Travisher?

[Richard Verwoest]

Hello all,

I seem to recall someone building some chair travishers. But I cannot seem to find the thread. Any help?

Thanks,

Richard

[John Keeton]

Elia Bizzarri builds them. Or, you can do what I did and buy the blade and sole plate from him and build your own.

Claire Minihan also builds them as does James Mursell. Highland Hardware sells one, too.

[Derek Cohen]

Hello all,

I seem to recall someone building some chair travishers. But I cannot seem to find the thread. Any help?

Thanks,

Richard

Richard, I’ve posted pictures of a few I built. I used Claire’s video, however be warned that this was Mk1, and the version used by Peter Galbert (which is the foundation for Claire’s video) has since changed for the better. The change is in the shape of the blade/intersection with the wear plate.

Search for pics, and yell out if you have difficulties.

I made all the components - curved blade, etc - from scratch. You can too.

Regards from Perth

Derek

[Bob Glenn]

Plus one on Galbert's design. Additionally, you can touch up the cutting edge without removing the iron from the tool.

[stevo wis]

James Mursell of travisher.com makes an excellent travisher and he sells them completed or as a kit.

Stevo

[Derek Cohen]

Has anyone here used travishers from both James Mursell and Peter Galbert? Anyone that can comment on using James' travisher?

The reason I ask is because I suspect that their designs are quite different - not that the look different, but that they are used differently.

Regards from Perth

Derek

[Tony Shea]

I own both James' and Claire's travisher and switch between them often when carving a seat. I personally don't have a ton of experience carving seats and all of it has been done in hardwoods, maple and walnut. I typically use the Mursell travisher for rougher work and save the blade on Claire's for getting a nicer surface. Although you can hold Claire's travisher to take a pretty aggressive cut I can get work done quicker by setting the blade out on the Mursell travisher since the blade is adjustable.

The biggest difference in use is that the sole length on the Mursell travisher seems to be longer. This means that getting into the tight radius at the back edge of a carved seat can be awkward depending on what direction the grain is running on your seat. Because the Minihan Travisher has a shorter sole it can create a tighter radius just as a round sole spokeshave does compared to a flat sole. Other than that the motion and technique is relatively the same. They both are very comfortable and mostly intuitive although tavishers in general aren't very intuitive due to having to rock more forward for a shallower cut. The body of the Mursell Travisher is also longer therefore some with small hands might struggle a bit keeping a good grip. I have average sized hands and find it very comfortable.

In terms of maintaining the blade sharpness I find the Minihan Travisher easier to make sharp. The blade has a natural hallow on the flat side and also does not have tangs like the Mursell does. The tangs can get in the way if one needs or wants to grind the blade and put a hollow in the bevel.

Overall they are amazing tools and I really like using both of them. I think everyone would love both versions and wouldn't hesitate recommending either of or both of them.

[Richard Verwoest]

Thanks for all the comments.

Derek, I only found 3-4 pictures I beleive from you. Some bar steel and some older travishers I beleive you made new blades for.

I am thinking of buying a blade and following the video from Claire. Time will tell.

Richard

[John Keeton]

Richard, I emailed with Claire when building my travisher as my main question was the positioning of the sole as related to the blade. She was gracious in responding and indicated that a horizontal gap isn't necessary and that a gap of around 1/64" (sole lower than edge of blade) was enough. I also rounded the leading edge of the sole. I haven't seen Claire's video, so all of that may be covered in the video.

Also, Derek is far more accomplished and knowledgeable on these sort of things, so I will defer to him in the event my comments contradict his thoughts.

[Derek Cohen]

Tony, thanks for taking the time to respond with such detail. The reason for my question is that I suspect that their is likely to be a difference in design, which will affect how one uses these travishers. The design difference would be at the wear in front of the mouth. It is a subtle thing, but with profound impact.

Recently, there was a discussion about wooden spokeshaves at WoodCentral. At first I was hesitant to mention this issue, since I assumed that others knew about it, and doing so would just sound preachy. However, I soon realised that this was not so, and the content below borrows from my post there.

One can inter-change spokeshaves and travishers in the content below.

The information you gave indicated that the two travishers set up differently. Correct me if I have read this the wrong way ... read too much jnto your comments.

James Murcells’s travisher appears to require the blade to be raised or lowered for the depth of cut. Like the traditional metal plane - and metal spokeshave - a fine set produces a fine shaving. Then increase the blade projection, and you get a thicker shaving. There is some effort to do so, and so you leave this travisher set up for a rank cut.

The Claire Minihan/Peter Galbert travisher only requires a single setting - in fact, the blade is fixed for what appears to be a fine cut, yet it can be made to take a rank cut with the same setting. How does this work? This is what is soooo interesting! These are two I made ...



The notable feature of the Peter Galbert design travishers is the mouth/sole ..



... the wear angles at 3 degrees away from the mouth.

The effect of this is that forward pressure reduces the depth of cut, and the shaving taken is quite fine. Place pressure on the rear of the sole, and the depth of cut it increeased, with a thicker shaving taken (it may be the other way around ... )

It occurred to me that this must be the same with vintage wooden spokeshaves. However I do not own any in good enough condition to test this out. I have HNT Gordon woodies, but they are really like small hand planes. Metal spokeshaves, similarly, have coplanar soles. Even the curved ones - the wear area continues into the mouth. It does not drop away.

