Chisels - - wow~!!

[Cliff Rohrabacher]

I'm looking around for some nicer chisels.
That's easy enough to do.

I rather like the look of the Lie Nelson products. They are purdy purdy purdy. However they are A2 and while it's a fine steel it's ability to take a really fine edge isn't as good as O1. And they are bloody spendy .


The Ashly Iles I saw on ToolsForWoodWorking are very reasonably priced and are O1.
But they aren't so purdy as the spendy Lie Nelsons.

Maybe it's like the difference between the trophy wife who looks great on the prow of your yacht, and the one that can raise kids, love, think, converse, and cook.

But that trophy wife shore is purdy.

[Robert Rozaieski]

Oh, you can get the AIs in a pretty version as well if you are willing to spend a few more bucks ;).

94271

They come in boxwood too. The price has gone up since I got my set of 11 for less than $300, but they're still worth it. For 11 LN chisels it would cost you almost double that. I'm not allowed to post a link to the vendor but Google "The Best Things" and look for them there. Lee will take good care of you. I have no interest, just a happy repeat customer.

[Jason Whelehon]

I LOVE my Pfeil bench chisels

http://www.woodcraft.com/family.aspx?FamilyID=300

[Eddie Darby]

However they are A2 and while it's a fine steel it's ability to take a really fine edge isn't as good as O1.

Sharp is a realative term that depends on where you are during the life of an edge.

I like the fact that I don't have to run to a hone or stone as often as I do with O1.

So while on an atomic level O1 will produce an initial sharper edge, which is short lived, I find that the A2 gives me a sharper edge throughout it's use.
Since sharpness can reach a point of diminishing returns, I find the longer life to be a most useful trade-off.

In other words, purdy is nice ... and functional.:cool:

[Jim Becker]

Cliff, I went with the Ashley Isles and have been very pleased with them. (The longer handled version) I was actually disappointed that the review in the latest issue of FW didn't include the longer handled version from TFWW. Speaking of that review...check it out.

[Brent Smith]

Hi Cliff,

I agree with Eddie, there really isn't any difference in use after the first few blows. I have A2 and 01 chisels. The 01s are quicker to get sharp, but you have to do it more often. A2 takes a bit more work (especially the initial work on the back!!!), but last longer. From where I stand, it's really just a question of whether you want to do your sharpening quicker, or less often. Either way you're going to put in your eight hour day. So go with the chisels you like the look and feel of whether it's the trophy or the all around...you're the one who has to wake up next to her in the morning.

[Jim Koepke]

As Jim B. said check out the Fine Woodworking article on chisels.

It is viewable here:

http://www.taunton.com/finewoodworking/ToolGuide/ToolGuidePDF.aspx?id=31061

It requires membership or you can try a one time 14 day free trial.

Or it should be on the news racks soon, it is in the October issue. There is good information on the different steels used and microscopic photos of the edges after use.

My only wish is they would do a similar article comparing old chisel brands that are only available on the used market.

jim

[Casey Gooding]

You will never be disappointed by the Lie-Nielsen chisels.

[Martin Shupe]

You will never be disappointed by the Lie-Nielsen chisels.

I'll second that. I really like mine.

[Phillip Pattee]

The FWW article does test the Ashley Iles chisels like Robert has with the octagonal handle. For what it’s worth there are a few things in the article that leave me somewhat skeptical. For example the article rates edge retention higher for the Ashley Iles O1 tool steel chisels (both versions tested) than the Lie Nielsen A2 tool steel. If true, then where does that leave the initially sharper, longer to sharpen, holds an edge longer argument? The height of the side flat is a pretty objective measurement and the article leads this reader to believe that smaller makes it better for dovetails (naturally I agree). It’s true that the three chisels with the smallest side flat heights, .01 in, and two at .025 in all rated excellent for dovetails, but…one with .088 in rated very good while one with .040 in rated only a good. No explanation that I could find. Finally, given the Pfeil chisel has a higher rating than the Lie-Nielsen in more categories and a lower price, why didn’t the Pfeil win?
Bottom line, it is highly subjective. Get the chisels that you like the best by your own criteria. They are all pretty darn good tools.:D

[Danny Thompson]

I, too, was surprised at the Pfiel's didn't get the not given how well they showed in the final scoring grid.

