but...

I guess I don't really understand the advantage of this method. Since this is meant to be quick why bother to sharpen that hole bevel convex, your just honing a bunch of steel that doesn't' impact the cutting edge? I understand the hole down and dirty, stop obsessing over unnecessary precision mindset, but I think think is a quicker easier way to have this approach freehand.

That is to freehand micro/secondary bevels. I think there might be a misconception that freehanding secondary bevels is about trying to match and maintain a perfect angle on a tiny bevel since that's how micro bevels are thought of when using a jig. In reality, when freehanding, a secondary bevel is quick, dirty, and though somewhat imprecise, very effective. This is because you are not actually worried about perfectly matching the exact micro bevel every time. Rather you are using the primary bevel as a reference for a starting point and then just lifting up "ever so slightly". If you don't match it exactly every single time its not a huge deal because it's such a small area it tends to reset itself anyway. The reality is, as the secondary bevel grows you are likely end up creating a mini convex bevel anyway, and if it grows too big and too imprecise you just regrind - or if you want let it stay be a little convex. So anyway, I guess what I'm questioning most here is the idea of deliberately making the entire bevel convex. It seems to me that a convex bevel is just an infinite series of micro bevels ever increasing in steepness so if your going to do the hole quick and dirty thing, why not just focus on the steel that matters.

Personally, I prefer to hone on a single, preferably hollow ground bevel. However, if over time I've gotten my primary bevel out of whack and don't feel like re grinding I will lift up slightly and create a secondary bevel to hone on until I get back to the grinder.

Anyway, here's a link to ALF honing (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j8CPbZg8PGo) using the method I'm talking about. The secondary bevel is not what i typically do, but it is the quickest, easiest way I personally have used to freehand a very sharp edge.

At the end of the day I don't care how anyone sharpens their tools. I haven't tried a convex bevel and honestly don't plan too, but to be clear I'm not criticizing anyone who has found this method to be effective. Again, if it works for you, then work it. I just happen to think there might be an even quicker and easier down and dirty method of honing.

[David Weaver]

I knew it was going to be the bird chirp video, Chris!

Alf should do children's audiobooks. I could listen to her talk all day.

[Chris Griggs]

I knew it was going to be the bird chirp video, Chris!

Alf should do children's audiobooks. I could listen to her talk all day.

That made me crack up - mainly because I whole heartily agree. Personally, I'd buy and listen to the entire series of "ALF reads Harry Potter"

[Shaun Mahood]

I think the biggest thing for me was that I didn't know that a convex bevel was "allowed", and it never crossed my mind to try it. I had pretty much resigned myself to either having to buy a grinder, using my jig, or spending a whole lot of time using less sharp chisels as I learned to freehand them. I spent a ton of time reading on the internet, read all the sharpening books I could find, and watched all the videos I could find as well. This is the first sharpening method that has done everything I want, and it does it quickly and gets things very sharp, so I'm happy. I'm glad you guys are happy with your methods too!

I'm not sure about the effective difference between secondary bevels and the convex bevel. For me though, sharpening in a convex bevel gives me a very easily repeatable action that I couldn't get the hang of with a secondary bevel. I would always second guess myself on the angles, and found moving back and forth keeping on the same plane without a hollow grind quite difficult.

I also think there is something to the stropping involved, since by putting pressure on the center of the convex bevel the leather seems to compress in the shape of the bevel and polish it all at the same time. Kind of pointless to have the back half super highly polished, but I haven't had the same problems dubbing the edge over as I used to.

Anyways, I doubt any of it really matters much when the blade hits the wood. Main difference seems to be whether you use a grinder or not.

[David Weaver]

Yeah, there aren't really any rules to the bevel of a chisel, especially when the entire thing is the same steel.

If it works for you, then you use it.

I've gotten a lot of old chisels that were sharpened with a convex bevel like that, some more gradual than others. I've also gotten old chisels that were flat, and a lot that were dull, so it's hard to tell who sharpened them.

