Chisel Question

I don't think so

mike recchione

>I'm sure there must be some reason why some chisels are made one way or the other, but I've certainly not noticed any difference in use. One special feature of socket chisels seems to be that you can use them without a handle, driving them with a hammer to get that much sought after mushroomed socket effect. It goes really well with the splatters from opening up cans of paint.

Re: Chisel Question

JL

>I don't know - are there any advantages to having shock absorbers on a car? Most of the tang chisels (the good ones anyway) have the "shock absorber" pad.

Re: Chisel Question

Joel

>Sorry - the reason for the leather washer is to make it easier to fit the handles - in the old days the better chisels do not have leather washers.

Re: Chisel Question

Ernie Miller Topeka

>I think it might have had somthing to do with ease to make. I think tang were easier to forge and socket had to be cast. I saw swweet hear 750's going for $30 each at a farm auction this weekend?

Re: Chisel Question

Derek Cohen (in Perth, Australia)

>I have a few sets of both socket and tang chisels, and I really do not see much difference in actual use.

Psychologically, the socket chisels seem to say to me " you can tap me HARD with your little hammer". While the tang chisels seem to say " go EASY". But this is just a perception, not a reality.

One of the chisels I collect are the Bergs. I go for the tanged versions and these always appear to be cheaper than the socketed versions. Perhaps this reflects that socket chisels are more expensive to manufacture.

Regards from Perth

Derek

Re: Chisel Question

JL

>Works for me. I was told that it was to act as a cushioning device. As I only have "cheap" chisels (Narex), I haven't really seen many w/ leather washers.

Banging hard

mike recchione

>I thought about that notion but rejected it. Doesn't the bolster on a tang chisel make it just as good for banging on as a socket chisel? I was looking at my mortise chisels (meant for banging and prying), and exactly half of them are tanged and half are socketed. Maybe it's significant that the traditional English "pigsticker" has a tang - it can't be all bad for banging on.

Re: Banging hard

joel

>All chisel handles if properly mounted should work well with downward force. Prying is another matter.

The weakest point in a socket chisel is just about the socket where there is a little gap before the handle expands to full size. That's the narrowest section of wood that can break and it's limited by the size of the socket.

On a tanged chisel all you do is make a fatter handle. In the case of the oval handle mortise chisels - which are the stoutest of all the english patterns, the oval allows you to make a very strong section in the direction of the force, but still keep the width of the chisel narrow and easy to grasp.

Re: Chisel Question

Todd Hughes

>I believe socket chisels are a much stronger design then tang ones. With a tang chisel handle you have a handle with a hole in it which if you think about has got to weaken it while a socket handle is solid. With a socket handle as it is hit it compressers into the socket which holds it together while with a tang it goes straight up against the bolster and of course with a tang chisel you have a 4 sided wedge being driven into your handle which the bolster is supposed to keep from being driven in to far.Tang chisels normaly have much smaller necks in front of the bolster then socket chisels have in front of the socket and this leads to them becoming bent.Also the tangs in the handle can get bent as well while hard to do with a socket chisel. All these reasons are why with "Pig Sticker" type mortice chisels [almost always English makers] have Huge handles and are still often found with busted ones.....and why socket mortice chisels are much more common

I don't think socket chisels became common much befor 1800 probably because they are harder to make when hand forging using tradtional ways. I believe the English held on longer against making socket chisels because they used hand forging longer then the US factorys who became automated pretty early on due to lack of manpower.By the way most if not all vintage socket chisels are forged and not cast in my experance.... Maybe not true with English chisels but I think if you look most American chisels you see that if they are ment to be hit with a mallet and have leather bumpers or driving rings will be socket chisels because they hold up better...In my opinon no comparisn between the two as which is stronger. Of course many chisel types don't need to be that strong and a tang works fine and that is why they are used....Todd

Re: Chisel Question

Joel

>"All these reasons are why with "Pig Sticker" type mortice chisels [almost always English makers] have Huge handles and are still often found with busted ones.....and why socket mortice chisels are much more common"

The reason why socketed chisels are more common in the us than English Mortise chisels were that there were NO makers of English socket chisels in the US so any chisels you do find are likely from before 1850. After 1850 the overwhelming amount of mortising was done by cabinetmakers by machine. In the few American catalogs that list both styles the English style is recommended.

In England, English mortise chisels are very common. Socketed American chisels are much rarer. So much for the theory about handle strength. The English adopted machinery a lot later than the Americans which is why the English Mortise chisels were in production till just after WW2.

I have in my colleciton 200 year old Mortise chisels which still have lots of live in them. If I tried to use any socketed chisels with the speed of efficiency I can use an English Mortise chisel - I would break the chisel. And it's not that I don't like Americian chisels - I love the 750's

I have incidenctly tried to break the handles of English mortise chisels in user tests - I haven't been able too. EVERY case of handle failure in the english styles I have seen cam from someone using a steel hammer on the handle and splitting it from the top. (A wooden mallet is the correct tool) I have seen handle failures on American socket chisels three ways: STeel hammer damage, broken off handles at the top of the socket, misshapen tapers which don't fit the handle.

I think - but I have no proof of this - it's just a theory - Socket mortise chisels are easier to mass produce as long as you have really big drop forges - which the American makers had. The socket is totally consistent and the handles can be mass produced.

Tanged chisels are much harder to make consistently in a factory because the tangs were forged seperately from bolster and to fit a handle properly you might have to drill the hold off center in the handle so that the tool itself is centered. That is how all chisels were mounted in Sheffield until recently and many firms still do it that way. English firms were historically capital short so the older technology remained in force. You also get a lighter tool which is most cases is a great thing.

Re: Chisel Question

William Duffield, on the Cohansey

>Nope, the socket didn't have to be cast. For example, I have an old 3" skick by J.D.Kimball with a forged socket.

Re: Chisel Question

Mike McDaniel

>My opinion! Nothing feels sweeter in the hand, then a quality socket chisel. No harsh corners, or sharp metal edges to dig at my palms. I own full sets(1/8" to 2") of both, and I always grab for the sockets. Even most of my gouges are sockets.

Re: Chisel history

Adam Cherubini

>Patrick,

This may be personal preference thing. I can't help you with your question.

But just in case anyone is interested: Gabriel's 1791 inventory priced 1" socketed chisels at 6d (pence) and a 1" tanged firmers at half that amount. This isn't true for all sizes (socket chisels being twice the price of a tanged chisel), but its roughly true for the larger sizes. These prices are probably chisels sans handles. Hard to say how the handle and the fitting would effect the price. Elsewhere handles were listed seperately, though I don't recall the prices. 3/1d? I forget.

It may be of interest that socketed chisels simply weren't available in small sizes and weren't available in as great a variety of sizes as their tanged counter parts. Perhaps the stronger and more expensive chisels were made for heavier work, leaving lighter duties to less expensive tools????

Please watch for an upcoming PW article on this subject. While it won't answer your question specifically, I hope it gives the background info needed to make smart chisel choices.

Adam