Mortise chisels

[Osvaldo Cristo]

https://youtu.be/q_NXq7_TILA

For years I had the opinion traditional mortise chisels had a such format for limitations on the quality of available steel in the past. It was reinforced a few years ago when I watched this movie and now "accidentally" I found it again as automatic YT suggestion.

Definetivelly I am not an authority on the subject and I really would like know your experience and practice. Please forgive me if this theme was raised on the past but I couldn´t find.

Thanks in advance for your feedback.

[Jim Koepke]

Osvaldo, There are almost as many different opinions on how to cut a mortise as there are opinions on sharpening.

My preference is to use a mortise chisel instead of a bench chisel when possible.

Many of my mortises over 1/2" have been cut with firmer or bench chisels. It is tough to find mortise chisels larger than 1/2" at a decent price.


As Paul Sellers said, a large mortise chisel can feel awkward in use. After you use one on a dozen mortises it might start to feel natural.

jtk

[Ed Mitchell]

While steel quality did vary greatly 300 years ago, mortise chisels have more steel simply so that you can they can take more abuse than your standard bench chisels without concern. The Renaissance Woodworker spoke about this -- it's not the sharpness of a mortise chisel that matters, it's the angle of the grind used for splitting and for leverage. So if you're using them thusly, they'd better be able to handle those forces.

I don't think Paul Sellers would disagree, either. Much of Paul's message is simply that you don't need expensive tools or a vast collection of tools to get started making fine furniture. The two messages do not contradict -- a bench chisel can be used to make a mortise if you take a little extra care (which is exactly what Paul says at the beginning of the video), and yes, a mortise chisel is a highly effective tool for cutting mortises by hand.

[Jim Matthews]

I'm with EM - at our course Mr. Sellers expressed real pleasure in using fine (often expensive) tools but emphasized that good quality could be has for little $$.

*****

This is the method I use, but I bought a set of Narex mortising chisels, because they're more effective.

An important aspect for getting a clean (and straight) mortice wall is a sharp "side" edge. 1:34 of the following video demonstrates preparing a mortice chisel for this.
https://youtu.be/FYDqeQeov7o

[Derek Cohen]

Ed, I am not sure I agree with Shannon Rogers on this. There is a significant difference when a chisel is sharp. Further, it is relevant that the leading edges at the back of the blade are sharp as well. One is not simply splitting wood away, but cutting/cleaning the sides of the mortice.

I also disagree with Paul Sellers. I am not saying that a bench chisel cannot be used for chopping mortices - clearly it can. I've done it, he does it. It is just that his demonstration is flawed, and in this it becomes an argument for ditching traditional mortice chisels. PS does this because he seeks a cheap method, and what gets lost in this is support for the better method. Chopping against glass biased the results his way. The mortice chisel is designed to support itself and remain directional. The glass aids the directional factor of a bench chisel that is poor with self-direction. PS also pushes a jig which supports a bench chisel in the same way glass does. You have to ask why?

Before you decide on what you will use, try both methods - without a side support.

Regards from Perth

Derek

[Warren Mickley]

In the 17th century and early 18th century, mortise chisels had a reverse taper; they were thinner near the bolster than at the bevel. (They might have had a slight taper in with also). This illustrates that the thickness is not so much for strength as to keep the chisel registered in the cut. A thin chisel can rotate in the cut and cannot register and be jigged by the previous cuts.

In the 19th century mortise chisels became more and more robust, culminating in what some call the pigsticker. I would not call this a traditional chisel. It arose during a time when mortising machines were common. At the time, they were called the joiner's mortise chisel. They became so beefy that it was difficult to make a deep mortise unless it was very long. It is difficult to maneuver a thick chisel in a deep mortise. At the same time a second type of mortise chisel arose , the sash mortise chisel. Because sash rails are thin the mortises are narrow and a problem for the thick chisels. Cabinetmakers also tended to use sash mortise chisels for frame and panel work, which also tended to have more delicate frames.

A lot of amateurs today are using the pigsticker chisels make very shallow mortises, one inch deep or less, even in stiles that are over two inches wide. This is not traditional work.

I have a number of chisels that are 200 years old that I use in my work. The steel is very fine: fine grained for a nice edge and long lasting. The advantage of buying a new chisel is that it might be more carefully ground, not that it has good steel.

[Thomas Wilson]

One of Seller’s points is that the bevel chisel was substantially faster. The difference may be how much metal was rubbing against the uncut side of the chop. The longer bevel of the mortise chisel created more friction and thus slower cutting.

A point he did not make was how the two would compare on the tenth or hundredth mortise cut, however many were cut before sharpening. A blunter tool may have given different results. The heavier tool could take the punishment of bludgeoning through without breaking. Speed was less important than durability. In this video, both chisels are cutting, cleanly separating fibers.

