Thread: Chisel Hardness Study, the first step.

Yes, I start with X-coarse DMT duosharp and proceed through to 8000 or 10000 grit on water stones. Unbelievably laborious, I've had numerous blisters and abrasions.

The Blue Spruce chisels are all pretty close to flat and take less effort. It may be that they have a thick decarb layer on the back. If I have to grind away a significant proportion of all faces of the cutting edge have the makers done their work?

I think it depends on the problem you are having. If you can pick up the teeny rolled edge on the back with your fingernail yet the hardness "reads" over 60 - yeah... Perhaps you are dealing with a slightly softer surface layer. Maybe see about working the back 0.010" with preference towards the bevel end and see if it helps anything....

But if it's reading over 60 and you can are getting slight chipping on the edge - no, probably not... Microbevels would probably make a significant difference.

I wouldn't expect Blue Spruce to have this problem so much as the "down market" chisels. But if working the back makes a difference in performance - then maybe they just didn't grind off quite enough in the initial prep work.

On doing this sort of work to backs.. I have given up on stones and have moved back to my surface plate and a roll of PSA backed sandpaper... Change it out the instant the cut slows down - you can really remove a lot of material on good fresh paper.... I do 100 to 325 grit on the plate with sandpaper and then move back to the stones....

There is no steel which can be sharpened with any precision because none of them has a crystal structure such as you find in flint or diamond.
Most discouraging when you actually see your edges with a scanning electron microscope. The steel is shredded, every time.

I did learn that soft woods need the sharpest edges for carving. I did learn that I needed only 1500 grit and honing with CrOx/AlOx.
That's an edge which lasts no more than 30-40 minutes of steady work in a soft wood like Western Red Cedar (ring count 25).
Half a dozen licks on the strop and I can really feel the ease of resistance in the push.

See for yourselves: The Complete Guide to Sharpening by Leonard Lee. approx pages 32 & 33?
The scanning electron micrographs were prepared by the National Science and Engineering Council of Canada.

In a sense, the 15 pictures are a serious blow to dogma. Saved me a heap of money in sharpening materials.

I watched a Tage Frid video... During the video, he talks about the importance of keeping your tools sharp.. He takes his chisel over to the belt sander set up with 150 grit and zip zip zip.... Gives it a few licks on the strop and back to work... It was good enough for him.... And Tage did this for money....

But I also recognize that Mr. 150 grit belt sander takes care of the slight layer of soft steel in a jiffy.... You can feel it bite hard on the soft mush and then all of a sudden it goes slick when it hits the hard steel underneath... And once it's gone it's gone.. You don't have to worry about that again.

One observation I've made that calls the decarburization layer hypothesis into question is the correspondence of instrumental hardnesses I see across instruments.

I've tested these chisels with 150 kgf HRC scale of the HR-150A tester, 45 kgf HRN using the Ames 2-S superficial tester and the New Age instrument at ~12 kgf on its' HRC scale.

If the outer layer of a chisel blade was appreciably softer the lower force instruments should (in principle) be sensitive to the effects of the thin soft layer because of their different indenter penetration depths and they should return different readings but they don't. All give results that agree very well.
Still a puzzle.

So I went at the backs of 6 chisels tonight... 100 grit PSA on my surface plate.... I went through probably 10 feet of the stuff..... But I measured the amount of steel removed with my precision micrometer.... And my arms are tired...

The average depth of grinding metal removal at the where the bevel meets the body.... A massive 0.003" with a spread from 0.0025" to 0.0035". For the Metric inclined - that's 0.075mm average metal removal with a spread from 0.063mm to 0.088mm.... I would have sworn at least 0.020"/.5mm.. Nope - nowhere close....

The difference in chisel performance on wood - even with only a 100 grit ground back- was really impressive all the way across...

Note - these were all chisels which had nominally been "prepped" and used prior to this... Meaning light back flattening to get 1/8" to 1/2" of flat behind the bevel and at least 0.040" or so ground off the bevel during sharpening....

So.... Would the meter detect a slightly softer layer 0.003" thick?

What's really going on here at the steel level? I don't know... But I can tell you whatever it is - there is a thin, soft layer that does not cut wood well on these new chisels. Unfortunately - that's what makes the sharp cutting edge of the chisel.... Grind that layer off with 100 grit sandpaper and the chisel cuts like a completely different tool afterwards...

Rob, I like the data. I have purchased a lot of the chisels in your list, and I have also had about a half dozen of them hardness tested on a versitron. Not that you can add it to your data, but my Iyoroi chisel tested around 61 - my friend's rather. It was a single mortise chisel, though, so no guarantees that it was representative. I would guess them to be closer to 63 hardness (but they are not 64/65 as they claimed at the time).

An LN mortise chisel tested 61 also (within their spec), three vintage chisels tested between 57 and 60, and one witherby chisel that I had trouble getting any use out of prior to testing (a long socket pattern chisel - oddball) tested 53 hardness. It wasn't hard enough for productive work.

