18thc chisels

Re: 18thc chisels

Pam Niedermayer - Austin, TX

>What do they look like? How are they used? etc?

Pam

Re: 18thc chisels ****

mikew

>Terrible, aren't I? Thank you for the kind words.

I recently received one of C&W's smoothers--simply a wonderful tool! I took a picture with a partial of one of our saws in the background. Handsome pair, I think.

I had put off getting one of C&W's smoothers for too long--so long in fact, someone else purchased this one for me. Now I am saving my pennies for either the Jr. Jack or a panel raiser...

Take care, Mike

Re: 18thc chisels ****

mikew

>Ok, seriously.

I suspect we're talking stright-sided firmers? I have some early Butcher. Not quite the same period, though. If that's what they're basically using at Williamsburg, I use them for general bench chisels.

They also work well for cleaning out joinery for say carcass sized DTs, etc. I haven't gotten great results in smaller DTs even with the small chisels. I did grind the sides down on one to pare tails cleanly with minimal fuss on my part.

Here's one I rehandled. It was the shortest of the ones I picked up during the past summer. Still want to get some more.

Take care, Mike

Re: 18thc chisels ****

Todd Hughes

>Actually it wasn't to after 1800 that most chisels had straight sides like the one shown in the photo. Befor that the typical 1700s chisel flared out slightly toward the cutting edge giving them a very distinctive look. The further back from it the narrower it got. Suposedly they can be roughly dated from the amount of flair with the older ones having more.

....I have some 18th century type chisels somwhere or other will have to try to find them and perhaps post a picture....Todd

Re: 18thc chisels

Paul in NJ

>I don't know of anyone making 18th century style firmer chisels and I have never seen them on the used market. The closest thing you can buy are zero sweep carving chisels but even these are thicker in cross-section. The 18th century firmers tapered both in width and cross section. They were 1/16 inch (~1.5 mm) thick or less at the bevel end. I could see several advantages to these. The thin cross-section would be easier to hone and would penetrate the wood more than a thicker chisel. The tapered width would allow you to get into corners such as when doing dovetails. The main problem with them is that they would not take a lot of abuse like trying to chop a deep mortise and levering back on them, but they were never meant for this.

Paul Dzioba

Re: 18thc chisels *LINK*

Christopher Schwarz

>Tom Latane, a blacksmith, made these chisels for me out of the Diderot books. They have the shape that Todd indicated, more like a fishtail carving gouge than a modern chisel.

Interestingly, some chisels made in Asia still have this shape. Joel Moskowitz's tool museum site has some photos (see link below). And another woodworker who visited some workshops in rural China also had photos of similar tools.

Tom made the blades for me with a thin layer of steel forge welded to some cast iron. I made the handles.

They work well. Sneak into corners. They don't like the power grinder!

Chris




Tools of Vietnam

Re: 18thc chisels detail

Christopher Schwarz

>Here's a closeup of the shape of the bevel/bezel/slopey part.

Re: 18thc chisels

Todd Hughes

>I think you mean wrought iron and not cast iron...Ain't going to forge weld no steel to cast iron ! ....Todd

Re: 18thc chisels

Greg Forster

>I should be working, but...

Thanks for all the response. I broached this subject in the past on various sites and drew no interest.

The chisels I have in mind are flat sided, tapered and very thin in cross section (even fragile).

I attended a "Working with Wood" seminar several years back (on tables)

and Colonial Williamsburg had several of these "reproduction" chisels in use. Their construction went the "whole nine yards" including hammer welding a steel edge to wrought iron. The cabinet makers said it took some re-thinking on chisel use due to the almost delicate nature of the chisels.

Please, some of you going this year, take a look at these chisels and

now that Mack Headley and company have had several years working with them- what have they learned?

I can't go this year, although the more I look at this 17th c furniture and really a different method of construction from our

"beloved" Queen Anne and Chippendale, it's fascinating.

Re: 18thc chisels

Christopher Schwarz

>Todd,

You're wright about wrought. I was typing too fast.

Re: 18thc chisels *LINK*

Pam Niedermayer - Austin, TX

>Funny, just a few months ago I commissioned a bachi nomi to be made by Tasai-san. that looks a lot like these. Great minds, etc.

BTW, I love this chisel and plan to have more made as soon as I can afford it.

Pam


Bachi nomi, old Asian style chisel

Re: 18thc chisels detail

dave jeske

>Hey, The triangular shape looks familiar! I do not have any 18th century chisels but your repros look pretty neat. My chisels were originally based upon a small early Tyzack chisel I have. Don't know when it was made but "looks" all hand forged and shaped.

Dave

Them be beautiful...a nice collection

vlparisian in Houston (clearing off today)

>

Re: 18thc chisels

Dean J in MN

>Good Question. One I've been pondering for a while as well...