[William Fretwell]

Osvaldo, I think Derek has it right. I have three Ray Isles modern pig stickers. The sharp corners do clean up the mortice as you cut. The deep chisel stays straight as you cut and adds great strength for leverage. You can pound the F.....Bujeesus out of them with gay abandon. They are much faster that way. Force applied = wood removed. It is such a different way of working, you pound away like a lunatic and the chisel says “that’s all ya got?”.
I destroyed a Wood is Good heavy mallet pounding a pig sticker and they are supposed to be indestructible!

[Mark Rainey]

Osvaldo, I think Derek has it right. I have three Ray Isles modern pig stickers. The sharp corners do clean up the mortice as you cut. The deep chisel stays straight as you cut and adds great strength for leverage. You can pound the F.....Bujeesus out of them with gay abandon. They are much faster that way. Force applied = wood removed. It is such a different way of working, you pound away like a lunatic and the chisel says “that’s all ya got?”.
I destroyed a Wood is Good heavy mallet pounding a pig sticker and they are supposed to be indestructible!

Agreed William, one of the finest pleasures of hand tool use is violent mortising.

[Jim Koepke]

One of Seller’s points is that the bevel chisel was substantially faster. The difference may be how much metal was rubbing against the uncut side of the chop.

Yes, it is kind of like the difference between driving a 6d nail and a 16d nail. The small nail can be driven with a light hammer. The bigger nail will take forever to drive with a light hammer.

Listen to the sound of the blows as he is hitting the chisels. It may have just been the difference of hitting plastic instead of wood. To me it sounded like stronger blows on the bevel sided chisel. His pigsticker may have been more effective using a mallet with greater mass.

His technique seemed a little more sloppy with the pigsticker. Remember he had a large mound left in the middle that took extra time to correct.

A longer bevel sided chisel will be more likely to flex or bend when levering a deep mortise. A few of my longer ebay chisels have arrived with a bit of belly.

A very important aspect to it all is the sharpness of the chisels. Even the slightest skew of the edge or change of angle across the bevel can cause the chisel to turn in the cut. That could cause loss of speed and the rough edges shown for the pigsticker. Also as the video link posted by Jim Matthews there are three sides that need to be sharp for cutting a clean mortise.

It may be just whacking a chisel, but there is a lot of preparation that goes into it.

jtk

[Ed Mitchell]

Ed, I am not sure I agree with Shannon Rogers on this. There is a significant difference when a chisel is sharp. Further, it is relevant that the leading edges at the lack of the blade are sharp as well. One is not simply splitting wood away, but cutting/cleaning the sides of the mortice.

I also disagree with Paul Sellers. I am not saying that a bench chisel cannot be used for chopping mortices - clearly it can. I've done it, he does it. It is just that his demonstration is flawed, and in this it becomes an argument for ditching traditional mortice chisels. PS does this because he seeks a cheap method, and what gets lost in this is support for the better method. Chopping against glass biased the results his way. The mortice chisel is designed to support itself and remain directional. The glass aids the directional factor of a bench chisel that is poor with self-direction. PS also pushes a jig which supports a bench chisel in the same way glass does. You have to ask why?

Before you decide on what you will use, try both methods - without a side support.

Derek, I don't think Shannon would disagree with you -- sharp always makes a significant difference. But "significant" is not the same as "primary", therefore you both might well be in agreement. Perhaps I'm misunderstanding what Shannon was trying to communicate, so the fault here would be mine, but I think he was saying that the wedging action is primary, and sharpness is not insignificant, but rather secondary.

As for Paul Sellers, you are so many light-years away from what Paul is trying to do that again, I don't think there is disagreement. I believe Paul would never support an argument to ditch traditional mortise chisels if you have them. Anyone making such an argument and claiming their argument has support from Paul's work has, imo, misunderstood what Paul is doing and is building a house of cards.

I think Paul is trying to get the person who has never done any woodworking in their lives to stick a toe in the water. To do this, he is teaching methods that emphasize being inexpensive and approachable. I'd bet he would agree with you that his demonstration has flaws and the mortise chisel has inherent advantages, but you might have missed the fact that your recommendation has an inherent assumption. You're recommending someone try both methods, which means they must first acquire both kinds of chisels, and that's exactly the kind of additional investment (in both money and time) which perhaps goes unnoticed by a man with tens of thousands of dollars in high-end woodworking tools and a long history of expert woodworking, but might well mean the difference between a novice deciding to stick with woodworking or take up (e.g.) gardening as a less expensive, less demanding hobby instead.

I've seen videos by Paul where he uses a simple jig to aid in the cutting of mortises with bench chisels, and the "why" seems clear. The jig costs nothing to make, and his experience teaching thousands of beginners for decades has shown him that it helps beginners both achieve better results than they might get without the jig and without requiring them to buy additional tools, as well as overcome a concern about remaining plumb on some of their cuts. Better results at no cost to beginners == more beginners deciding to stick with woodworking....and as they progress, they eventually cease to be beginners, and then they stumble on the works of people like yourself, and can grow further (and start learning about some subtleties that they didn't know, and shopping for more tools, and etc) but by then Paul's job is long since accomplished, and it's time for the Derek Cohens of the world to light their way.

