How I sharpen chisels and plane irons

[lowell holmes]

I don't want to tread on the other sharpening thread. There is more than one way.

See the following.

https://paulsellers.com/knowledge-base/sharpening/

Having learned hand tool woodworking in Paul Sellers classes at Homestead Heritage in Waco Texas, I use his techniques.

I use diamond hones and strop with raw hide leather on wood charged with green honing compound.
My edges are scalpel sharp.

[Jim Koepke]

The video on the page linked is a bit different than his convex bevel method.

It also doesn't get into his idea of only needing to go up to 250 grit on a plane blade.

Paul Sellers may be a great woodworker, but my confidence in his methods would be enhanced if he would stay with one method instead of confusing people with a variety show.

It comes down to finding a method that works and improving it as much as one can. It helps one in building their base of knowledge to be open to different methods. Knowledge is built by learning different ways or systems. Then one can put to use the bits that fit in with one's own equipment and methods.

For me, it is get sharp and get to work.

jtk

[Patrick Chase]

It also doesn't get into his idea of only needing to go up to 250 grit on a plane blade.

IIRC the test he used to draw that conclusion was more along the lines of "can I take a continuous reasonably thin shaving" rather than "does this leave the best possible surface on the wood". The qualities of the shaving should be irrelevant except inasmuch as they help us understand why we are (or aren't) producing a specific result at the surface.

[John C Cox]

Jim, I think Paul shows many different ways because he does different things depending on the outcome he is after with the tools he is using for that task...

If you think about "Sharpening" as how you achieve adequate On-Wood performance given the type of work and the steel in the the tools at hand - then doing different things to different tools makes fine sense......

I think most people handle this intuitively - which is why we go round and round so much.. Their brain says "steeper bevel on this one" and their arms just do it without them having to consciously decide to shoot for a 40 degree bevel on the Aldi rather than 35 on the Stanley and 28 on the Two Cherries or whatever.. But if you ask them - they would tell you they sharpen all of them "The Same"...

[Robert Engel]

The convex bevel idea of Mr. Sellers is totally counterintuitive IMO.

For one, it increases the wedge effect and two, the edge cannot possible be as sharp.

Also, I'm of the opinion that improper/excessive stropping can actually dull an edge due to a dubbing effect.

So I also don't do the 30 strokes on a strop that he advocates.

Still in all, I love his approach he has influenced me to return more often to my first love - hand tools.

[Jim Koepke]

IIRC the test he used to draw that conclusion was more along the lines of "can I take a continuous reasonably thin shaving" rather than "does this leave the best possible surface on the wood". The qualities of the shaving should be irrelevant except inasmuch as they help us understand why we are (or aren't) producing a specific result at the surface.

My recollection is he was saying for finish work most will stop sanding after ~250 grit to apply a finish so it should be adequate for a plane blade.

Maybe if there was a disclaimer at the beginning of the "250 grit is all that is needed" video my mind reading abilities wouldn't have been put to such a difficult task.

Certainly a few others didn't get the message. In one sharpening thread someone argued they could get a blade fine for finishing with 80 grit sand paper. Maybe they were going for a wind worn rustic look.

jtk

[Patrick Chase]

IIRC the test he used to draw that conclusion was more along the lines of "can I take a continuous reasonably thin shaving" rather than "does this leave the best possible surface on the wood". The qualities of the shaving should be irrelevant except inasmuch as they help us understand why we are (or aren't) producing a specific result at the surface.

Here's the blog post in question. It turns out that his standard *is* specified in terms of the wood's surface (good), but his standard is "sufficiently finished for sanding" (err, not good). His test pieces are all noticeable straight-grained, which makes it an easy test in terms of both materials and grading.

Why bother smoothing at all if you're just going to break out the abrasives anyway?

[John C Cox]

IIRC the test he used to draw that conclusion was more along the lines of "can I take a continuous reasonably thin shaving" rather than "does this leave the best possible surface on the wood". The qualities of the shaving should be irrelevant except inasmuch as they help us understand why we are (or aren't) producing a specific result at the surface.

