New old pig sticker arrived

[Charles Bjorgen]

Up early Sunday morning and found a newly placed 3/8" pig sticker mortise chisel on the Bay for a buy it now price with shipping for a total of $36. Made by Isaac Greaves and cast steel. I believe this has been discussed here before but thought I'd bring it up again. This tool has a 30 degree bevel and a slight secondary bevel at the tip, a bit rounded. I have to redo the bevel and am wondering the best way. Tools for Working Wood suggests a primary bevel of 20 degrees for clearance in the work and secondary of 35 degrees for strength. Your thoughts appreciated. Here are pix to prove it:

[Mike Henderson]

I sharpen mine with a 25 degree primary and a secondary of 30 to 35 degrees. If the edge is not holding up at about 30 degrees, I'll go to 35 degrees. But I usually put the secondary on freehand so that's not really an accurate secondary bevel. Just higher if the edge is not holding up.

After years of looking, I have a set of Ward cast steel pigstickers.

Mike

[Derek Cohen]

I would grind the primary bevel to 20 degrees and add a 35 degree secondary bevel.

It is also important to flatten the back of the chisel for at least 2" from the tip (I do more than this). The reason is that the lands end up sharp, and this aids in the sides cutting cleanly.

Regards from Perth

Derek

[Jesse Busenitz]

A quick google didn't bring anything up so.... What is this chisel used for, and where did it get the nickname??? Around here we call a long knife a "toad stabber" don't ask me why... I'm guessing that these did not actually get used for butchering but that's just a guess.

[ken hatch]

A quick google didn't bring anything up so.... What is this chisel used for, and where did it get the nickname??? Around here we call a long knife a "toad stabber" don't ask me why... I'm guessing that these did not actually get used for butchering but that's just a guess.

The polite or maybe correct name is an English Pattern Mortice Chisel but I sure do love me some pig stickers.

[Jim Matthews]

Something about the proportions of these seem right.

+1 on making sure the flat sides are at right angles.
If they're properly registering, they'll cut straight.

[Warren Mickley]

I bought an Isaac Greaves Mortise chisel last year. I was not as lucky as you. The previous owner must have been reading blogs or something because it was freshly ground with a 20 degree bevel. The real edge with the original bevel had not been touched at all. Your chisel appears to be around 40 degrees; I like closer to 30.

Before grinding it back to a more efficient flat 30 degrees, I tried the Greaves for a few mortises. Usually we ride the bevel as we sink the chisel into the cut. Because the bevel was not flat, it was not as stable and secure and mortise quality suffered. The chisel penetrated, but the wedging action was poor so it was more difficult to get the chisel out of the cut. And without a real heel to the edge the levering out of the chips was very clumsy.

Historical drawings of mortise chisels always show a flat bevel. Here is NIcholson:
311040

[Steve Voigt]

Just to add to the general confusion, the name that I am familiar with is "oval-bolstered mortise chisel" (OBMC). I think "pigsticker" was invented in the land of Internetya. ;)

Pictures can be deceiving, but measuring your photo with my bevel gauge, I get 35° on the money. It takes a lot of work to remove a 20° primary on a mortise chisel, so I think it's likely your chisel has always had a single bevel, though it may have started life shallower than it is now.

I would suggest the path of least resistance--try the tool with the geometry it already has. It is actually very easy, if time-consuming, to sharpen a mortise chisel with a flat bevel. The large surface area makes it easy to keep flat; the trick is to pull only, and not try to work it back and forth. And side-sharpening doesn't work for me at all.

That's just my experience, though; your mileage may vary. Nice looking chisel though! Good luck!

[Steve Voigt]

After years of looking, I have a set of Ward cast steel pigstickers.

Mike

Wait, I thought you said vintage cast steel was garbage! Why didn't you get the Ray Iles?

Just kidding Mike. Well, sort of. We've been arguing about vintage steel for years, so I think I am allowed to razz a little. ;)

[Mike Henderson]

Wait, I thought you said vintage cast steel was garbage! Why didn't you get the Ray Iles?

Just kidding Mike. Well, sort of. We've been arguing about vintage steel for years, so I think I am allowed to razz a little. ;)
I never said that vintage steel was garbage. I said that modern steel is better than antique steel. I also said that the antique steel is very usable as long as you understand its limitations - mainly that it won't hold an edge as long as many modern steels. Our ancestors produced a lot of wonderful furniture with those antique steel chisels and plane blades.