I can't help but think there is something we may be missing about 18th C. chisles. Time and time again I've been suprised by going back and working with close copies of 18th C tools. The marking gauge and Mike's Kenyon saws are good examples. I wonder why the "sudden" change to bevel edge chisels happened for example? Why did we lose the handle shape I see in the Seaton chest? I for one hate the handles on a lot of chisels, especially the metal rings on the top of my otherwise nice witherbys. (I need to rehandle those). I've not used a very thin firmer as descibed in this thread and found in the Seaton chest inventory. Anyone else using non-swept carving chisels as a surrogate 18th C firmer?

When we figure this mystery out, let's figure out if flat backs are needed on chisels as well. (Ducking and running...)

-Dean

hey boss

Bob Lang

>how did he make chisels out of books? If we new that secret, we'd be on to something.

Bob,

having that kind of a day

Sheesh, everyone's an editor these days... :)

Paul Kierstead

>

Re: hey boss

Christopher Schwarz

>Bob,

Isn't your annual performance review coming up?

Chris

We don't need no stinkin' flat backs!

Bob R.

>Funny you should mention the flat back thing. I actually have a couple late 19th century (I think) Sorby firmers that were going to be a bear to flatten the backs on. After reading Adam's A&M column a couple months ago I got to thinking that maybe an absolutely flat back on a chisel really is not that necessary. I decided to try the "ruler trick" on two of the firmers since it works so well on plane irons. I already had some AI chisels with flat backs so I could always use those if I ruined the Sorbys. Although I haven't used them that much yet, I haven't really noticed a difference between using the Sorbys without the absolutely flat backs and the flat backed AIs. Only time will tell if not having an absolutely flat back on the Sorbys is a disadvantage.

Re: We don't need no stinkin' flat backs!

Dean J in MN

>Bob --

Good to hear! I plan on doing the same thing to some cast-off chisels in my shop and see what real effect non-flat back has on day to day work. Can't learn if we don't try!

-Dean

Re: hey boss

Jim Shaver Oakville, Ont.

>Chris,

I'd like to add some feed back for Bob's review!

:-)

take care,

Jim

Re: We don't need no stinkin' flat backs!

Wiley Horne

>Dean,

Just to add a bit to your thought....Your post immediately above refers to 'ducking and running' at bringing up the heresy that chisel backs might not need to be perfectly flat.

Little story....I have an acquaintance who is a highly-regarded maker of commissioned furniture, violins, and timber-framed installations. He is well-known as a tool guru, albeit of the Japanese tool persuasion. Perhaps it is his background in timber-framing, but he has all of his cabinetry chisels with a slight 'knuckle' on the back. He says he wants the control that the knuckle provides. In other words, a perfectly flat-backed chisel is not necessarily self-jigging to pare straight--it may be self-jigging to dive into the work depending on how deep a cut you're making (think paring the ends of a mortise)--and so he likes a little bit of leverage to prevent this.

Well, I don't know. Mine are flat-backed. But this guy's skills are far beyond mine. You won't see his opinion voiced on a woodworking forum, because he hasn't got time or interest in getting in rows about such matters. He's made quite a reputation doing it his way.

And in a larger sense, maybe there is no universal cookbook in hand tool operations. Maybe it all depends, and maybe there is room for varying circumstances and individual preferences.

Wiley

Re: We don't need no stinkin' flat backs!

Dean J in MN

>Wiley --

You are correct, there is no universal cookbook. I just think of all the horrible time I spent flattening the backs of tools. Why? Because that is what everyone was telling me when I started. You must have flat backs. There was no debate in the popular press I read. This was the way it must be. But -- is it?

You see, I admit -- I'm lazy. I hate standing at the stone and flattening anything. Just think of all that time I could have been building stuff! At the same time, I feel dirty for slowly allowing my current crop of chisels to belly. So, rather than spend that time standing doing what I hate, I'll question the dogma.

Time will tell if I end up standing there and flattening those tools again.

-Dean

Re: We don't need no stinkin' flat backs!

mikew

>Hi Dean--having been paid what works out to be great per/hr wages for flattening other people's chisels and sharpening them, OF COURSE they need to be flat...

My own? Well, less than flat. I can say they are flatter towards the tip than they were when I obtained them--whether they were vintage or new chisels. To me, that last bit gets flat just from the sharpening process. Over time. Not onerous one bit. Also not intentional, just a by product.

Plane blades? Same. Heck, I doubt all my planes are flat, either. They do work nicely, though.

I go through spurts spouting off about the subject. Most times, I don't care. And besides, how flat is flat enough?

Take care, Mike

College textbooks make the best chisels

Bill Houghton, Sebastopol, CA

>You need something with very high density to make a good chisel. Economics textbooks are particularly recommended, though some business law textbooks come in a pretty strong second.