At that time, I deemed the 57/58 hardness chisels as useless because I couldn't set them up exactly the same as a 62 hardness chisel and get exactly the same results. In time, I've come to prefer the chisels that are in the 58-60 range, and get more edge life out of them than I got out of the harder chisels when I started.

The key was learning what the chisel likes. If an AI chisel likes 27 degrees, a chisel three clicks softer might like another two degrees or so. If it does, you have to give it to the chisel. If you don't, then there's not a lot of sense criticizing the chisel itself, because you'd be using 29, for example, if you never came across the chisel that works at 27. It would never make a difference in work rate.

I don't have any "real" preferences at this time other than to like chisels that don't need tedious routines (e.g., you can tell me that a chisel made of M4 is super durable, but I have to use diamond stones to maintain it effectively, at least prior to the last step - and the edge retention in anything other than abusive situations doesn't really make up for it).

I bought three sets of sorby chisels last month, I just admire their pattern. I found them all for a decent price - unused or new, but only about 1/2-2/3rds of actual new street price here on average. I'm sure that I won't keep them all.

In my opinion, the two factors that correspond with price are (I guess there are three):
* level of finish on the chisel - super high cost correlates often with a level of finish suitable for an incompetent gentleman user (the kind who makes little, but celebrates how clean their tools are, and how little wear or damage they have)
* the efficiency of the maker - LN isn't particularly efficient compared to someone with dies made up for all of their chisel, but their price isn't overall bad compared to what you'd think you need if you actually tried to make something finished that well by hand
* the greed of the distribution network and retailer. Woodcrafts and Rocklers add gigantic markups to mediocre tools in most cases. Japan woodworker (before and after merger with WC), same story. Tsunesaburo planes from JWW were generally twice or so of the amount that Stu Tierney sold the tools for. Planes that sell new on ebay directly from japan cost $800 sometimes in the JWW catalog

There are chisels that are a dollar that are perfectly fine for general work - or were. I have a set from HF, but their current pattern isn't the same thing. they're maybe a touch soft, but not close to the unusability that I encountered with the witherby that tested 53 hardness on a versitron.


.

.
..

There will never be a shortage of gentlemen users who comes forward and says they can't work with an inexpensive set because they refuse to use the chisels and see what they like. There's just such a thread on SMC right now, and though I don't particularly love narex chisels, I didn't find the ones I had to be difficult to figure out.

The hand wringing that occurs over back flattening is also a matter of minor differences in flattening technique (I can set up a set of something like Narex chisels in 20-25 minutes, but it would've taken more than that per chisel when I was trying to use the stones that I use on a day to day basis) - but that's the nature of the gentleman user setting the market.

re: the Bergs - they're not magic, they're just good middle of the road carbon steel chisels that sharpen well on anything. I would guesstimate the set that I had (socket chisels) to be 59/60 based on how they perform on a washita stone. You can gauge hardness on a washita within about 1 rc if you have experience with them, but above 64 or so, it's anybody's guess, and below about 56, same. The washita is an even match hardness for hardness with 62 steel and the slowdown past that is exponential, and the increase in cutting speed below that, same. Below about 57, a good edge isn't to be had because the stone can cut faster an deeper.

Anyway, I'd consider the bergs to be as desirable as anything I've ever used. But I have other unpopular ideas, like preferring japanese chisels that are 62-63 hardness (but decent quality) over those that are 65-66. When you mortise with one at the high end, guaranteed over time, the corners of the chisel will chip off, they don't like to be sharpened with diamonds that are more coarse than fairly fine, and repair becomes arduous. The ones in the 62-63 range can be sharpened on anything (including oilstones) and still maintain a very high level of sharpness in use.

I would assume that quansheng (or qstool, or whatever they call themselves) could make a good chisel with a wonderful profile for Woodcraft for a dollar or two per chisel, but for some reason, that isn't done. Maybe because of the difficulty of grinding those profiles post-hardening, but you would think that operating in an environment where labor is cheap....that'd be the ideal place to do the labor-intensive things that differentiate your products. (I had the bubinga handled chisels that WC used to sell for $80, and then sometimes for $40...it looks like they're trying to make people believe their chisels should cost a lot more now).

One other surprisingly good chisel, but one that's not cheap outside of england -

The red plastic handled footprint chisels that have the gradual bevels. I'd bet they're 60-62 hardness, they take a wonderful edge, and their only real sin is that the handles are heavy plastic instead of wood.

Originally Posted by truckjohn

And my arms are tired..

Originally Posted by truckjohn

So.... Would the meter detect a slightly softer layer 0.003" thick?

Now that you say that I've realized I have a way to test the idea. I have some surface oxidized/decarburized A2 floats that I made a while back. Easy enough to test the three main instruments against them with progressive decarb layer removal.

David,

One of the things I intend to investigate is included angle. I'm going to start with the Blue Spruce paring chisel and progressively increase the grind angle of the edge and test edge retention. Should be interesting.