As I see it, Paul is the grade school teacher, and you're the university professor. Both are needed, just at different times.

[Jim Koepke]

I think Paul is trying to get the person who has never done any woodworking in their lives to stick a toe in the water. To do this, he is teaching methods that emphasize being inexpensive and approachable.

Maybe it helps people avoid the idea of needing to wait until they can purchase expensive tools before being able to make mortise & tenon joints.

Though some of my mortise chisels cost less than some of my regular bench chisels, it is good for new comers to woodworking know they can get started with what they have on hand.

Too many get involved by purchasing a lot of high end tools without even opening the box until "the time is right." All too often a year or two later they are selling unused tools because they never had the time or tools they thought they would need to get started.

jtk

[Michael J Evans]

Derek, I don't think Shannon would disagree with you -- sharp always makes a significant difference. But "significant" is not the same as "primary", therefore you both might well be in agreement. Perhaps I'm misunderstanding what Shannon was trying to communicate, so the fault here would be mine, but I think he was saying that the wedging action is primary, and sharpness is not insignificant, but rather secondary.

As for Paul Sellers, you are so many light-years away from what Paul is trying to do that again, I don't think there is disagreement. I believe Paul would never support an argument to ditch traditional mortise chisels if you have them. Anyone making such an argument and claiming their argument has support from Paul's work has, imo, misunderstood what Paul is doing and is building a house of cards.

I think Paul is trying to get the person who has never done any woodworking in their lives to stick a toe in the water. To do this, he is teaching methods that emphasize being inexpensive and approachable. I'd bet he would agree with you that his demonstration has flaws and the mortise chisel has inherent advantages, but you might have missed the fact that your recommendation has an inherent assumption. You're recommending someone try both methods, which means they must first acquire both kinds of chisels, and that's exactly the kind of additional investment (in both money and time) which perhaps goes unnoticed by a man with tens of thousands of dollars in high-end woodworking tools and a long history of expert woodworking, but might well mean the difference between a novice deciding to stick with woodworking or take up (e.g.) gardening as a less expensive, less demanding hobby instead.

I've seen videos by Paul where he uses a simple jig to aid in the cutting of mortises with bench chisels, and the "why" seems clear. The jig costs nothing to make, and his experience teaching thousands of beginners for decades has shown him that it helps beginners both achieve better results than they might get without the jig and without requiring them to buy additional tools, as well as overcome a concern about remaining plumb on some of their cuts. Better results at no cost to beginners == more beginners deciding to stick with woodworking....and as they progress, they eventually cease to be beginners, and then they stumble on the works of people like yourself, and can grow further (and start learning about some subtleties that they didn't know, and shopping for more tools, and etc) but by then Paul's job is long since accomplished, and it's time for the Derek Cohens of the world to light their way.

As I see it, Paul is the grade school teacher, and you're the university professor. Both are needed, just at different times.

Ed, hit the nail on the head.
At a time when I was making less than 35k a year and supporting four people, Paul gave me the confidence that I didn't have to have a planer,jointer, mortise machine,router, etc to do good woodworking. His message is you can do great work without needing the most expensive tools, and every specialty tool under the sun.

Paul is the reason I got into hand tools, and built my workbench.

Yes I'm a little bit of a fan boy. But his methods are really no nonsense and work.

[lowell holmes]

I agree.

[Derek Cohen]

Ed, hit the nail on the head.
At a time when I was making less than 35k a year and supporting four people, Paul gave me the confidence that I didn't have to have a planer,jointer, mortise machine,router, etc to do good woodworking. His message is you can do great work without needing the most expensive tools, and every specialty tool under the sun.

Paul is the reason I got into hand tools, and built my workbench.

Yes I'm a little bit of a fan boy. But his methods are really no nonsense and work.

Michael, Paul has built a huge ... huge ... following out of those with a desire and little funds. And it is a business. He earns money from this. That is fine, but I just do not like the Evangelist Paul. I very much like the Teacher Paul, and also the Craftsman Paul, and watch his videos for this. The Evangelist Paul comes across as egocentric, narcissistic and rigid. He does not appear open to methods other than he own. He will remove messages on his web page from those who (politely) question his methods (I know). The Evangelist Paul will cook the books to make his points. Such as using a BU plane incorrectly to make it perform less well than his beloved #4. Such as planing with a 250 grit sharpened blade on soft wood. When it comes to morticing, he is not stating that traditional mortice chisels are preferred but that bench chisels will suffice until then (and here is a way to do it). He has garnered a large following because they like him leading a rebellious movement. And he plays to this.

Regards from Perth

Derek