When I started looking for heavy mortise chisels (pigstickers) there was no way I could afford the Ray Iles chisels. I bought a number of different brands of pigstickers but was drawn to the Wards (for some reason - maybe it was the logo) so I began to search for Ward cast steel pigstickers. That search went on for years until I was able to get a pretty complete set. They aren't accurate in their width but that's not a problem - you just fit the tenon to the size of the mortise.

I also have a set of Swan "Best Cast Steel" (a few are "Best Tool Steel") bench chisels (rectangular cross section) and a set of Witherby bench chisels (tapered sides) which may also be cast steel - they aren't stamped that way. It also took me years to assemble those complete sets. But I don't use them very much because the edges don't hold up compared to my modern LV, LN, Blue Spruce and Japanese chisels.

No, for chisels and plane blades, modern steel is much superior to antique steel such as "cast steel" or "shear steel". Anyone can prove this to himself (or herself) by simply using the different tools in the same fashion and examining the edge under a magnifying glass.

Mike

[Derek Cohen]

Mike, The English Oval Bolstered mortice chisels I have are mostly by Ward. They are excellent. I have a couple of Ray Isles D2 versions, which are better, but the vintage laminated steel of the Wards certainly was not outclassed (and mine were full length when purchased, so had little use and, more importantly, were not abused on a grinder). Recently I was able to compare these with A2, and the vintage Wards held their edge a little better.

Jim, the sides of an oval bolstered mortice chisel are rarely square. They are trapazoid for easier release. There are many other types of mortice chisels, such as the sash mortice chisels (the style that LN sell), and these have square sides.

Warren, I am interested in your comments about the 30 degree primary bevel. You make a good point about a higher angle having a better wedging action (although I have not compared angles in this regard to know whether this is the case). Japanese mortice chisels are also ground at 30 degrees. However the latter tend to be used in softer woods than I use. I just do not get the penetration with a higher primary bevel. I even use a heavier mallet than most. However, the main reason why I have a 20 degree primary (and 35 degree secondary) and not a 25 degree primary, is that it has been my understanding that the 20 degrees is traditional for the oval bolstered chisel. Certainly that is what the research of Joel Moskowitz has been. In addition, all the vintage mortice chisels I have came with a 20 degree primary. Do you think that the 20 degree primary is a modern day characteristic?

Regards from Perth (presently in sunny Cape Town)

Derek

[Warren Mickley]

Forty years ago when I started with mortise chisels some recommended a 35 degree bevel on mortise chisels for edge retention. They were full flat bevels. My chisels were around 30 and I thought I would gradually raise the bevel as I sharpened them. However for some reason I found it hard to raise the chisel enough to accomplish this and never got above 31. I now use about 30; you don't want to abuse the edge.

When a guy talks about "penetration" you have to wonder how much he knows about mortising. Mortising is about wedging, not penetration. Of course the Japanese use the same method we do.

Yes the 20 degree bevel is a modern idea. It is counter productive because you want to ride the bevel and you need a heel. If Joel Moskowitz ever did historical research on mortise chisels I have not seen any evidence of it. Here is another historic drawing:
311074

[Charles Bjorgen]

Thanks for all the replies, guys. Steve was correct that the current bevel is 35 degrees. Just re-measured. It has a slight rounded secondary. The chisel also has the shape with the bevel side being slightly narrower than the back. I'm going to follow Steve's advice and work with the shape as it is. The edge needs to be squared up first.

Did some Googling after posting my question and ran across some other thoughts. Derek a few years back suggested not doing a hollow grind. My Baldor has seven inch wheels. Not recommended? And--English Bolstered Mortise Chisel it is. Some folks thought the "pigsticker" name was coined by Patrick Leach of Blood and Gore fame.

[Steve Voigt]

I also have a set of Swan "Best Cast Steel" (a few are "Best Tool Steel") bench chisels (rectangular cross section) and a set of Witherby bench chisels (tapered sides) which may also be cast steel - they aren't stamped that way. It also took me years to assemble those complete sets. But I don't use them very much because the edges don't hold up compared to my modern LV, LN, Blue Spruce and Japanese chisels.

No, for chisels and plane blades, modern steel is much superior to antique steel such as "cast steel" or "shear steel". Anyone can prove this to himself (or herself) by simply using the different tools in the same fashion and examining the edge under a magnifying glass.