For anyone who has used a sandstone wheel grinder like the old ones (george?), presumably you will get a rounded bevel with those, too? It's not like they have a tool holder on them, at least not the ones I saw.

[Jack Curtis]

I have a couple of old Japanese chisels that could be called convex bevelled, use them for hard duty such as chopping mouth mortises in hard wood. Also a pile of old mortising chisels from the UK, the big ones with huge oval boxwood handles, for the same reason. In both cases they're made/sharpened this way so the edge is backed up by a mass of metal.

[Salem Ganzhorn]

Jim,
Thanks for posting this. I recently picked up some chisels from another member on this forum and one of them is a long 1/8th buck bro's. I have always had difficulty sharpening narrow chisels.

http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7062/6894684725_8ee5e09d7b.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/93434731@N00/6894684725/)
Untitled (http://www.flickr.com/photos/93434731@N00/6894684725/) by eyekode (http://www.flickr.com/people/93434731@N00/), on Flickr

I tried my normal routine but my grinding skills are just not good enough for the narrow chisels. I remembered this thread and thought I would try out the convex method described in the video you linked.

http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7059/6894685119_cce07ef423.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/93434731@N00/6894685119/)
Untitled (http://www.flickr.com/photos/93434731@N00/6894685119/) by eyekode (http://www.flickr.com/people/93434731@N00/), on Flickr

My initial impression is very positive. I have been a dedicated hollow grind kind of guy for quite some time. But maybe that has changed?
Thanks again!
Salem

[Charlie Stanford]

Paul Sellers on how he sharpens....

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a6ykVzL2VAM&feature=player_embedded

Anyone sharpen this way...?

Jim

Not at present. Seems like that would make a chisel back up in a mallet driven cut much more than a flat ground or hollow ground chisel. You can certainly make allowances for it. Seems like the advantage would be rarely having to visit the grinder.

[Warren Street]

I have moved from a jig to Mr. Sellers' method and found that edge retention is much better on my cheap Narex chisels. They would fold/roll and chip very easily at 30 degrees and was very frustrated with them. I thought it might have been the chisels but after using the Paul Sellers method I've found that the edge stays sharp much longer and there's no chipping or rolling. Very happy as it's very fast and works very well.

[David Weaver]

I don't know if I said it in this thread, probably not, but most people that use the method are going to end up steeper than 30 degrees, and any chipping from abuse should all but disappear. You may not always want such a steep bevel, but it's not like all of us can't figure that out for ourselves individually. If it works, do it.

[george wilson]

I watched some oif the "bird chirp" video,but could not understand a word that was mumbled!!

[Chris Griggs]

Yep, sharpen a chisel at 35 degrees and it won't roll either, unless its it inordinately soft. When I'm using my bench chisels for heavier than typical work I'll just lift the edge off the hollow grind a few degrees and it gives me the same effect. The secondary bevel is so small that when I want it back to a more standard angle I can often just hone it out on my 800 grit stone. Worst case scenario I spend a minute at the grinder, to remove it.

[David Weaver]

That would seem a better method. A lot less sensitive to steel hardness or what kind of stone you're using.

[bob blakeborough]

I have been pondering this whole convex bevel idea for a while now. The last couple days off I have had I have spent re-establishing the primary bevel by hand (no grinder in my shop) at 30 degrees on all of my chisels and plane irons using my MKII Veritas sharpening jig (I am a fan of this jig BTW). Now I am looking at either continuing how I have always sharpened (using a jig and micro-bevels) or taking this opportunity to start mastering (I use that term loosely!) freehand sharpening. I am pretty determined to go the freehand route except for when I need to re-establish a bevel for any reason.

I have my beater Narex chisels that I might practice this convex bevel method with before ever turning my BS chisels to stone, but I know most people who use this method use diamond plates or oil stones then finish with the strop. I have diamond plates up to 1200 and water stones up to 8000 and the strop. Will the convex method kill my water stones as they are not as tough as the primary options?

