Chisel Refurb results

[Dave Beauchesne]

I just finished an old D.R. Barton 1/8" chisel refurb tonight.

It looks like a J. Jemison owned it at one time; I got it a a garage sale for a buck.
The mark is a D.R. Barton 1832, which appears was used between 1873 and 1880. So, it is one of the oldest tools I own.

Not much else say other than the new handle is curly BLM, the original almost looks walnut like.
The bevel was about 40 degrees, I scaled it back to 25, hollow ground on the old crankeroo, and finish off to a hair popping finish on my 8000 Shapton. Tough old steel, I hope it performs well.

The one picture shows the old handle for comparison; my lathe skills are rudimentary at best, finish is shellac under bees wax.

Dave B

[george wilson]

Barton is a good brand.

[Maurice Ungaro]

Very nice handle you turned!

[David Weaver]

Nicer than any chisel I ever refinished! The forged and ground bolster has a style (eye-catchy) that nothing made now can match.

[Warren Mickley]

Very nice chisel, Dave. I kept think of this type of chisel last week when people were asking "what qualities make a better chisel worth the cost?" This one meets my criteria:

1. Handle easily removed (or better yet sold unhandled)
2. A nicely tapered tang, straight taper, not one of these crude blunt tapers often seen today.
3. A real forged bolster of a size appropriate to the chisel
4. No stainless steel. No chrome, high quality steel

Here you show a chisel I could use, one I would like to have. None of the chisels discussed as "better" quality last week meet these criteria or could find a place on my bench. One of the participants in that other thread once dismissed this type of chisel as of esoteric value only. He doubted that they would ever be made again. I do not agree with that assessment.

[David Weaver]

I doubt they'll ever be made again, but only because it takes skill and experience to make these that the boutique makers do not have. Nobody can deal with water hardening steel, apparently, which makes wonderful chisels. (well, except the japanese, but in a different and heavier format).

It's a shame, because the boutique cabinetmaker's chisels (boutique being smaller than manufacturers like LN or LV) have either very heavy sockets or just look like a piece of industrial supply flat stock that was inserted into a handle.

[Warren Mickley]

I doubt they'll ever be made again, but only because it takes skill and experience to make these that the boutique makers do not have. Nobody can deal with water hardening steel, apparently, which makes wonderful chisels. (well, except the japanese, but in a different and heavier format).

It's a shame, because the boutique cabinetmaker's chisels (boutique being smaller than manufacturers like LN or LV) have either very heavy sockets or just look like a piece of industrial supply flat stock that was inserted into a handle.

You are telling me that a chisel that a journeyman could buy for not much more than an hours wages in 1795 could not be made today? It is almost laughable.

About twenty five years ago I was scything weeds along the road and an old man stopped and asked if I could cut his weeds. I wasn't eager but went to be neighborly. He was so tickled he gave me $10 for about ten minutes of not exactly skilled work. The next week I was at a sale when a scythe came up for bids. I overheard one old man say to his companion "nobody knows how to use a scythe any more". Just laughable.

You might as well say nobody can use a pole lathe or make a beech plane. Or like one guy used to say "As far as I can see nobody ever figured out how to use a double iron plane." If craftsmen could do it in 1790 we can surely learn to do it today.

[David Weaver]

Warren, it would only take one individual with some initiative to do it, but I guess I'm saying on the probability of whether or not someone will, I'd say they won't. Most of those chisels were probably built by skilled labor (as opposed to the idea that some guy was standing around an anvil hammering stuff to perfect shape), hammered to rough shape and then ground on sandstone wheels - that'd be my guess. It could certainly be done today, but the reason I'm saying probably nobody would is two fold:
* you need to sell to beginners these days to sell in volume. Beginners will read magazine articles and comments like that of Mike Henderson talking about the "limitations" that plain steel chisels have. They will want chisels that promise them little sharpening
* as far as I can tell, most people who get involved in making tools and who have to do it at speed to make something for a good price decide it's too much work, instead opting to make long push chisels or something out of industrial supply stock and fitting an exotic handle to them. It would take making the chisels in volume to do it, which would involve repetitive work, and involve buying suitable tooling to grind and finish a chisel of that style accurately.

So, it's not a "can't" thing in my view. I'll bet george wilson could make chisels of that type if he wanted to, and make superb examples on the first try.

I'm not suggesting that it's my preference that people view them as something not to be made, I like that style of chisel and have ditched all of my modern chisels except for japanese chisels and a couple of novelties (like the chinese tunsgten HSS chisels, which bear some resemblance to vintage chisels in that they are fairly thin and tanged). I *much* favor using older chisels that aren't as clunky and that have good dry feeling water hardening steel.

(we can all make beech planes, of course. Without power tools at that. The ones in my avatar were made by a hack like me and work wonderfully. It just took a little bit of examination of some good double iron planes so that we'd know what to make, but we have that documented on this board now for the few who might like to try. I don't know what the equivalent hobbyist blacksmith would be to make something with a forged bolster. It's beyond my level, and I don't really have an appropriate grinding setup to do it. I think for the effort, if someone did make fine examples, some magazine reviewer or blog writer would set up a bogus test and hit them with a sledge hammer and talk about how some large construction style chisel held up better. The market has gone to the beginners)

[Kees Heiden]

Companies like Asley Iles, Pfeil or Zwei Kirschen have all the knowledge and technology in house to make those English chisels to 18th century specs. They know how to forge and grind a quality chisel in an economical way. But their designs are different at the moment then what you are looking for exactly.