That said, I didn't really like the feel of the Pfiel's, so I compromised and went with 2 individual LNs (1/4", 1/2"; $100 delivered). Later I added the 1" ($60). I've gotta say I love them! Great in the hand. Thought I would add a piece every month or so until I had a full set, but haven't found the need.

Good luck.

[Jim Nardi]

They will be the last chisels you'll ever buy. Very happy with mine. There are japanses chisels that are better at twice the price.

[Jim Tolpin]

Except that I find the Japanese chisels are just too darn brittle except when used for the wood they were originally designed for: clear softwood. But they too are awfully pretty--and you can spend up to $600 a chisel if you look hard enough!

[Frank Drew]

I worked pretty exclusively in hardwoods and my Japanese bench chisels stood up fine; there was a long thread about on the subject of Japanese chisels here a number of months ago.

[Steve Hamlin]

Apart from the aspects subject to personal preference (handle shape and size, balance, blade profile etc) comparisons of this nature are also at the mercy of the variance between two tools off of the same production line.
So, yes, Blue Spruce will always be perfect, but tools produced in higher volume, subject to different QA regimes, can show widely different characteristics out of the box.
Unless the testers have time to prepare a large sample of each chisel, they could either get lucky or unlucky. Fer instance, on balance I'd far rather prep a set of Sorby's than AIs as I've found the faces/backs of the former more consistent. Get a good example of a newer AI, and it'll only take a couple of minutes, while a bad Sorby will take ten - the other way and I've found myself go straight to polishing a Sorby and taking half an hour on a (new and improved) AI. Perhaps I've just had the opposite luck of the draw.
Perversely, I'd actually most easily part with my Blue Spruce dovetail chisels - because I have nothing personal invested in their preparation; arriving perfectly formed, they are a commodity which I know I could replace at any time (and most certainly would!)

With regards edge retention, it wasn't clear whether they effectively tested the factory edge, or ground back a decent amount to reach the true temper of the blades. Touching up as I work, I really don't see that it makes any difference whether it takes 5 or 6 minutes work before an edge needs touching up. Indeed, the more often refeshed, the more time will be spent with the a better edge. Good work was done with iron and even copper chisels.

Cheers
Steve

[Randy Klein]

The FWW article does test the Ashley Iles chisels like Robert has with the octagonal handle. For what it’s worth there are a few things in the article that leave me somewhat skeptical. For example the article rates edge retention higher for the Ashley Iles O1 tool steel chisels (both versions tested) than the Lie Nielsen A2 tool steel. If true, then where does that leave the initially sharper, longer to sharpen, holds an edge longer argument?

I think it's because he honed all bevels at 30 degrees for the edge retention test (despite the usual recommendation that A2 should be higher). I have the LN's and 30 degrees is not enough. I find 35 much better for edge retention.

[Robert Rozaieski]

The height of the side flat is a pretty objective measurement and the article leads this reader to believe that smaller makes it better for dovetails (naturally I agree).

For what it's worth, I've never found side height to be an issue cutting dovetails. I've cut dovetails with straight sided firmer chisels and never had a problem bruising the tails. Dovetails have been around a lot longer than bevel edged chisels. To clean the sharp inside corners you just pare with the corner of a smaller chisel held at a skew. No need for special chisels.

Of course chisels are very personal, much more so than say a plane. First priority is that they must be comfortable. If they are not comfortable to use, you won't like them no matter what kind of steel they are. Personally, while the LN look nice, I don't like the handles, they just don't fit my hand well when paring. I'm sure the steel is great, but again, it's all about comfort when it comes to chisels. Edge retention is really not a big issue with chisels in my opinion. They are so easy to hone freehand that I touch them up very frequently while working. For this reason I prefer O1 since they hone so much faster than A2 or D2. I have Ray Isles D2 mortise chisels and they are a real bear to hone. They take forever.