[Chris Griggs]

I watched some oif the "bird chirp" video,but could not understand a word that was mumbled!!

LOL. I love that video!

[Adam Lewis]

i have been doing this for a number of years with my pocket knives. only i just use a strop with some sand paper on it if i have to regrind a "bevel". it is something i learned form the guys at bark river knives. they grind all of their knives by hand with a convex bevel. i have found out that it is easier to maintain the edge with quick touch-ups than to get out all the equipment and start honing a new bevel. also the knives tend not to dull as fast, as there is more meat behind the edge to keep the steel from rolling or to keep the carbides from breaking off. sure the angle may not be perfectly 25 or 30 degrees, but it is close enough that the wood sure doesn't care. i tend to think of the jigs as something more modern anyway. but to each their own. if it works for you, then who is to argue that one way is better than another.
this is just my humble opinion....i could be wrong......

adam

[David Weaver]

I have been pondering this whole convex bevel idea for a while now. The last couple days off I have had I have spent re-establishing the primary bevel by hand (no grinder in my shop) at 30 degrees on all of my chisels and plane irons using my MKII Veritas sharpening jig (I am a fan of this jig BTW). Now I am looking at either continuing how I have always sharpened (using a jig and micro-bevels) or taking this opportunity to start mastering (I use that term loosely!) freehand sharpening. I am pretty determined to go the freehand route except for when I need to re-establish a bevel for any reason.

I have my beater Narex chisels that I might practice this convex bevel method with before ever turning my BS chisels to stone, but I know most people who use this method use diamond plates or oil stones then finish with the strop. I have diamond plates up to 1200 and water stones up to 8000 and the strop. Will the convex method kill my water stones as they are not as tough as the primary options?

It will if you push a chisel in hard enough to gouge them. You can quickly get used to adding pressure only on the pull, though, and let the chisel just ride the stone back on the push without pushing it into the surface. It's no harder in the end, and a fresh waterstone is probably faster on the pull than a worn diamond stone is on the push and pull together.

Realistically, though, there is no need to do all of that crashing around with your finish stone. Find where your bevel is, lift the handle a degree or two and pull the chisel three or four strokes and work the back a little bit.

The whole reason I yammer on and on about a grinder and two stones is because you can literally come fresh off the grinder, use a medium stone three or four strokes right on the hollow as a reference and raise a wire edge. Go then to the finish stone, work the back for ten seconds and then lift the handle a tiny bit, just a couple of degrees, and just pull three or four strokes. The secondary bevel will be so small that it will take almost no work to raise a wire edge on the flats of the hollow again the next time, but the edge will be spectacular, and you won't need to strop if your final stone is an 8k strop. If there's dirt or particles on your strop, it'll actually worsen the edge.

It's a 30 second process with a chisel, add a minute if you need to grind each 3 or 4 times you refresh an edge from dull.

[Sam Stephens]

To call it "convex" suggests something more exaggerated, akin to the opposite of the concave bevel produced from a hollow grind when it practice paul sellers' "method" is what most free hand sharpeners do -register the bevel on the pull so that the edge just makes solid contact and a slight pressure to tilt down the back of the chisel/plane on the push to avoid ramming the edge into the stone. This of course is no more than the mechanics of the motion of pushing and pulling a chisel or plane iron across a stone. There should be less than 5 degree overall difference in the chisel angle.

if you stop at 1200, then yes strop, if you go to 8000 then the improvement is going to be negligible. however for touching up an edge during use, the strop is mighty handy.

[Charlie Stanford]

To call it "convex" suggests something more exaggerated, akin to the opposite of the concave bevel produced from a hollow grind when it practice paul sellers' "method" is what most free hand sharpeners do -register the bevel on the pull so that the edge just makes solid contact and a slight pressure to tilt down the back of the chisel/plane on the push to avoid ramming the edge into the stone. This of course is no more than the mechanics of the motion of pushing and pulling a chisel or plane iron across a stone. There should be less than 5 degree overall difference in the chisel angle.

if you stop at 1200, then yes strop, if you go to 8000 then the improvement is going to be negligible. however for touching up an edge during use, the strop is mighty handy.