[David Weaver]

I don't think they're going to trouble themselves with water hardening steel, either, which is about the only modern steel that's indistinguishable from vintage steel when you put it to the stones.

Larry Williams had some chisels that he had made and was proud of, and they looked very nice, though I can't find them. Maybe they were in a thread that got removed.

[Bill White]

All of the above comments are reasons why I cherish my W. Butcher chisels. They work, are pleasing to hold, sharpen well, and I've bought most of them for bargain prices.
Cast steel rocks.
Bill

[Kees Heiden]

Warren didn't ask for water hardening steel! O1 has no chrome either and Ashley Iles uses O1. The Germans are really fond of adding chrome to their steel.
Larry Williams made a nice set of chisels with the features Warren would like, but they grinded them from the solid. That is an uneconomical way of making these tools.

[David Weaver]

O1 has a little bit of manganese, chrome, nickel and tungsten in it. Not a lot compared to A2 or some of the unspecified steels (especially like those in two cherries tools, etc), but it's there and if you use something like an old butcher chisel for a while and then use O1, you notice that it's not quite the same thing. It's about as good of an approximation as we're going to get on a mass produced basis, though.

I agree on what you say about larry's chisels. You can do whatever you want when making them for yourself, but forging the chisels in a die and then finishing them like they do razors these days would be more realistic in terms of making new chisels.

But tools are marketed for beginners, not experienced users. Beginners just aren't going to gather why a chisel like an old butcher is a really nice chisel to use for work on a day to day basis. Unless a blogger told them that the qualities of those chisels were desirable (but I doubt that will happen, either).

[Sean Hughto]

https://farm3.staticflickr.com/2944/15415830505_1c3a71ee13_z.jpg

[bridger berdel]

somewhere out there is a blacksmithing version of this board, where a bunch of really talented iron bashers are chatting about making tools for trades other than their own, and lamenting that they just don't have access to woodworkers skilled enough to know the difference between mass produced drop forged tools and real blacksmith made stuff, and how so many of the good old designs have been lost....

[Brian Holcombe]

I think for the effort, if someone did make fine examples, some magazine reviewer or blog writer would set up a bogus test and hit them with a sledge hammer and talk about how some large construction style chisel held up better. The market has gone to the beginners)

Hah, that is a good point. How often do you see doweled joints compared to M&T in a manner in which the joint is stressed to failure and a conclusion drawn that they are identical in quality for these reason. I guess it is just too impractical for a magazine to find historic examples of joinery which have remained intact after years upon years of practical use.

Dave, Gorgeous work!

[David Weaver]

somewhere out there is a blacksmithing version of this board, where a bunch of really talented iron bashers are chatting about making tools for trades other than their own, and lamenting that they just don't have access to woodworkers skilled enough to know the difference between mass produced drop forged tools and real blacksmith made stuff, and how so many of the good old designs have been lost....

There are definitely a few small places making high quality tools for the woods (john neeman and autine tools - a spin off of john neeman by a guy who refers to himself as john, though that's just a trade name similar to the way japanese makers give themselves another when they go pro). I saw a video last week on a channel called "wranglerstar", which appears to be a guy who is in my opinion similar to what many of our amateur tool bloggers are (as in the purpose of the use of tools appears to be to try to generate publicity or income, the video isn't incidental to an otherwise highly skilled user). He had an axe from john neeman that had a handle that had shrunk. It was a beautifully made axe and all of the commenters were railing about how it should be sent back to the maker because he should handle something like that because of the price (it was about a $275 axe or something). Many of them were going on at length about how the handle was made improperly and the maker didn't fit it right when it likely only dried and shrunk. Only a couple of commenters said "refit the handle, if you can't do that, you really can't use an axe that nice, anyway". Really ridiculous - shipping an axe that costs a few hundred bucks all the way back to latvia to get a handle refitted.

That's the other issue. You'd have every beginner in the world sending hand forged chisels back talking about how they didn't like the way the handles felt or how they didn't hold an edge as long as they expected. Can you imagine setting up dies to make chisels and then adding a bolster (be it by weld or by solder or something) and having people sending them back when there's nothing wrong with them?

I was at a brooks brothers outlet this weekend and had to wait in line because some guy in front of me couldn't fathom that his coat that was not made in the third world couldn't just be exchanged at any time on his terms. that's not the kind of place I normally shop, but I understand their policies and after I bought a sport jacket there, my wife said "if you find another one cheaper somewhere else, you can just return this one". OK....that's a good way to get them to decide to make stuff in the third world, because people think that it doesn't cost anyone to return things that have a great cost to make.

Anyway, all of that adds up to why nobody would have much desire to make something for the beginners market if it isn't something that could be made in long runs and the customer service cost absorbed.