Focus on comfort first and foremost. Magazine articles can test till they are blue in the face but they cannot tell you which is most comfortable for you. You need to try them out. Any good retailer will let you return a tool you don't like. Joel does it, Lee does it, LN does it. Try as many as you can, keep the most comfortable and return the rest.

[J D Thomas]

Cliff,

I just recently purchased the LN 5 piece set, and they are fabulous. They replaced my Marples for most of my chisel work and I'm not finding that getting a good edge on the A2 steel is all that big a deal. Yes it takes a bit longer than my old Marples, but once there, they hold. I'm very impressed and pleased. As for the $$$, I was in the right place at the right time: I used the Woodcraft 10% off sale they had recently, and additionally they added another 5% to folks who came in during the first 4 hours of the sale. So my aggregate savings was pretty good.

[Cliff Rohrabacher]

I have this thing for socket chisels.

I can't say that they are "better" than tang chisels. I just like the way the look.

I may end up on Flea Bay there's lots of them there.

[Chuck Nickerson]

Who only has one set of chisels? Barrs @ 22*, L-N @ 32*, and Marples @ 37*. :o Mortise chisels are next...

[Wilbur Pan]

Except that I find the Japanese chisels are just too darn brittle except when used for the wood they were originally designed for: clear softwood.

That's a common misconception. Hardwoods have been used in Japanese woodworking through the ages. A search of antique Japanese furniture will turn up pieces made with keyaki (zelkova), and chestnut (kuri), both of which are hardwoods.

But an even more obvious example is that the bodies of Japanese planes are almost exclusively made of Japanese white oak. The same chisels that are used to chop out the opening of these wooden plane bodies are the same ones that are used on softwoods.

Cliff, Imai chisels are really nice, but if Lie-Nielsens are spendy to you, the Imais are pretty much the same price.

[Cliff Rohrabacher]

The expression "Firmer" is the equivalent of "Bench" when referring to chisels.
Firmers are all flat backed with a straight flat cutting edge perpendicular to the center-line of the chisel.
The terms don't indicate relative length of the handle or the steel.
Am I correct?

Skews and gouges are not called"Firmers" they are skews and gouges.
Yes?

[Kevin Brenton]

The expression "Firmer" is the equivalent of "Bench" when referring to chisels.
Firmers are all flat backed with a straight flat cutting edge perpendicular to the center-line of the chisel.
The terms don't indicate relative length of the handle or the steel.
Am I correct?

Skews and gouges are not called"Firmers" they are skews and gouges.
Yes?


You are correct IMHO.
check out these Aussie made chisels .
http://www.haroldandsaxon.com/index.htm

Kev.

[Cliff Rohrabacher]

Those are purdy purdy.
Someone is a dab hand at chisel making, what?

And they make a chisel from High Speed Steel~!!!
Now that's pretty Shizzy.

I noticed that they are not stating prices. Hmmm If you have to ask then you prolly can't afford it~?

[Glenn Clabo]

Cliff...
http://www.haroldandsaxon.com/product_range.htm

[David Weaver]

That's a common misconception. Hardwoods have been used in Japanese woodworking through the ages. A search of antique Japanese furniture will turn up pieces made with keyaki (zelkova), and chestnut (kuri), both of which are hardwoods.

But an even more obvious example is that the bodies of Japanese planes are almost exclusively made of Japanese white oak. The same chisels that are used to chop out the opening of these wooden plane bodies are the same ones that are used on softwoods.

Cliff, Imai chisels are really nice, but if Lie-Nielsens are spendy to you, the Imais are pretty much the same price.

I'm relatively new to the game with only two sets of reasonably good quality japanese chisels (each about equivalent to the LN chisels). I also have a couple of LN chisels.

I have not noticed a brittleness problem with the japanese chisels, but I have noticed that they feel much sharper than the LN chisels.

I do not pry with the japanese chisels and thus have not had an issue with breakage with them - i use cheap store-brand bench chisels to pry. My experience with prying with the LN chisels is that they do very well at angles you wouldn't expect, but in the end, you can still get them to fail - they just fail differently. Instead of chipping out, they fold. The end result is the same, you either need to grind or hone out the failure.