I would put it like this:
"Does it adequately do the work I am expecting it to?"

For example - if I am cleaning off saw marks with my plane, I don't really care about the ultimate quality of the wood finish as long as it's "adequate" - aka minimal tearout... In this case, I would really like to take a nice thick shaving and be done in a pass or 3... That requires far less precise setup...

On the other hand - if I am edge jointing and need an invisible glue line - that takes a different sort of edge prep and plane setup... In this case - I am taking transparent shavings and chasing the high spots while candling the joint..

[Jim Koepke]

Here's the blog post in question. It turns out that his standard *is* specified in terms of the wood's surface (good), but his standard is "sufficiently finished for sanding" (err, not good). His test pieces are all noticeable straight-grained, which makes it an easy test in terms of both materials and grading.

Why bother smoothing at all if you're just going to break out the abrasives anyway?

+1 on that

My use of sand paper has diminished as my ability to sharpen has improved. Mostly now my sandpaper is used on metal work, the lathe or for rounding dowel ends.

jtk

[Warren Mickley]

Sellers techniques are pitiful. There is much better information on this forum.

[John C Cox]

Why bother smoothing at all if you're just going to break out the abrasives anyway?

Ha!

My guitar finishes have gotten exponentially better since I switched to sandpaper for the final levelling and sanding tasks..

It's worthwhile to get as close as you can - but getting the edge tools off the bench sooner has resulted in a lot less chips and damage to fix immediately prior to my finishes.. There's nothing quite like the feeling of seeing a well set and very sharp plane pull a chip right before you were about to wipe finish.. Groan...

[Graham Haydon]

Warren drops the bomb .

I think Paul's info is ok and good for getting started. However, over time, he has gotten a bit too heavy and over the top. I had a quick read of his info on plane sharpening angles that was linked to and read that a "macro camber" sharpened at 41 degrees provides a strong edge. I think sadly the Myth Buster has become Myth Maker.

That said, he does does have a following who he helps enjoy woodworking. Plus, he was on a team of people who made a smart piece of furniture for the White House http://www.sustainlife.org/woodworking-craftmanship/ . Mind you, I think it helps to have Frank Strazza on your team

[Mike Baker 2]

I love Paul Sellers. He makes me want to work wood.
We can argue technique on sharpening, or anything else. Well, you guys can; I don't have the experience working wood to get into all that. I will find what does and does not work for me like everyone else did, by doing.
But I take from Mr. Sellers what I can grasp and use, and what seems logical to me, and discard the rest. But he is not the only source I use. I believe in looking at things from many different viewpoints and figuring out what I think works better for me. There are others I watch as well, and take from also.
I also tend to try things that aren't "written", make things my own, to some degree. If it works I keep it, if it don't, I toss it aside.
But his sheer enthusiasm for wood working, and his encouragement to new wood workers to just get in there and work wood, is infectious. And I believe it's very practical, in that I learn much more from my mistakes than from anything else.
MHO.

[Jim Koepke]

Warren drops the bomb .

I think Paul's info is ok and good for getting started. However, over time, he has gotten a bit too heavy and over the top. I had a quick read of his info on plane sharpening angles that was linked to and read that a "macro camber" sharpened at 41 degrees provides a strong edge. I think sadly the Myth Buster has become Myth Maker.

That said, he does does have a following who he helps enjoy woodworking. Plus, he was on a team of people who made a smart piece of furniture for the White House http://www.sustainlife.org/woodworking-craftmanship/ . Mind you, I think it helps to have Frank Strazza on your team

Something seen on one of Paul Seller's videos gave me the impression he claimed the pieces for the White House were done all by himself.

A 41º bevel would make for a strong edge, but it might not work too well in a plane bladed bedded at 45º.

jtk

[lowell holmes]

Warren, if you had ever seen Paul Sellers work, you might not have that opinion.

Also, Frank Strazza is possibly the most talented woodworkers I ever met.

I can tell you that if you ever have the opportunity to visit Homestead Heritage you should do so.