Good point. My understanding of this method is that the convex belly would not be as correspondingly pronounced as the the hollow put in when hollow grinding. A big belly would really make the chisel back up in a mallet driven cut I would think, though I'm guessing. Something not so pronounced not so much and could be accounted for.

[Brian Thornock]

I have my set of basher chisels set up this way and they work quite well. A $7 set from HF and I use them for pounding and wailing on stuff. My nicer Narex chisels have the traditional primary/secondary bevel configuration. I think that both have a place. I like to use my narex bevel down sometimes, thus the flatter bevels. Try it out is all I can say. I will always have some sharpened this way, and will always have some sharpened the other way.

[David Weaver]

Good point. My understanding of this method is that the convex belly would not be as correspondingly pronounced as the the hollow put in when hollow grinding. A big belly would really make the chisel back up in a mallet driven cut I would think, though I'm guessing. Something not so pronounced not so much and could be accounted for.

It appears to be from his video, but I have seen plenty of old chisels like that. Maybe he's exaggerating the motion. I believe the effective difference in angles for a hollow from a 6" wheel causes a 25 degree ground angle to have a shallowest angle of around 21 degrees or so. It's not too thin. I can't find the sheet of paper where I worked it out. To ride the bevel like you might on a turning skew (as paul says he likes to do) it would have to be fairly pronounced.

[Steve Q Brown]

To call it "convex" suggests something more exaggerated, akin to the opposite of the concave bevel produced from a hollow grind when it practice paul sellers' "method" is what most free hand sharpeners do -register the bevel on the pull so that the edge just makes solid contact and a slight pressure to tilt down the back of the chisel/plane on the push to avoid ramming the edge into the stone. This of course is no more than the mechanics of the motion of pushing and pulling a chisel or plane iron across a stone. There should be less than 5 degree overall difference in the chisel angle.

if you stop at 1200, then yes strop, if you go to 8000 then the improvement is going to be negligible. however for touching up an edge during use, the strop is mighty handy.

Well said.
I was taught this method of sharpening from my dad, an old school northeastern carpenter who learned from his uncles, grandfather, etc, before him. It's the traditional method (though jigs of varying sorts have been around for centuries), and more importantly it works.. quite well, I might add.
To second Charlie's follow-up and maybe put a finer point on it (meant only slightly punny), it seems some of the detractors of this method not only lack the practical experience of using it, but also over-think the process. Better stated, we're (at least I am) using a convex microbevel. I do use a grinder, or sandpaper, coarse diamond, what-have-you to set the initial bevel angle... I then hone the convex microbevel using fine grit abrasive or waterstones/oilstones etc.. and lacking a strop (or keeping with tradition taught to me) I use an abrasive polish- valve grinding compound, autosol, jewlers rouge, etc on wood (planed flat) to finish.
I've used all the sharpening media I mention, and more.. and the items I've sharpened all shaved my arm hair without razor burn, and all can take sub .0005 shavings in use.
In time, yes, one may convex the entire bevel surface- but it only affects sharpening time. It doesn't detract from the sharpness or usefulness of the tool, especially chisels. And when this happens, just as with any other sharpening method when the microbevel becomes 'unmanageable', one simply has to regrind the primary bevel.

David made a comment that "most people that use the method are going to end up steeper than 30 degrees"... my first thought was 'isn't that the point of microbevelling?'
Upon further reflection, and visiting common sense, I'll say that if one simply doesn't hold the chisel or iron at an angle greater than 30 degrees, this 'problem' is alleviated. It's pretty much moot however in his 2nd, more accurate point that if what you're doing works, keep it up.
I have yet to have a problem with bevel-down carving (in fact, I find it easier to control a chisel with a convex bevel). Further, I'll piggyback on warren's comment about the edge longevity of a convex bevel being greater than multi-angle microbevels.