[Mike Henderson]

Beginners will read magazine articles and comments like that of Mike Henderson talking about the "limitations" that plain steel chisels have. They will want chisels that promise them little sharpening
Well, just to reiterate my position vis-a-vis modern steel and antique steel (let's say before 1850):

1. Our ancestors did not have the chemistry to know what trace elements were going into their steel, or even controlling the amount of carbon in it beyond relatively wide limits. They didn't even know it was carbon that allowed the steel to harden.
2. They could not make good steel consistently, although they could recognize good steel after they had made it.
3. Over the past 150 years, we've gained a pretty good knowledge of the chemistry of steel, the hardening process, and the micro structure of the steel. This knowledge has been used to tailor steel to specific uses, including woodworking (chisels, plane blades, power saws, etc.)
4. Essentially all users of steel have moved to modern steels for the advantages the modern steel has.
5. It would be sad indeed if we had not made significant improvements in steel for specific uses over that period of time.
6. Just because something is old, it does not mean that it is better, or that our ancestors had some magic that has been lost to modern time.

None of this is to imply that antique steel cannot be used in woodworking. It's obvious that our ancestors used that steel and produced some outstanding furniture. You simply have to know the characteristics and limitations of the steel and work within that performance envelope. The same is true for modern steel. It's just that the performance envelope of modern steel might be larger than the performance envelope of antique steel.

Mike

[A good example of improvements in steel is the razor. A modern razor can be used many, many times and still give a very close, comfortable shave, with no maintenance except washing the crud off the blades. Compare that to the old Gillette "Blue Blades" (for those old enough to remember them), or a straight razor. With a Blue Blade, you were lucky to get two shaves before it was too uncomfortable to use (felt like it was pulling the hair out). And straight razors are honed before every use.]

[David Weaver]

I think it's likely that we have moved from blade steels to diemaking steels because there isn't much of a market for blade steels, and because the users have gone from mainly professional users (who often prefer a simpler steel, across blade steel uses like shaving, chef/butcher work and woodworking) to an amateur market that values things like time between sharpening and rust resistance. That's due more to incompetence in sharpening and infrequent use.

And because it takes far less skill to make tools with steels that have been optimized for stable hardening than it does to make tools with water hardening steel (though there is obviously some skill left to tolerate water hardening steel in asia and parts of eastern europe).

I have no idea what would be popular if the market were a professional market instead of an amateur market. But it should be noted that high speed steels (even HSS like T series HSS that makes a good blade steel) have been available for a very very long time and the professional market did not make use of them in tools. The hobbyist market drove that.

I don't think it's the age of the plain forged steel that makes them more favorable to me, its their characteristics. Those characteristics are generally available in white steel #2 tools from japan, better characteristics actually (you get a little more hardness, but still get good sharpenability and toughness), but there are not tools available in white #2.

[David Weaver]

It occurs to me that to get a chisel of the style warren mentioned, we'd probably have to look to a carving tool maker. I don't know if anyone makes a bolster like the one on the old chisels, though auriou makes a decent approximation of it on carving tools, as do other carving tool makers probably.

I wonder if auriou could be convinced to make some chisels for about the same price as their carving tools.

[Dave Beauchesne]

Thanks for the positive comments gentlemen: It feels good to revive some of the old ones and see how they perform.

Dave B

[Warren Mickley]

Well, just to reiterate my position vis-a-vis modern steel and antique steel (let's say before 1850):

1. Our ancestors did not have the chemistry to know what trace elements were going into their steel, or even controlling the amount of carbon in it beyond relatively wide limits. They didn't even know it was carbon that allowed the steel to harden.
2. They could not make good steel consistently, although they could recognize good steel after they had made it.
3. Over the past 150 years, we've gained a pretty good knowledge of the chemistry of steel, the hardening process, and the micro structure of the steel. This knowledge has been used to tailor steel to specific uses, including woodworking (chisels, plane blades, power saws, etc.)
4. Essentially all users of steel have moved to modern steels for the advantages the modern steel has.
5. It would be sad indeed if we had not made significant improvements in steel for specific uses over that period of time.
6. Just because something is old, it does not mean that it is better, or that our ancestors had some magic that has been lost to modern time.

None of this is to imply that antique steel cannot be used in woodworking. It's obvious that our ancestors used that steel and produced some outstanding furniture. You simply have to know the characteristics and limitations of the steel and work within that performance envelope. The same is true for modern steel. It's just that the performance envelope of modern steel might be larger than the performance envelope of antique steel.

Mike

[A good example of improvements in steel is the razor. A modern razor can be used many, many times and still give a very close, comfortable shave, with no maintenance except washing the crud off the blades. Compare that to the old Gillette "Blue Blades" (for those old enough to remember them), or a straight razor. With a Blue Blade, you were lucky to get two shaves before it was too uncomfortable to use (felt like it was pulling the hair out). And straight razors are honed before every use.]

Of course chemistry has improved, but your arguments are very weak. Unless the steel maker and the tool maker have a vision of what qualities they want a chisel to have, they are bound to fall short. Was Jackson Pollock's paint better than Jan Vermeer's? I suspect Pollock was not as demanding. I think Stradivari would have been frustrated by today's varnish offerings. Are you going to trumpet the superiority of Wonder bread because of the great knowledge of its chemists, it fine quality control?

It would be sad indeed if we had not made significant improvements in steel for specific uses over that period of time. Yes is is sad. We have actually gone backwards. We are not praising 180 year old tools out of nostalgia, we praise them because they are better. The dumbing down, no-amateur-left-behind concept is strong in the hand tool world. Lee Valley might have fine technicians, but until they can understand how a double iron plane works their offerings will fall far short of the Carruthers planes of 1767.

It does not sound as if you have actual experience with straight razors.