Mike

Oy. I don't really want to relitigate this issue for the twentieth time, but I'll make one quick observation.
Your definition of "superior" is based exclusively on edge retention. But there are other measures. "Gets sharper" would seem to me to be more important, and "easy to sharpen" is pretty high on my list.
I think maybe when people develop sharpening routines based on tormeks and worksharps and complicated honing jigs, they come to view sharpening as a difficult and unpleasant task that should be put off as long as possible. So they gravitate toward steels like A2 that allow them to put it off as long as possible, and edge retention becomes the holy grail.
If you instead develop a quick effective routine, sharpening is just a brief and not unpleasant pause in the work, and edge retention drops far into last place as a concern

[ken hatch]

Oy. I don't really want to relitigate this issue for the twentieth time, but I'll make one quick observation.
Your definition of "superior" is based exclusively on edge retention. But there are other measures. "Gets sharper" would seem to me to be more important, and "easy to sharpen" is pretty high on my list.
I think maybe when people develop sharpening routines based on tormeks and worksharps and complicated honing jigs, they come to view sharpening as a difficult and unpleasant task that should be put off as long as possible. So they gravitate toward steels like A2 that allow them to put it off as long as possible, and edge retention becomes the holy grail.
If you instead develop a quick effective routine, sharpening is just a brief and not unpleasant pause in the work, and edge retention drops far into last place as a concern

I haven't a dog in this .....but I agree, edge retention is not at the top of my list. How sharp, followed by how easy and what stones are needed, and down the list near the bottom as long as the edge doesn't chip or fold at the first sight of wood is how long. A good part of that order of preference is simply a function of having a good sharpening bench set up and being able to sharpen free hand as I work with no fuss, maybe a little muss because it is sharpening and I've finally given in to the advantages of ceramic water stones. I expect if every time an edge needed touching up I had to pull out the sharpening gear and set it up on the working bench or go to another room or place to sharpen, install the iron into a jig, spend the needed time to repair an abused edge, and clean up my mess before I went back to work my priorities would change and and I would be singing about the wonders of A-2.

[lowell holmes]

(quote) "+1 on making sure the flat sides are at right angles. If they're properly registering, they'll cut straight."

Now you have me confused. My Ray Ailes pig stickers are not perfectly rectangular. They are slightly trapezoidal in shape. The back of the chisel is slightly narrower than the front of the chisel.

I also have Lie Nielsen mortise chisels, however I prefer the pig stickers, but then I don't do as many mortises as you guys do.

[Mike Henderson]

Oy. I don't really want to relitigate this issue for the twentieth time, but I'll make one quick observation.
Your definition of "superior" is based exclusively on edge retention. But there are other measures. "Gets sharper" would seem to me to be more important, and "easy to sharpen" is pretty high on my list.
I think maybe when people develop sharpening routines based on tormeks and worksharps and complicated honing jigs, they come to view sharpening as a difficult and unpleasant task that should be put off as long as possible. So they gravitate toward steels like A2 that allow them to put it off as long as possible, and edge retention becomes the holy grail.
If you instead develop a quick effective routine, sharpening is just a brief and not unpleasant pause in the work, and edge retention drops far into last place as a concern
It's all in what you want. As I said much earlier, if antique steel works for you, God bless you - use it.

I find that the new LV chisels sharpen as quickly as antique chisels, get as sharp and hold an edge longer.

Mike

[Derek Cohen]

Warren, if I were home at this time (I am in Cape Town at present), I would head off to my workshop and make a comparison of the two chisels bevel angles. I see pro and cons each way, but this is just theoretical conjecture since I have always used a mortice chisel with a 20 degree primary bevel. That is, over the past 15 - 20 years.

What are the pros and cons as I suspect? From a wedging perspective, a 30 degree primary should enable one to take a thicker chip/slice. The con is that the depth of the chip will not be as deep as the chisel with the shallower primary. A 20 degree bevel will penetrate deeper but not wedge as strongly.

The technique I follow is to first drill a hole at one end, and then take 1/8" thick chips and chop as deeply as possible. This is the method suggested by Maynard. In this case, chopping a mortice is all about penetration and less about wedging.