In my experience, having used most of the methods available today, it is faster, easier, and more soulful (if that's important) to sharpen freehand. That's how our forebears worked.

[David Weaver]

Faster than what, using a dry grinder?

My comments about the steep final bevel aren't because the method limits you to that, but because I am guessing that's what a lot of people will end up doing by the almost universal comment of "my edges last a lot longer and are a lot stronger".

It's a good method if you don't have a dry grinder. It's a good way to take longer than using a dry grinder if you have one. It also causes you to favor softer chisels, especially in the wider size and most especially if you do it with oilstones.

That pretty much sums it up. I have kept some of my softer chisels up with the method out of curiosity, it's not like it's hard (and none of mine are above 30 degrees final bevel), but it does take longer to get the same quality edge as you can get with a grinder and fewer stones.

[Steve Q Brown]

Faster than what, using a dry grinder?


Yes, a worksharp or similar device will ultimately be faster.
However, since we are in the neanderthal forum, which I took to mean non-electric and most people neither have nor have access to an alternatively powered grindstone, I was speaking to the ease of taking your chisel or plane iron, spritzing a little water/oil whatever (I usually use a foaming type glass cleaner) on your abrasive medium and honing an edge without the unnecessary step of mounting the work in a jig and setting it to that 'perfect' angle. Maybe it's splitting hairs to say that it's faster when in reality it equates to less than a minute of additional effort, but I'm a student of the school of K.I.S.S., time is money, and so forth.

Again splitting hairs, because we all know sharp is sharp and what works works;
Speaking to the steep(er) final bevel comments, I'd argue that the convex microbevel is inherently stronger due to the extra material in that shape vs. sharp angled microbevels; thus the edge retention.
You don't have to take my word for it- draw some increasing angle bevels on a piece of paper like they teach in the jig sharpening methods, then round the shape hitting the vertices of the microbevels- the area under the arc is the added material that supports the edge. It's minutiae, sure, but imagine a polyhedral egg, they would cost exponentially more because the majority of them would break before making it to the supermarket. Eggs are strong due to their shape- which is similar to the shape of a convex microbevel.
With practice one can easily hone an arc (or partial ellipse?) that mimics a 30 degree (or whatever desired) angle in performance with the added benefit of being able to smoothly adjust to a slightly higher or lower cutting angle by riding the rounded bevel, letting the user ease into or out of a cut. I don't believe there is a counter argument of being able to ride a jig-honed straight microbevel with the same degree of control.

[David Weaver]

As to the strength of the edge, I guess the reason we know the effective lowest angle of the hollow is because of the past comments, some outright, that a hollow make an edge unsuitable for work because it's weakened so much.

I think for practical purposes, it comes down to the final bevel angle, pretty much exclusively. I've never seen an edge break up to the hollow or on it, and though it does provide a little more support even if the edge failure doesn't go up to a hollow (i.e., chipping you'd get from too low a bevel angle), we're not talking about an extra hollow razor.

But it doesn't matter much, whoever is doing the sharpening just needs to find what works quickly and well, those kinds of details don't matter too much. I'm personally just so fond of a dry (wheel) grinder because it's quick, it can be cheap, and you can use it for all kinds of other things (toolmaking, etc). And it allows you to work only the most important part of the edge with finer stones.

[Darren Brewster]

Maybe it's splitting hairs to say that it's faster when in reality it equates to less than a minute of additional effort, but I'm a student of the school of K.I.S.S., time is money, and so forth.

This is why so many posts about sharpening speeds ring so hollow to me. Saying your method takes 30 seconds when the opposing method (I realize no one is opposing any method, I just don't have the words to say what I mean exactly) takes 45 seconds seems kinda silly to me when you consider what a small percentage of the time it takes to make a project that is.

That said, I recently got my first bench grinder and am starting to have some success with it. Using the hollow to register the chisel isn't as easy as a lot of people say, but it is getting easier every time I do it. It is readily apparent to me why it is such a popular method.