Dave B, nice job on the handle. Lie Nielsen's chisel video shows a tang chisel with a horrible tang, then talks about how difficult it is to replace the handle on a tang chisel if the handle is damaged. Not sure how handles become damaged, but you did not seem to have any trouble with replacement. Last year I bought a really nice skew chisel circa 1820 for turning at an auction for $8. There was an 1/8 chisel of similar vintage there also, but I let it go to a fellow cabinetmaker for $35.

[David Weaver]

[A good example of improvements in steel is the razor. A modern razor can be used many, many times and still give a very close, comfortable shave, with no maintenance except washing the crud off the blades. Compare that to the old Gillette "Blue Blades" (for those old enough to remember them), or a straight razor. With a Blue Blade, you were lucky to get two shaves before it was too uncomfortable to use (felt like it was pulling the hair out). And straight razors are honed before every use.]

I agree with warren's comments about razors. DE blades and straight razors are not remotely similar. You dry a straight razor after shaving and corrosion is minimal. A single carbon steel straight razor in the hands of an experienced user could literally shave anyone for an entire lifetime. There are more complex steels in razors, even old ones, but they are not an improvement over a simple carbon steel - they are actually a bit more cumbersome to hone, and they don't stay sharp any longer unless they exist in an environment where it's inevitable that they will see a lot of condensation.

A double edge blade is coated, it's not steel that makes them better than a gillette blue DE blade, it is the coating....at least on a throw-away basis. However, a straight razor shaver could hone a DE blue blade and probably get hundreds of shaves out of one before throwing it away - few knew how to do that, though, and at 12 cents per blade for a russian stainless coated blade, I'd throw them away on a weekly basis, too.

That said, a straight razor is rarely honed. Honing is metal removal with abrasive. Straight razors are stropped for each shave. They see a flax linen strop on a regular but less frequent basis, and they see honing very very infrequently in any razor user with any experience. Once every 6 months is plenty, and at that, on a stone slower than the stones commonly used as finish stones in woodworking.

The finest razors to use are carbon steel. They include the super extra hollow ground german razors of the early 1900s, the japanese razors of the 1960s and the spanish razors (filarmonicas) made early on. Henckels made a novelty 440C "friodur" razor that was cryogenically treated probably in the 1960s at the latest (just in case someone thought that was only a recent thing), but it is not better to use than a carbon steel razor, even with modern abrasives. It just resists corrosion, but does so at the expense of having to be a little bit softer than a carbon steel razor to preserve sharpenability. (there are good american carbon steel razors, too, but in my opinion they do not quite match the quality of the ones I mentioned).

I guess I could make a general statement and convince most people that shaving equipment is better now by comparing a feather high stainless blade to an old gillette blue, but it's not a very accurate statement though it does parallel selling materials to beginners. Carbon steel is king in straight razors, regardless.

[george wilson]

The Anderson Blacksmith Shop in Williamsburg has made wrought iron chisels with welded in steel bits for the cabinet maker's shop. They had to experiment around to figure out how to forge the bolsters at first,but worked it out.

I'll have to ask them how well they like the repro chisels. I know the blacksmiths like to use 1070 or 1080 tool steel since it welds more easily than 1095 without burning up at welding temperatures. That troubles me,though I know David Bartlet likes 1085.

I do not know if they are the equal of originals or not. I don't know if the cabinet makers have used real 18th.C. chisels or not. I have a few originals (18th. C. carving tools).

This may sound sacrilegious,but though
I have some 19th. C. Butcher chisels, my old 1965 Marples chisels have still been my go to chisels. My old 1950's Bergs are too soft. I don't know why they have such a good reputation,but they do. Maybe I am just too habitual. But the Marples get the job done,though I certainly would not recommend the new ones. Sadly,I have not yet made handles for my Pfiel chisels. They came with atrocious handles,and though I've made sone boxwood London pattern octagonal handles for them,I just don't like how they feel. I have gotten way too hung up trying to come up with a suitable handle design for them. I should probably just settle on the standard 1950's Marples(and others') round,bulged boxwood handle shape,which feels nice in my hands. I'm sure the Pfiels will be fine,as they are my favorite carving tools,and I have a large collection of antiques. My Bartons are especially nice,though they are cranked gouges for pattern making,and I don't use them much.

I'm probably getting into trouble writing this post,but all the work I've posted was made with the old Marples.

Anyway,back to the blacksmith made chisels, I'd have to say that they probably would just rather make other things. There is a lot of work in a chisel since it must be accurately ground all over. Most blacksmith things can be hammered out and thrown down. Making a chisel is a much more costly process and probably no one would pay the price that the labor would command these days. And we just don't have the deftness of the old workers who did it all their lives,and worked for starvation wages.

[Mike Henderson]

Of course chemistry has improved, but your arguments are very weak. Unless the steel maker and the tool maker have a vision of what qualities they want a chisel to have, they are bound to fall short. Was Jackson Pollock's paint better than Jan Vermeer's? I suspect Pollock was not as demanding. I think Stradivari would have been frustrated by today's varnish offerings. Are you going to trumpet the superiority of Wonder bread because of the great knowledge of its chemists, it fine quality control?
Well, let's talk about quality. What is Quality? Quality is what the customer says it is.

When engineers and scientists work to improve any product, they have measurable characteristics of the product that they are working to improve. For chisels, I imagine the primary characteristics are "Get sharp" and "Stay sharp". You can find modern chisels which excel in both of those characteristics.