I do not have blue steel chisels - only white - so my experience with everything up to now using oak, maple, cherry and walnut (and pine in some cases) has been fine with white steel. Edge retention is at least as good with the japanese chisels as with the LNs.

[Steve Pirrelli]

I skimmed through that chisel review in FW. They like the LN but gave them mediocre reviews on edge
durability. I thought A2's advantage was a very durable edge.

http://70.169.135.35/images/misc/progress.gif

[David Weaver]

I skimmed through that chisel review in FW. They like the LN but gave them mediocre reviews on edge
durability. I thought A2's advantage was a very durable edge.


http://70.169.135.35/images/misc/progress.gif


I don't have the review so I can't speak to it. It depends on what the test is.

I only compared my LN mortise chisels to the MHG mortise chisels (which claimed to be hardness 61). The LN chisels held up significantly better.

As for sharpness of the edge, I don't think they're (LN) really any better than the Hirsch chisels that I have, which I do believe are leigitimately hardness 61. The A-2 is tough, though, and you can get away with a lot of things that you wouldn't get away with in tool steel - it does still bend the edge instead of chipping it out if you are abusive (and I'm sure that you can chip it out or break it if you work hard enough).

Example - I had to get the microbevel to about 40 degrees on the one MHG chisel that I had to get acceptable performance - anything less, and the edge failure was catastrophic in purposely abusive mortise chopping. The LN mortise chisel didn't really come apart catastrophically at its original bevel (probably 30 degrees). It's nice to be able to do that - it's a huge difference in bevel angle.

As far as sharpness and delicate work, though, I still haven't seen anything that competes with the reasonable quality japanese chisels I have. They get sharp and stay sharp.

One other note, the A-2 is HSS, and it lasts noticeably longer in cocobolo and some of the other abrasive stuff I have on hand than does tool steel. (can I admit out loud that I have several times taken a board and just planed it repeatedly for the pleasure of it - until a blade is dull enough for it not to be pleasurable? Especially cocobolo, which planes surprisingly well and easily, but dulls the plane blade faster than something else that planes similarly easy). With maple and cherry, the difference is less pronounced, and if you don't hate sharpening, I doubt you'd notice it - I don't. I would think that the difference in exotics with chisels would be a lot the same - the A-2 is more abrasion resistant than tool steel, right? Just as a matter of curiosity, you can take a LN chisel and a japanese chisel of greater hardness over a diamond hone and notice that the harder japanese chisel is easier to lap than the LN tool - it is harder, but less abrasion resistant.

Every type of test is probably going to have a different winner. Chris Schwartz's test was pounding a chisel directly into redheart (I think you can see it on his blog). In that instance, it would make sense that the A-2 would outperform the tool steels and japanese steels - that's a nasty test. If someone was paring 1/2 millimeter chips off a 3/4th by 3/4th square piece of maple or cherry, I would expect the results to be different. I think Chris found the LN chisels as favorable (or more favorable) as anything out there. I trust his word and honesty. I'm not going to beat my chisels into any of my exotic turning blanks. It doesn't return the same level of excitement as planing the wood does.

At any rate, all of that is based on my very limited experience of what's actually in my garage to use, and somewhat subjective - partially biased probably, too, by my current fascination with just how easy it is to make the japanese chisels ridiculously sharp without having to fight much of a wire edge. If you get any of the decent chisels and learn to sharpen properly and use them properly, I fail to see how you could do a good job with all of them and be happy. It might be more useful to pick the top 10, and pick the ones that have the profile and handles that please you the most.

Sorry to ramble so much - I'm just trying to work toward saying that I wouldn't stop an urge to buy the LN bench chisels just because of one magazine review. The quality is consistent as any, the profile is very nice, the handle design is very comfortable and can be struck, and they are so far better than what most people need that it's not worth worrying about.

[glenn bradley]

but…one with .088 in rated very good while one with .040 in rated only a good. No explanation that I could find. Finally, given the Pfeil chisel has a higher rating than the Lie-Nielsen in more categories and a lower price, why didn’t the Pfeil win?