[Bryan Ericson]

The Close Grain blog has a nice tutorial for double convex bevel sharpening: http://www.closegrain.com/2012/07/convex-double-bevel-sharpening.html. Seems like his method with the guide blocks would help to control the final bevel angle. I have some ebay chisels and plane blades around that I'm not using at the moment - I might give this method a try and see how it turns out.

[Steve Q Brown]

*SNIP*... I recently got my first bench grinder ... *SNIP*

'nuff said ;)... without condescension in the sincerest sense... I was there at one point too... I'm glad you're adding tools to your shop and more importantly USING them (I assume).
To more fully address your comment, and reiterate my (and David's) point, it is only semantically that we discuss this. Many methods can achieve the desired result, it's all about what works for you in your shop, the way you work, with your tools, to achieve the results you desire. If a post rings hollow to a reader, one lacks the necessary experience to fully understand the context.

As I said above.. I've used most of the methods available today that I'm aware of and the best bang for the buck (temporally speaking) for me is freehand sharpening, which tends to be a convex bevel type scenario... occasionally I'll use the jig, but it seems that before too long I'm needing to resharpen that tool and my sprayway glass cleaner is within reach and the stones are on the shelf above the bench. Though right now I'm actually using a piece 1/4" mirror scrap with some 3m microfine from TFWW.com<-- not so shameless plug for the goodguys...but I digress...Spending 15 seconds less time and getting a better result using less equipment seems like a win-win-win to me and Charlie Sheen.

I'm the biggest believer in "to each, his own"... there are many ways to skin a cat or sharpen a piece of metal; I know my method works, is reliable, consistent, and fast. I'm only trying to share that with the world. If you read somewhere else on the webnet that frog skin is the most bestest sharpenerizer, then let me know... I'll be in the shop making things.

David, Darren, whoever... if you find yourself in my neck of the woods, I'll buy the first round :)

[Derek Cohen]

Paul Sellers on how he sharpens....

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a6ykVzL2VAM&feature=player_embedded

Anyone sharpen this way...?

Jim

Long before I read about and then watched Paul Sellers sharpen a blade Jacob on the UK forum had been going on (and on and on .. :) ) about his method of sharpening, which turned out to be very similar. Jacob is very traditional, and a working furniture maker, and his argument was that this method got him back to the wood as soon as possible.

For some years now I have used Jacobs/Pauls method when sharpening mortice chisels. These are the only blades I will do this way.

Why mortice chisels and not others? Simply because these chisels are otherwise difficult to hone freehand. They have a 20 degree primary bevel and the require a 30-35 degree secondary microbevel. There is only one honing guide that can hold such a thick/deep blade - the Kell Mk I - but I'd rather freehand a blade if possible. All my other chisels, except for Japanese, are hollow ground, which acts as a guide for the microbevel. I find a hollow grind far more controllable and much speedier than the rounded bevel method. I believe I am removing less steel with a hollow and microbevel as, using a Tormek, it is possible to grind to the edge and then only require the smallest of microbevels. This can be established with a single stroke on the 1200, and polished with a few strokes on a 13000. If you look at Paul Sellers' video, he requires 20 stokes on each of his stones.

I have been reluctant to use this method on plane blades. As with chisels, a hollow grind BD plane blade takes seconds to freehand. And the microbevel on a BU plane blade really benefits from the greater accuracy of a honing guide. This is not because of any fear of being out a few degrees, but the reassurance that the secondary bevel is at around 50 degrees and not 30 degrees. The latter makes a significant difference.

Regards from Perth

Derek

[john davey]

I follow Pauls web sites but have not switched to this. I do find it interesting and may give it a go. From some of the posts here it now makes more sense to me why Paul uses a bench chisel for m&t work and not a mortise chisel.

[David Weaver]

I'm not sure paul does use only a bench chisel. Maybe he does, but I thought that he also may have just been proving the point that you don't need to wait until you can afford or find mortise chisels before you start cutting mortises.

