Thread: They didn't need to Sharpen/Tune/Fettle like this in the old days!

And here was I thinking that I was sad git because I measured a plane shaving the other day with my new digital vernier calipers after I'd just sharpened the blade in my LN LA smoother.

(0.04 of a mm in case you were wondering. )

Craig (sad git)

True enough, Midge, but did you ever see one of those old timers use a scraper. They didn't need to get a fine finish with their planes because they could set-up and use a scraper to produce a surface as flat as glass.

My Dad, a pattern maker, told me it took 10 years to learn to use a scraper properly, that you could then use it to achieve perfection for 20 years and that you then spent the last 10 years of your life suffering agony from the damage it did to the joints in your fingers and thumbs.

While you're at it Midge go past his tools and have a look at Krenov's works,
A timeless elegance

Well thats it!!!!

I feel left out.
Anyone know how to tune a Sheffield steel brickies trowel so I may become an artiste?? ( not the bull shyte type either you lot)

Al :confused:

Ah but for mine it's all the different bond types that make brickwork artistic.

Seems we forget that there's more to the craft - sorry art - than stretcher bond.

The walls of the Squizzy family homestead where slabs cut with a broad axe. I remember they looked pretty good back then?...a bit of hessian here an there...some corrugated iron, a Meters No 1 and a bowl full of porridge before school... What more could a kid want?....a Nintendo????:eek:

Looking back sometimes makes it easy to see forwards....

Cheers

Why didn't they need to do this in the old days?

Didn't they? There's an evolution in every country, a progression of quality in the workmanship, the tools used, and how those tools were "tuned" for lack of a better word, over time.

Compare America to Britain. High class furniture was the last thing on the settlers' minds early on. But in Britain the tools of the trade that were at least available were of a much higher quality from the get go.

By the 1700s in America, centers like Philidelphia were producing first-rate furniture. I own some planes from the period and location. They are as nice as any Clarke & Williams are making today.

By the 1800s, there were more British/Scottish infills being sold in America than at home. (Which is why many British antique tool dealers actually go to auctions in the states and take them back and sell them there.)

The mid-1800s Scottish infill I have has as tight of a mouth and as flat a sole as can be made today. I didn't have to do anything but scrub the light surface rust off. Same with the Preston infill from the late 1800s I have.

Either, it seems, they were built to such standards they didn't need to be fettled, or the users did so. Either way it explains how in the age of mass-produced Stanleys they need to be fettled.

Well, take my opinion for what it's worth. And we all know about opinions (espcially mine , they're like...well, you know, and everybody's got one.

Take care

All very Zen like isn't it.


I think we need a hijacker.

Originally Posted by outback

All very Zed like isn't it.

P

So Midge, you appear to on the one hand enjoy the fact that you have sharp tools that actually do as you want: "the better I became (in my mind if not in practice!) and even got satisfaction if not enjoyment out of getting my tools to work better and the blades consistently sharper".

But then you become consumed by an obsessional doubt (such guilt!), saying "but there was always the nagging thought .....Why didn't they need to do this in the old days?"

When you quote Krenov, remember that he is talking about the tools of yesteryear: "these parts were simply not designed to do the sensitive work we are talking about" - he was referring to the mass produced (Stanley, et al) planes that were principally designed for carpenters and odd-jobbers, not for cabinetmakers. And if they were used by cabinetmakers, I would assume that they paid the same attention to detail and tuning as any latter day handtool-oriented cabinetmaker (amateur or professional) would do.

It is also my contention that bevel-down blades (in planes) require considerably less attention to detail than bevel-up planes (where the cutting angle is determened by the bevel angle). These were not considerations in Yesteryear since, by-and-large, the tools were not available (or, if they were - such as the Stanley #62 - they were not purchased by the masses).

There is no need to feel guilty for precision. However, there is the danger that this slides to the excessive end of the spectrum and turns into an obsessional involvement with irrelevant detail. Machining wood to a thou' is silly since it will expand and contract more than this every day anyway. But having a sharp blade to do the job is another thing altogether. Then the question is "what is sharp enough"? And "do you spend more time sharpening than woodworking"? I know some who get their kicks from renovating planes (repainting them, etc) and I doubt that they actually ever get used for the purpose for which they were originally designed. You get the picture?

Time for my medication. :eek:

Regards from Perth

Derek

Hey Midge, I wonder if Derek plans on sending you a bill. I think you just got consulted over/to/whatever.

Originally Posted by outback

Hey Midge, I wonder if Derek plans on sending you a bill. I think you just got consulted over/to/whatever.

Here come the DENIAL phase then! :eek: :eek: :eek: I think the only bit I can argue with is the "guilt" bit.

I certainly don't feel guilty, but my knowledge for so many years was learned from my father (who had no training and it would seem, managed to produce results despite the fact that he knew nought!), then my father-in-law, mates, and other chippies with whom I worked on and off "taught" me better techniques to the point where my serrated edged planes and chisels would cut and perform to the level of their experiences.

The doubts arose mostly because the cheap (remember FHP?) blades were not capable of taking these finer edges once I learned enough to try, and despite what was then lots of extra effort, and in confirmation of the bagging I took from my tradesman mates, the results were no better! They were right and I was wrong!

In fact I do enjoy having sharp tools that do what I want, I don't understand how I could have done anything before, nor how "they" (the unenlightened) produce stuff so well without that knowledge? I guess it's called talent.

There is no need to feel guilty for precision. However, there is the danger that this slides to the excessive end of the spectrum and turns into an obsessional involvement with irrelevant detail. Machining wood to a thou' is silly since it will expand and contract more than this every day anyway. But having a sharp blade to do the job is another thing altogether. Then the question is "what is sharp enough"? And "do you spend more time sharpening than woodworking"?

Agree! Of course I am now mostly through the book,(which I got out to look at the pictures thanks Echidna ) and can say that I have been more than pleasantly surprised at many other observations in the text. I guess that's why Krenov was so highly regarded as a teacher!

Perhaps next week I should quote a passage on the balance between machines and hand work... bugger it :

If you use up all your energy doing the hard labour by hand, then usually you won't have the strength, the clarity of purpose to do the fine part later on - when it really counts.

He is not referring to the hobbyist whose satisfaction is derived from doing all by hand though.

Cheers,

P (Who chops down trees with a bow-saw - don't worry I'll be back into Mills and Boon next week)

:confused: What was this thread about anyway??


Cheers

Derek have you checked your PM's?

Originally Posted by vsquizz

:confused: What was this thread about anyway??

It was about Friday night, but it spilled over to Saturday!

Cheers,

P (Did I mention my wife was Australian?)