Uh, the same reason the Laguna won the FWW bandsaw bake-off even thought it was the only saw to stall during the test :confused: ;)

[Steve Pirrelli]

Sorry to ramble so much - I'm just trying to work toward saying that I wouldn't stop an urge to buy the LN bench chisels just because of one magazine review. The quality is consistent as any, the profile is very nice, the handle design is very comfortable and can be struck, and they are so far better than what most people need that it's not worth worrying about.


Yep, I guess it's all a trade off. The Japanese chisel had the highest durability ratings but were more brittle.

[Cliff Rohrabacher]

Cliff...
http://www.haroldandsaxon.com/product_range.htm

Oh cool a price.
And it's not too bad a price either.

[Wilbur Pan]

According to the article, the Japanese chisels do not seem to be any more brittle than A2 steel chisels:


For the Japanese-style chisels and those chisels with A2 steel blades, I used an angle of 35º, recommended for these harder and more brittle steels.

So there doesn't seem to be a reason to choose, say, Lie-Nielsens over Japanese chisels based on brittleness concerns, although I have never heard anyone worry about brittleness with Lie-Nielsen chisels.

Also, the edge retention was better for the Japanese chisels. In this clip from the article, the top photo was from the Japanese chisel, the middle is the Lie-Nielsen, and the bottom was from a Grizzly budget chisel.

[Frank Drew]

I have no experience with the newer generation of Western artisanal chisels but I'd consider buying from makers such as Harold and Saxon if for no other reason than to support this very welcome resurgence in craft toolmaking.

But it would take a hell of a good chisel to beat my Japanese ones in terms of sharpness, aggressiveness of cut, and edge retention.

[Cliff Rohrabacher]

a Grizzly budget chisel.


HA HA HA That thing rolled over like a - - well I can't say it here but, you know what I mean .

[John Sanford]

I found the FWW article to be somewhat disconcerting for several reasons. First, the author apparently only used one size of chisel. In a perfect world, doing so would give you results that are representative of "across the line." In the real world however, such is not the case. Wider chisels, by virtue of more mass, are going to behave differently under heat treating than narrow chisels. How different depend on the both the metallurgy of the blade, and the skills of the manufacturer. The more skillful the manufacturer, the better they'll be at ameliorating these differences across different widths.

Second, the author didn't include, if only to establish the "lowest common denominator", any of the modern Stanley, Buck Bros or Harbor Freight/cheapo Chinese chisels. These have one huge advantage over ANY of the chisels reviewed except for the Marples. You can find them in virtually any Wal-Mart, Borg or other vendor that sells chisels.

Third, there was no apparent effort to address the matter of variability inherent in manufactured products. Perhaps the Pfeil chisel was a extra-special super duper Tuesday product, while the lowest ranking chisel was crafted on Monday morning by a fella who'd had a fight with his wife that morning after being hung over all Sunday. While it may be unreasonable for us to expect the magazines to acquire multiple PM2000s when its review time, getting a couple examples of each chisel can improve the sample size, and thus the validity of the results.

Finally, although my memory isn't exact on this, I don't recall any mention of the true sizing of the chisels. Metric or Imperial? Most, if not all, of the European and Asian chisels are actually metric. Sometimes the 1/2" is actually 1/2", sometimes its 12mm, sometimes the 12mm is 1/2", etc.

All that said, my bottom line on tool purchases is this: find a tool that can do the job at hand, and that I'll enjoy using. If I enjoy a tool because its handcrafted in a shop at a forge that looks like something out of Dante's Inferno, then that's what I'll get. On the other hand, if I like my tools to be creations of the finest automated technology Mankind has cooked up, then I'll want Forgetronic Chisels. Either way, the WOOD doesn't care. Since I do this woodworking thingy primarily because I ENJOY it, that's my ultimate measure of the utility of the tool. Enjoyment. So once you determine whether or not the tool will do the job at hand, don't sweat the other stuff. Just get what you'll enjoy using.