The closest I have is a set of wooden Stanley spokeshaves, such as the #84 ...



The wear here does angle, and I can induce a thick and thin shaving in the same manner to a travisher.
Interestingly, this is not the case with the Veritas LA spokeshave, which resembles the Stanley. The wear is parallel ..




If this is correct, I find it interesting that a common recommendation for metal spokeshaves - to open one side and close the other - is suggested for woodies. If woodies are designed to be used like the travisher, then the blade can be left in a single position.

Back to the two travishers in question: my supposition is that James’ design is like the traditional metal spokeshave, and Peter’s is like the traditional wooden spokeshave.

Regards from Perth

Derek

[Derek Cohen]

Thanks for all the comments.

Derek, I only found 3-4 pictures I beleive from you. Some bar steel and some older travishers I beleive you made new blades for.

I am thinking of buying a blade and following the video from Claire. Time will tell.

Richard

Richard, when I get a chance, I will post photos of how I built these travishers.

Regards from Perth

Derek

[Tony Shea]

Tony, thanks for taking the time to respond with such detail. The reason for my question is that I suspect that their is likely to be a difference in design, which will affect how one uses these travishers. The design difference would be at the wear in front of the mouth. It is a subtle thing, but with profound impact.

Recently, there was a discussion about wooden spokeshaves at WoodCentral. At first I was hesitant to mention this issue, since I assumed that others knew about it, and doing so would just sound preachy. However, I soon realised that this was not so, and the content below borrows from my post there.

One can inter-change spokeshaves and travishers in the content below.

The information you gave indicated that the two travishers set up differently. Correct me if I have read this the wrong way ... read too much jnto your comments.

James Murcells’s travisher appears to require the blade to be raised or lowered for the depth of cut. Like the traditional metal plane - and metal spokeshave - a fine set produces a fine shaving. Then increase the blade projection, and you get a thicker shaving. There is some effort to do so, and so you leave this travisher set up for a rank cut.

The Claire Minihan/Peter Galbert travisher only requires a single setting - in fact, the blade is fixed for what appears to be a fine cut, yet it can be made to take a rank cut with the same setting. How does this work? This is what is soooo interesting! These are two I made ...



The notable feature of the Peter Galbert design travishers is the mouth/sole ..



... the wear angles at 3 degrees away from the mouth.

The effect of this is that forward pressure reduces the depth of cut, and the shaving taken is quite fine. Place pressure on the rear of the sole, and the depth of cut it increeased, with a thicker shaving taken (it may be the other way around ... )

It occurred to me that this must be the same with vintage wooden spokeshaves. However I do not own any in good enough condition to test this out. I have HNT Gordon woodies, but they are really like small hand planes. Metal spokeshaves, similarly, have coplanar soles. Even the curved ones - the wear area continues into the mouth. It does not drop away.

The closest I have is a set of wooden Stanley spokeshaves, such as the #84 ...



The wear here does angle, and I can induce a thick and thin shaving in the same manner to a travisher.
Interestingly, this is not the case with the Veritas LA spokeshave, which resembles the Stanley. The wear is parallel ..




If this is correct, I find it interesting that a common recommendation for metal spokeshaves - to open one side and close the other - is suggested for woodies. If woodies are designed to be used like the travisher, then the blade can be left in a single position.

Back to the two travishers in question: my supposition is that James’ design is like the traditional metal spokeshave, and Peter’s is like the traditional wooden spokeshave.

Regards from Perth

Derek

That is actually a really good point and is something I was not very clear about. The Mursell travisher does in fact have a very similar design to the sole. I don't know the angle off the top of my head but is clearly angled compared to the blade bottom or mouth. Therefore the theory of operation is basically identical between the two different designs. That is why I am able to leave the blade set out for a pretty rank cut but I also can take relatively fine shavings setup as it is. The more you rock the tool forward the less deep of a cut it will take. This actually works a little nicer on the Mursell travisher as long as you have a large enough surface you are carving to take advantage of the longer sole this travisher has. There is more registration of the sole on the work therefore can be a little more stable. But this isn't always what you're looking for in a travisher, there are a lot of places where I prefer the shorter sole to get into tighter curves.

I googled the Mursell travisher and there are some photos online that you can clearly see the drop off in the front of the sole but again I don't know the angle. The adjustable blade is just to offer even more adjustment in depth of cut and mostly is there due to the design of the blade I assume. The blade in these Travishers are made by Ben Orford, a wonderful tool maker/green woodworker in the UK, and are O1 tool steel.

Having said all of this I still prefer my Claire Minihan travisher and can honestly say I baby it. This is why I like having two different travishers so I can baby the really pretty one that also works so darn well.

[John Keeton]

Perhaps as important as the length of the blade is the radius. Elia’s blade is 4.5” radius and he also sells a 12” radius. Claire’s standard blade is 4.25” radius and she also makes a 6.5” model. I couldn’t find the radius of the Mursell blade, but it appears greater than Elia’s 4.5”, which is what I have. I have nothing to compare to, but the one I built on Elia’s blade works well and is comfortable. The blade came sharp, but I honed the bevel to 2,000 grit to improve the edge.