And, yes, I see modern razors as an example of significant improvements in not only steel, but in ergonomics. I can use a modern razor for a long time and it is easy and comfortable to use. To me, that's a very good example of an improved product, including vast improvements in the steel - a real quality product.

You may have other characteristics that make a quality product for your and that's okay. You should choose a product that best meets your particular needs.

If you like to use chisels with antique steel, God bless you.

Mike

[george wilson]

Warren, I WILL trumpet the superiority of modern steels.I leave Chinese steel out!!! I have about 350 antique carving tools and chisels,and I know from experience that they are not all the same consistency. Not even Addis,of which I have about 75.Actually,about 15 more.

One 12 piece set was so hard I could not get them to take a decent edge. I had to heat them up to purple to use them. Some have been too soft.

These days we know a great deal more than they did even in the early 20th. C. about chemistry of steels. We have much tighter controls over quality.

The big question is: Do modern chisel makers use decent steels that cost money? Many do not. Some,like Sears at least USED to use were made in Holland from .050% carbon,which is at the threshold of being able to harden. And it has very poor wear resistance when hardened. This was shown many years ago in a Fine Woodworking test of chisels. The Japanese kept coming out the best.

I haven't used the PM VII chisels that LV sells,but I have a plane blade of it,and really like it a lot. I think you're going to get what you pay for. That was true in the old days also. But what was also true is that testing in the old days consisted of relying on the experience of choice workmen. Like everyone,they could have good days and bad days. They broke open samples of steel,and by the looks of the grain size,sorted them into different categories,like spindle steel(the lowest),to razor steel(the highest). Then,they relied upon the workmen to reliably harden and temper tools.

I know there have been a few complaints about some well known expensive modern chisels here. Related to human error. But back in the old days,even more human judgement was relied upon,starting with making the steel. These days,at least we have better control over that.

On a few occasions,I had to fix good old brands like Witherby chisels,whose welded steel bits came loose. One curled up like a fish hook. Clearly,it was never hardened at all. No one would say Witherby was not a good brand,either. Museum craftsmen were not supposed to use antique tools,but sometimes would buy their own and bring them to work.

[David Weaver]

The razor comparison, again. It takes about a month to learn to use a straight razor reflexively. The cost to use it after that is zero unless you drop it. Shave time is less than five minutes. The missing link is that people were sold convenience (and I don't blame them early on, because life lacked it when gillette managed to get safety razors in GI hands and really get them some exposure). Razors now (or the plastic things with 5 blades) are a joke. They are marked up something like a factor of fifty, and within a couple of months of using a straight razor, they do not provide a shave that matches a straight razor.

A safety razor is also an improvement for body parts (legs, armpits, whatever) and people who do not have a steady enough hand to use a straight razor (as in people with parkinsons, etc). It's not a quality issue, though, it's a marketing and keep everyone dumb issue. why would I sell you a straight razor once or twice in your life if I can get you to spend $4 on a plastic cartridge 12 times a year for the rest of your life?

An experienced user will have no problem with vintage chisels in "get sharp stay sharp". They just get sharp faster. If the average vintage chisel or carving tool doesn't hold an edge for a user, it's a lack of skill issue, and in items that are truly hard to sharpen (incannel gouges, profiled moulding plane blades, etc), there is no contest in which is more practical to use.

[george wilson]

Some antique razors were really unusually good. I read a writeup about an inherited straight razor that had been so good,it was borrowed by everyone in a California gold rush camp. The owner decided to sacrifice it to test why it was so good. The test showed that it's steel was cleaner than modern aircraft steel. I think I read the article in Fine Woodworking,but can't recall now.

That was an unusually good razor even in the days when other old razors were in daily use.

[Brian Holcombe]

If you have beard hair like mine you will appreciate a well sharpened straight razor or a good razor in a safety razor. Modern razors are total crap.

Anywho, I do not agree that the customer alone defines quality, the collaboration between maker and customer feedback defines quality. The chisels of yesteryear were not made in a vacuum and more of those of today, but I think a good example of that in today's process is that of japan. A good customer, who is appreciated for their ability will be able to have something created especially for them. I see it all the time in bonsai tools, in fact many makers consider it a badge of honor to present a design developed through collaboration between master smith and user.

The customer feedback in essential to the process, but they are a component, in my opinion.

[David Weaver]

The Anderson Blacksmith Shop in Williamsburg has made wrought iron chisels with welded in steel bits for the cabinet maker's shop. They had to experiment around to figure out how to forge the bolsters at first,but worked it out.

I'll have to ask them how well they like the repro chisels. I know the blacksmiths like to use 1070 or 1080 tool steel since it welds more easily than 1095 without burning up at welding temperatures. That troubles me,though I know David Bartlet likes 1085.

I do not know if they are the equal of originals or not. I don't know if the cabinet makers have used real 18th.C. chisels or not. I have a few originals (18th. C. carving tools).