When the whole argument came out before about using a fence post vs. using a blue chip, it was interesting that this comment came up:

http://www.toolsforworkingwood.com/store/dept/TBMC/item/MS-MORT.XX/English_Mortise_Chisels_by_Ray_Iles

(see the bottom of the page, and you'll find this: "The best chisel I have ever used." - Paul Sellers )

That doesn't exactly say that he uses it, I guess.

[Jim Matthews]

I sharpen all my edge tools this way, now.

Instead of a complicated set up, I rock (to raise the burr) and roll (pull back on the finest surface) to chase the burr and strop.
The benefit of this isn't in getting the finest edge - it's in getting a serviceable edge, quickly.

It means I needn't stop and get out all my stones and guides to start cutting again.

I'm by no means the most proficient sharpener, and with this method - I needn't be.

[Mike Tekin]

One question I have on this method that never found a real answer too is does this method slow down/become less efficient when you are using nice 01,A2, or the new Veritas steel chisels and thicker plane irons from the modern premium makers?

Paul only shows and encourages this method with the standard vintage irons and lower priced softer steel chisels.

What are people's thoughts? anyone sharpen thick modern steel irons and chisels using this method? What are your thoughts?

[Metod Alif]

The pressure, when produced by the same force, on the contact surface with a stone/plate is greater when the bevel is convex than when it is flat.
Sadly, this obvious (OK, probably not) fact is not mentioned by the numerous comments on convex honing, and consequently its benefits or drawbacks.

Metod

[Darren Brewster]

One question I have on this method that never found a real answer too is does this method slow down/become less efficient when you are using nice 01,A2, or the new Veritas steel chisels and thicker plane irons from the modern premium makers?

I've used it with Veritas A2 irons quite easily.

[David Weaver]

Yes, on a wide hard iron or chisel, it becomes less enjoyable. That's what my comment was regarding grinders earlier freeing up someone to be less likely to favor a tool that's softer or less abrasion resistant solely due to how quickly it can be hand ground, especially if you're doing all of your dimensioning from rough with planes..

I'm aware of only one iron that will hang with the new premium irons but be as easy to grind as the vintage irons, and that's the thin laminated irons made by tsunesaburo.

It's not that you can't sharpen hard and thick tools with this method, it just becomes immediately apparent to you that it's not nearly as easy as it is with a stock stanley iron or something of the like. The grinder provides more of an advantage and lets you work only a tiny bit of metal.

[Jim Matthews]

To be clear, I've only just begun to sharpen this way.

Every piece of steel I own was set up with a microbevel.
Sharpening this way, I will eventually convert the cutting edge to a complete convex bevel.

As it is, this method is both fast and repeatable with an even cutting angle across the surface.
The main benefit is the speed with which I can get back to a sharp edge, without an involved set up.

The secondary benefit is that the entire cutting surface will eventually be a polished "half dome" with little resistance.
It's my hope that when that is achieved, cutting will be even smoother than it is now.

I just set up an old Record spokeshave this way and the result was good.

With my chisels, the result is an obvious improvement over using a guide.

With my plane irons, the result is less clear to me - but it is fast to dress a tired blade.
That's worth making the change, in itself.

[john davey]

Interesting because he says he doesn't use them in several of his videos. Who knows how long ago he made that quote as I am sure at some time in his life he has used them.


I'm not sure paul does use only a bench chisel. Maybe he does, but I thought that he also may have just been proving the point that you don't need to wait until you can afford or find mortise chisels before you start cutting mortises.

When the whole argument came out before about using a fence post vs. using a blue chip, it was interesting that this comment came up:

http://www.toolsforworkingwood.com/store/dept/TBMC/item/MS-MORT.XX/English_Mortise_Chisels_by_Ray_Iles

(see the bottom of the page, and you'll find this: "The best chisel I have ever used." - Paul Sellers )

That doesn't exactly say that he uses it, I guess.

[David Weaver]

Well, those aren't exactly a long-time offering. Perhaps he was doing a favor for Ray Iles, who knows?