source for holtey or other high end plane blades?

Re: source for holtey or other high end plane blad

Moses Yoder in White Pigeon, MI

>Better than a Hock iron? Never thought of that before.

Top Plane Blade Performance

Steve Elliott

>Top performance from plane blades is something I'm especially interested in. I've used a Holtey S53 infill plane blade and compared it to Hock A2, older laminated steel blades, an Academy Saws M2 blade (high speed steel) and a blade made from a powder-metallurgy alloy called CPM 3V.

The Holtey S53 blade will reach its best sharpness only when honed using diamond. Waterstones abrade it very slowly, but won't give it a really sharp edge no matter how much time you spend honing it. It has a tendency to chip, so a bevel angle of 34 degrees or more is necessary except possibly for soft woods. Grinding with a Tormek takes a very long time.

The A2 blade also needed a somewhat higher bevel angle to prevent microchipping. The older carbon steel blades didn't chip as easily, but lost their sharpness somewhat more quickly than the A2.

The Academy Saws M2 blade has much better edge retention than A2 and resists chipping, but grinds VERY slowly.

The CPM 3V blade has less tendency to chip and can be used with a final bevel angle of about 32 degrees for most species. It requires diamond honing, but seems to take a sharp edge better (quicker) than the S53.

If you’re interested in the details of how I came to these conclusions, they’re available on my web site (below).

Top performance from plane blades is something I'm especially interested in. I've used a Holtey S53 infill plane blade and compared it to Hock A2, older laminated steel blades, an Academy Saws M2 blade (high speed steel) and a blade made from a powder-metallurgy alloy called CPM 3V.

The Holtey S53 blade will reach its best sharpness only when honed using diamond. Waterstones abrade it very slowly, but won't give it a really sharp edge no matter how much time you spend honing it. It has a tendency to chip, so a bevel angle of 34 degrees or more is necessary except possibly for soft woods. Grinding with a Tormek takes a very long time.

The A2 blade also needed a somewhat higher bevel angle to prevent microchipping. The older carbon steel blades didn't chip as easily, but lost their sharpness somewhat more quickly than the A2.

The Academy Saws M2 blade has much better edge retention than A2 and resists chipping, but grinds VERY slowly.

The CPM 3V blade has less tendency to chip and can be used with a final bevel angle of about 32 degrees for most species. It requires diamond honing, but seems to take a sharp edge better (quicker) than the S53.

If you’re interested in the details of how I came to these conclusions, they’re available on my web site at infillplane.com.

Re: Top Plane Blade Performance

Steve knight

>I always see plane irons rated on how good they are by how long they hold an edge. thats not a rating of good but a rating of how long they hold an edge. a better iron would have less tearout with the same angle sharpen with less effort and also hold an edge longer.

Re: Elliot knows what he is talking about

Lyn J. Mangiameli

>

U R Correct

jim reed @ Tallahassee

>it all depends on how you define performance. Beyond a certain point, it is all trade offs. Easy to sharpen usually means sharpen often. Long wearing often means brittle. Superior performance in softwoods does not always translate into superior performance in hard woods. With high end blades you must pick your poision. Just my $.02--YMMV.

Re: My findings

Lyn J. Mangiameli

>Other than with respect to edge longevity (rate of erosion, chipping, rolling, etc.), which only determines how long a blade will function optimally, I just don't find discernable differences in achievable surface quality between blades of equal sharpness yet different materials. The key here is equal sharpness, which can be easily verified under magnification. I have several planes where I can interchange some combination of various blades from materials such as O2, M2, M4, A-2,A-11 and even V-15, as well as the laminated blades of the Japanese and Western varieties. For the same set up, sharpness, and blade geometry, in the same plane, I just haven't been able to determine reliable differences on over 40 different woods I've tested on.

This is not to say that some plane/blade/geometry configurations when considered as a synergistic package may not manage to achieve superior surface finish, but blade material in and of itself, IME, is not a significant variable in obtaining optimal surface finish.

Re: U R Correct

Steve knight

>easy to sharpen can mean a laminated iron so your only sharpening a small amount of hard steel. very hard edge can be tempered by a soft back and high quality heat treating.

the problem is we have a limited choice of solid steels to make cutting tools from. most were never designed for the job.

laminating really helps to make a better blade and take the problems of the higher end steels.

though os far I have nto seen a iron that mkaes a difference in soft or hardwoods. well oen that does not hold up to tropicals maybe but it is more a function of the plane then the iron for the different woods.

A question Steve...floating OT

Scott Burr in Ben Lomond CA

>First off, nice web site. I was just wondering who made your unhandled coffin smoother? Look like my E.P. Preston.

The plane in the photo is . . .

Steve Elliott

>a Mathieson. Right now it's my favorite "user" plane. Glad you liked the web site.