This may sound sacrilegious,but though
I have some 19th. C. Butcher chisels, my old 1965 Marples chisels have still been my go to chisels. My old 1950's Bergs are too soft. I don't know why they have such a good reputation,but they do. Maybe I am just too habitual. But the Marples get the job done,though I certainly would not recommend the new ones. Sadly,I have not yet made handles for my Pfiel chisels. They came with atrocious handles,and though I've made sone boxwood London pattern octagonal handles for them,I just don't like how they feel. I have gotten way too hung up trying to come up with a suitable handle design for them. I should probably just settle on the standard 1950's Marples(and others') round,bulged boxwood handle shape,which feels nice in my hands. I'm sure the Pfiels will be fine,as they are my favorite carving tools,and I have a large collection of antiques. My Bartons are especially nice,though they are cranked gouges for pattern making,and I don't use them much.

I'm probably getting into trouble writing this post,but all the work I've posted was made with the old Marples.

Anyway,back to the blacksmith made chisels, I'd have to say that they probably would just rather make other things. There is a lot of work in a chisel since it must be accurately ground all over. Most blacksmith things can be hammered out and thrown down. Making a chisel is a much more costly process and probably no one would pay the price that the labor would command these days. And we just don't have the deftness of the old workers who did it all their lives,and worked for starvation wages.

Did the blacksmith shop guys have to use hand hammers to laminate tools? That might be part of the reason that they have a preference for a lower carbon easier-to-weld steel.

White and assab steel in japanese tools can be 1.3-1.4 if it's a specialty steel or subclass A white steel #1, and they are forge welded, but under a power hammer. The subclass A white #1 is apparently almost impossible to get right, and few people work with it. the same is true for white #1 in general, you can get it in tools, but getting it done well takes some research and probably some luck (it is a modern process blade steel made from sand iron, but the carbon content is probably the problem because it gives it a narrow range of success in terms of working temperatures).

Lastly, there's something missing from the discussion, and that is the skill that is involved with the smiths who forge steel at low temperatures. It is, as far as I know, the only manual way to actually improve the grain structure of carbon steel and retain it. (I believe it's used with what stu tierney called a "rest period" which is a high temperature (but not critical) soak that might be the same thing as austempering). The best smiths in japan walk a line between not hot enough and hot enough so that when you get their tools, they are hard and tough both because they don't lose any work done by hammering and austempering (or resting).

Warren put the discussion a good way - no amateur left behind. I'll bet when the next thing comes out, we'll hear about how V11 doesn't hold its edge long enough.

If that kind of thing was vitally important, there would be a lot of vintage chisels made out of T1 steel, because it was widely available in the early part of the 1900s, but there was no demand for it in hand tools because users were professionals. It's superior as a blade steel to M2, also.

[David Weaver]

Some antique razors were really unusually good. I read a writeup about an inherited straight razor that had been so good,it was borrowed by everyone in a California gold rush camp. The owner decided to sacrifice it to test why it was so good. The test showed that it's steel was cleaner than modern aircraft steel. I think I read the article in Fine Woodworking,but can't recall now.

That was an unusually good razor even in the days when other old razors were in daily use.

They do vary a little bit, and even the japanese razors that are made with modern process steel vary from razor to razor. It's not really a coincidence that the modern process razors made even as late as the 60s used german, english, or japanese "silver steel" alloys that are high carbon and very little else. I don't think the modern razors are made of the same thing.

[george wilson]

Hand hammers only in the Anderson blacksmith. No historic documentation of a drop hammer there in the 18th. C.. No water power,though I suppose a horse powered tilt hammer could have been used.

[Jim Koepke]

We are not praising 180 year old tools out of nostalgia, we praise them because they are better.

My knowledge of metals isn't on a level to be able to get into the discussion on which is better and why.

For my purpose one praise for older tools is their availability in a wide variety of styles at a much lower cost.

My Buck Bros. paring chisels have a very low profile. They get used for fine paring tasks and dovetails.

My Witherby chisels have a much higher profile and get used on making dados or heavier paring work.

Then there is an eclectic mix of square sided chisels. They come to bat when a bit of percussive persuasion is in order.

A couple of my mortise chisels date back to the late 18th or early 19th century. They may not be in as nice a condition or as fine of steel as their modern day counter parts, but they do what they were made to do without complaint.

Just this week I bought a half dozen Buck Brothers carving tools for far less than the same tools would cost me from a modern maker.

There is no dispute of Veritas or Lie-Nielsen planes being better made than a Stanley plane from a century ago. The price of many of their bench planes are about 5 to 10 times what was paid for most of my bench planes. They may be better, but not that much better.

Have you priced a good auger bit lately? Last week there were a couple of Russell Jennings bits in a Restore/Habitat For Humanity store that set me back $2 and tax for both. My sets of Irwin bits were purchased for less than the cost of a couple of modern bits.

There is a lot of decent if not quality old steel available for what in some cases seems like a generous discount over what is on the new tool market. Maybe if there was a paycheck coming in for every minute my tools were being put to use the ability to hold an edge a little longer would become a bigger factor in my tool purchasing.

In reality though if the money ever starts rolling in from my woodworking it would be more likely for me to move my sharpening set ups closer to my work space. It sometimes takes longer for me to get up and walk over to the stones than it does to restore an edge.

jtk

[Kees Heiden]

I don't know much about steel, or economics, but I guess that an experienced blacksmith could carve out a nice market niche with sets of 18th century chisels. W1 steel, laminated even? The right shape, put some decent octagonal handles on them and price them in the vicinity of these new LV PM-V11 ones. I'm sure there will be takers.

[David Weaver]

I found Larry's chisels, they are on woodnet, so I can't link them here. He said on there they're O1, and I found it interesting that he concluded they hold an edge better than any other chisel they have around, including japanese chisels.