Indeed, Moxon says something similar. According to a paraphrase from Chris Schwarz, he reported:

" Moxon's technique .... You start with the chisel 1/8" from the end of your mortise with the bevel facing away from you and the handle tipped slightly toward you. Drive the chisel into the work until it won’t go any further. Do the same at the far end of the mortise. Then work your way between the two cuts, back and forth, in the same manner. ". http://www.wkfinetools.com/contrib/cSchwarz/mortChisel/mortChis3.asp

Anyone here willing to compare 20- and 30- degree chisels?

Regards from Perth

Derek

[Jim Koepke]

The chisel also has the shape with the bevel side being slightly narrower than the back.

This is common on mortise chisels. The trapezoid sides are supposed to keep the chisel from becoming stuck when working a deep mortise.

Some have squared sides. My recollection is those are called "registered" mortise chisels.

jtk

[Warren Mickley]

I don't think Moxon ever saw a joiner make a mortise. He makes a lame excuse for putting the joinery section before the carpentry section. I think the real reason was so he could move the mortising chapter from the carpentry chapter to joinery and bolster what is still one of his weaker efforts. Moxon thought mortises were made the same way by joiners as by carpenters.

In the joinery chapter, Moxon describes making a one inch wide mortise on the broad side of a quarter. A quarter is a stud, a 2X4 in a house frame. This is very different from making a 5/16 mortise in a furniture or wainscot frame, which would be more typical joiner's work.

[Derek Cohen]

Warren, my apology - I should not have mentioned Moxon as this confuses the issue. It is Maynard I was pointing to, whose technique emphasises penetration rather than wedging. Penetration favours a lower primary bevel. Your thoughts?

Regards from Perth

Derek

[Brian Holcombe]

Forty years ago when I started with mortise chisels some recommended a 35 degree bevel on mortise chisels for edge retention. They were full flat bevels. My chisels were around 30 and I thought I would gradually raise the bevel as I sharpened them. However for some reason I found it hard to raise the chisel enough to accomplish this and never got above 31. I now use about 30; you don't want to abuse the edge.

When a guy talks about "penetration" you have to wonder how much he knows about mortising. Mortising is about wedging, not penetration. Of course the Japanese use the same method we do.

Yes the 20 degree bevel is a modern idea. It is counter productive because you want to ride the bevel and you need a heel. If Joel Moskowitz ever did historical research on mortise chisels I have not seen any evidence of it. Here is another historic drawing:
311074

I had a really tough time making a mortise with a chisel until I put that together, now I can move through them fairly quickly.

[Steve Voigt]

Thanks for all the replies, guys. Steve was correct that the current bevel is 35 degrees. Just re-measured. It has a slight rounded secondary. The chisel also has the shape with the bevel side being slightly narrower than the back. I'm going to follow Steve's advice and work with the shape as it is. The edge needs to be squared up first.

Did some Googling after posting my question and ran across some other thoughts. Derek a few years back suggested not doing a hollow grind. My Baldor has seven inch wheels. Not recommended? And--English Bolstered Mortise Chisel it is. Some folks thought the "pigsticker" name was coined by Patrick Leach of Blood and Gore fame.

If you find the 35* too steep, it's not hard to back off a little, or even add a 20* primary if that's your preference.
It's interesting, Warren mentioned that he found it hard to steepen the bevel (grinding by hand, presumably). I've found this too, and I believe it's because 90% of the surface area of the bevel is soft steel or wrought iron, which abrades more quickly. The extreme version of this (which I have experienced, unfortunately) is that if you don't pay attention to the tip, you can be rubbing the bevel all day and never getting a burr, because you're only abrading the soft stuff and making the bevel shallower. Damikt.

On hollow grinding--the main issue is just that the bevel is so big that if you try to hollow grind in the usual way, you will get an ENORMOUS hollow. You can also try grinding with the chisel on its side, but then you get a hollow from side to side.
If you want to try flat bevel and the chisel currently has a convex bevel, you might want to hit it very lightly on the grinder, just enough to remove the bulge, so the chisel sits flat and will register easily.

[Warren Mickley]

I am sorry I am not familiar with Maynard. If there is too much penetration with a thin chisel it is difficult to remove the chisel without abusing the edge, chipping or bending. Mortise chisels are thick at the bevel for a reason and thinning it down here is taking away the advantage. If there is no real heel to the chisel it is difficult to remove chips.

[Noah Wagener]

I recall Leonard Lee writing that if you use a low primary angle you need to make sure the secondary extends past the lamination line or the bit could separate from the body of the chisel.