Originally Posted by D.W.

There will never be a shortage of gentlemen users...

It is probably too soon for Rob to be thinking about who he will be selling his chisels to, so the following observation may be premature.

The truth is that the 'gentlemen users' are the ones with the money. They are an excellent market for some tool makers.

Whereas building carpenters will buy a set of Stanleys, or whatever, and bash them around and hardly ever sharpen them, and then lose them onsite. They, along with the weekend warriors (the DIYers), will never notice the difference between 'Poor, OK & Excellent' or care to pay for the difference. They are the mass market and those that manufacture for them give those consumers what they will tolerate for the lowest price.

There is a third market; to the artisan/craftsperson. They value good tools and are discerning about performance. They use a few good tool every day for decades and look after them, rarely having to replace or upgrade them, so they are a very limited market, compounded by there being very few of them. They buy from the same tool range as the 'gentlemen users', or more correctly, the 'gentlemen users' buy from the same range as the top artisan/craftspeople in the (mostly forlorn) hope that such tools will improve their work.

Makers of 'Excellent' tools will probably aim their tools at the artisan/craftsperson end of the market, but I expect that the bulk of their sales will be to the 'gentlemen/women users'.

Apologies if I have taken this thread too far off topic.

I think you're right Neil.

The majority of buyers at the expensive end of the market are buying for looks or cachet, not the performance capability of the tools.

After the 2008 financial crash I bought a lot of high end tools at very modest prices. The vast majority of these purchases were NIB but at least a few years old indicating to me that they were coming from collectors, not users. I still haven't used many of them but I would, and do, without reservation whenever I feel the need. My other business interest has me increasingly busy and I simply haven't got round to projects that require them, yet that is.

Another feature of the boutique tools market that never ceases to amaze me is the importance of the appearance of a tool at the expense of performance. Seems that a lot of buyers are driven almost purely by gloss with function a distant second. For instance, if performance were the most important factor to the majority of buyers the Craftsman chisels I've reported on here would be wildly popular subjects of discussions on Internet fora such as this one but if you look around you can hardly find the name mentioned yet people gush all over themselves about chisels that are objectively poor in comparison.

My interest in these types of paradoxical behaviors have lead me to do a fair amount of reading in the area. I recommend "The psychology of propaganda" by R. Money-Kyrle. Kyrle points to the power of the then relatively new (1940/41) medium of radio was being exploited to propagandize unprecedented numbers of people. The Internet of course is the most recent iteration of the mass propaganda tool and has shown its power to influence popular opinion in ways that are contrary to the common interest vividly.

I know that there's room in the boutique tools market for more players, after all there is no effective competition. I see a unique niche in high end tools that are also excellent performers.

Originally Posted by NeilS

It is probably too soon for Rob to be thinking about who he will be selling his chisels to, so the following observation may be premature.

The truth is that the 'gentlemen users' are the ones with the money. They are an excellent market for some tool makers.

Whereas building carpenters will buy a set of Stanleys, or whatever, and bash them around and hardly ever sharpen them, and then lose them onsite. They, along with the weekend warriors (the DIYers), will never notice the difference between 'Poor, OK & Excellent' or care to pay for the difference. They are the mass market and those that manufacture for them give those consumers what they will tolerate for the lowest price.

There is a third market; to the artisan/craftsperson. They value good tools and are discerning about performance. They use a few good tool every day for decades and look after them, rarely having to replace or upgrade them, so they are a very limited market, compounded by there being very few of them. They buy from the same tool range as the 'gentlemen users', or more correctly, the 'gentlemen users' buy from the same range as the top artisan/craftspeople in the (mostly forlorn) hope that such tools will improve their work.

Makers of 'Excellent' tools will probably aim their tools at the artisan/craftsperson end of the market, but I expect that the bulk of their sales will be to the 'gentlemen/women users'.

Apologies if I have taken this thread too far off topic.

I agree 100%. I'm sure LN and LV know exactly who their market is from experience, and it's not going to be the person who realizes that they can do fine work with less expensive tools.

I haven't seen the artisan or craftsperson who couldn't do really superb work with a $25 chisel, but the gentleman market will often offer criticism for something like an Ashley Iles bench chisel because they are hand ground and not CNC ground. The writers here in the states tend to make statements like "buy the best tools you can afford", which is too vague to be productive.

A friend of mine is an ideal example of gentleman user. He will buy something that he doesn't have to do anything to, but that's about it. He also won't use said tool much, but he reads a lot and feels the need to buy based on articles, etc. What he buys will also depend on the teacher. When Charlesworth videos were the thing here in the states (10-12 years ago), he bought them and all of the tools Charlesworth recommended. Now, he's gotten a Sefton set of videos, and he has replaced his sharpening regime with the one that Sefton uses. His tools get very little use, though - but the seller gets the same price for them whether he uses them or not.

(I am by no means exempt from buying expensive tools, I just recognize they don't improve my work, but every purchase isn't about improving work).