I don't know what chisels he has, but that's interesting for anyone comparing chisels that have had "the rest period" and been heat treated properly that are white 2 or blue 2. But, I have no trouble believing they hold an edge very well, O1 should make a good tool steel. The shape is very nice on them.

[Chris Hachet]

somewhere out there is a blacksmithing version of this board, where a bunch of really talented iron bashers are chatting about making tools for trades other than their own, and lamenting that they just don't have access to woodworkers skilled enough to know the difference between mass produced drop forged tools and real blacksmith made stuff, and how so many of the good old designs have been lost....

I need to meet up with those people.....

[David Weaver]

rod stock isn't that expensive. I like the style (just as larry has done them), but I don't know if I like it enough to hacksaw and file/grind chisels out of rod. It would be no trouble for smaller chisels. I think it would cost about $60 in the rod needed to make a set of four chisels in quarters of an inch.

O1 of course. I've done dumber things, but I still have a long line of dumb things I'd like to do before that, though, too.

[Steve Voigt]

rod stock isn't that expensive. I like the style (just as larry has done them), but I don't know if I like it enough to hacksaw and file/grind chisels out of rod. It would be no trouble for smaller chisels. I think it would cost about $60 in the rod needed to make a set of four chisels in quarters of an inch.

O1 of course.

Of course Larry is machining these. Doing this by hand would be a whole other thing. Actually, the hacksawing, though tedious, wouldn't be that bad, because these chisels (the style that Larry made) are not that long--only about 4.5" down to the bolster. With a good HT hacksaw, I bet I could do the cuts for a 1/2" chisel in under 30 minutes. The real difficulty is the grinding/filing to shape, and getting accurate flat surfaces.

I think I would try W1, for several reasons. First, it's cheaper (in the larger sizes--the small are about the same). Second, it's closer to what the old laminated chisels were, and you don't need the abrasion resistance of O1 for a chisel, just as Japanese makers don't need to use blue steel for chisels. Third, I would be tempted to try heat treating just the bottom 2 inches, so I could bend the top half of the blade a little after HT and make it easier to flatten. With O1, because of the longer quench time, it's much harder to selectively harden that way.

For smaller chisels, I would be tempted try square stock rather than drill rod. More metal to remove, but much easier to mark out and saw. I think my cuts would be a lot more accurate. Easier to form the octagonal bolster as well. But for large chisels, the cost gets high real fast.

All in all, it's not an insane idea, especially for the smaller sizes. A 3 ft. piece of 9/16" W1 or O1 from Online Metals is $14 (before shipping), and that would be enough for four chisels 1/2" and smaller. Certainly worth experimenting with. Which leads me to...


I've done dumber things, but I still have a long line of dumb things I'd like to do before that, though, too.

That is epic. I'm stealing it.

[Steve Voigt]

The other option is to actually forge the chisels. I've been playing at blacksmithing for about 6 months, which is long enough to be really, really, bad at it, but to at least have a sense of the relative difficulty of different operations. Forging a tanged chisel with integral bolster is pretty high on the scale of difficulty, probably equal or even harder than making a mortised plane would be for a newbie woodworker.

There's a thread, "making woodworking chisels," on I forge Iron. You need to be a member to see the pics. In post #13, a guy shows some tooling for forming the bolster. The tooling itself is pretty complicated and almost certainly unavailable. So, the hurdles to this method are high.

Now I've got chisel-making lodged in my brain. Thanks Dave; as if I didn't already have enough useless crap to build! :p

[David Weaver]

The other option is to actually forge the chisels. I've been playing at blacksmithing for about 6 months, which is long enough to be really, really, bad at it, but to at least have a sense of the relative difficulty of different operations. Forging a tanged chisel with integral bolster is pretty high on the scale of difficulty, probably equal or even harder than making a mortised plane would be for a newbie woodworker.

There's a thread, "making woodworking chisels," on I forge Iron. You need to be a member to see the pics. In post #13, a guy shows some tooling for forming the bolster. The tooling itself is pretty complicated and almost certainly unavailable. So, the hurdles to this method are high.

Now I've got chisel-making lodged in my brain. Thanks Dave; as if I didn't already have enough useless crap to build! :p

Forging is above my head at this point. I would like to do water hardening, too, but I have not done any water hardening steel before (well, that's not true, but I haven't done anything large and flat) and don't know if I could get it hardened and tempered without warp, so I'd probably chicken out and go with something I know I can harden and temper without issue.

It does seem tempting, though, doesn't it? You and me could get drill rod and let it dictate the width of the chisel, then do the bulk work cleaning it up by draw filing and then filing in the other details and cleaning up what would be the cut in bolster.

I think I could probably make three of these by hand without issue in 15 or 20 hours or so - a lot would depend on how nice they're supposed to look. I don't have anything but a small belt grinder and bench grinder, and I'd feel more comfortable doing most of the work draw filing.

I'd like to see a few other people do it :) The 18 tpi lennox blades HSS hack saw blades cut fast enough to make it plenty doable - I can already imagine the sensation of the little chunks of stuff coming off of the blade and burning my front hand.

[Sean Hughto]

Old tool dealers and eBay seem to have a pretty good supply of this style - vintage tanged with a bolster - for very reasonable prices. If people want a set of these, they could put a nice one together for far less than $100, and with little time invested, except perhaps in rehandling to make their set match and suit them.

In short, why go to the trouble of smithing them unless you just want the rush of working with a tool you made yourself (which is completely legitimate, of course). I don't think there's much to be made for a contemporary smith to start making them as the vintage ones are available in piles. A contemporary smith would do well making stuff like hardware and hinges.

[David Weaver]

I've got a few of them, but I can't put together a good set of even sizes, and some of mine are horribly pitted. All of mine are old buck bros, which is popular here.

All it takes for a contemporary maker of any tools to get behind is a few blog posts and magazine reviews. But you have to finish your tools to a level that they can be used immediately by a beginner.

I noticed larry's comment about his chisel was that after several years, they had only found two used that were suitable. Making them is really a function - like the double iron planes - of getting something *exactly* like you want it to be in every aspect. That is, if you have the equipment around to heat treat it (I do).

[Sean Hughto]

search "tang chisel" on ebay and you will find plenty from butcher to moulson to swan to witherby to berg etc. From $4 to around $35 - they aren't expensive by modern chisel standards.

[David Weaver]

search "tang chisel" on ebay and you will find plenty from butcher to moulson to swan to witherby to berg etc. From $4 to around $35 - they aren't expensive by modern chisel standards.

I guess it depends on how particular you are. Most of those chisels are a bit heavy, some are turning tools, and there are definitely a few that would fit the description to me. It would make more sense for someone like me to watch the listings and wait to find some that looked 1/8th thick or so at the tip and then grind bevels on them myself if I wanted such a thing .

The draw to make might be stronger, though. I'm sort of surprised by Larry's comments that he couldn't come up with anything suitable in a period of several years. I've got, IIRC a set of 1/4, 1/2 and 1" buck brothers chisels of the type, all bevel edge (the two smallest are pretty nasty, though).

[Sean Hughto]

Now now, David, I didn't say everything produced in an ebay search would be perfect. My point was there would be SOME. If I was seriously looking I would do other searches as many sellers would not even think to put "tang" in the title. My point is meager: there are plenty of these sorts of chisels around for those who are interested. Just like vintage planes or irons or any other tools some will be more to your likeing or in better condition than others, but bottom line, a set of these would be easy to have.

[Steve Voigt]

I don't have anything but a small belt grinder and bench grinder, and I'd feel more comfortable doing most of the work draw filing.



I think the belt grinder (I assume you mean like a 1 x 42 or a 2 x something deal?) with some trizact belts would be a huge help for something like this. I don't have one; the only abrasive machine I have is the 6" dry grinder. Not averse to getting a little belt grinder though, if I could find one for the right price--they seem pretty useful if toolmaking is your thing.

[David Weaver]

Yeah, kalamazoo 1/42 belt grinder. It's not a bad machine for light grinding to make stuff like small tools and knives, and it can easily grind the pits out of an old iron with a decent coarse al-ox belt if you can bear to remove enough thickness to get them out. I've rescued a couple of totally deeply pitted irons, but the dilemma at that point is they literally lose a lot of thickness (and heat can be an issue).

I like something like that to lighten the load filing, but it's easy to get carried away and have something that doesn't look as nice as hand filed.

I just ordered W1 drill rod from mcmaster. it'll be less than $40 shipped for enough to make four chisels. it'll give me a chance to experiment with hardening W1, too.

[Steve Voigt]

I just ordered W1 drill rod from mcmaster. it'll be less than $40 shipped for enough to make four chisels. it'll give me a chance to experiment with hardening W1, too.

Down the rabbit hole… ;)

[bridger berdel]

Went to a street fair recently. A guy there was selling strops for disposable razors. They were made from way too soft of probably chrome tanned leather. His spiel was that he could get 18 shaves with, 4 without. I told him I last honed my straight about a year ago and shave about 3 times a week. He lost interest at that point.

[Jim Koepke]

A guy there was selling strops for disposable razors.

There used to be a hand operated device for stropping double edged razor blades.

I use a disposable razor in the shower with bar soap about twice a week and it lasts me for about six months. The keep changing razor styles so when something works I buy a dozen or so and am set for years.

jtk

[Ron Kellison]

"Compare that to the old Gillette "Blue Blades" (for those old enough to remember them), or a straight razor. With a Blue Blade, you were lucky to get two shaves before it was too uncomfortable to use (felt like it was pulling the hair out)."

I stopped using the modern multi-blade shaving system a couple years back, primarily because I was tired of paying $10-12 for a small pack of blades that would last me for a month. I dug out my old Gilette Fatboy and ordered a couple sample packs of double-edged blades. I settled on the Gilette Blue 7-O-Clock blades made in St. Petersburg and ordered two 100-blade packs for about $25 each. I get 4-5 good shaves on each blade and I'm still using blades from the first pack! I figure my cost per shave is less than a nickel, including a good shaving soap and the amortized cost of a silver tip badger brush. I think the quality of shave is just about as good as I was getting with my old 5-blade Gilette, the shaving time is about the same and the cost is MUCH less. Did I mention that I'm cheap? :)

My only real concern is that the St. Petersburg factory doesn't seem to be making the Blue 7-O'Clock blades any longer so, at some point, I'm going to have to start the sampler pack routine again to find another replacement blade.

[Bill White]

Hey Sean! Where'd ya get my Butcher? I want it back. :)
Bill