Thread: Lie Neilsen or Veritas?

These are wise words, Ian.

I fettled up a set of Bailey-pattern planes when I started out (Falcon Pope branded, plus one English No 3 and No 7). My thinking was that if I go buy premium new, I'm only liable to run them down. I'd prefer to know how to fix up and improve.

I've spent some money on some premium planes - a Veritas shooter (love), a Veritas shoulder plan, and a Veritas router plane which I only brought because I didn't know whether it was me or the plane struggling with a Stanley 71. I regret none of these but have always stuck with my starter bench planes.

One wouldn't want to discourage beginners but frankly learning to sharpen, set up, and properly use a hand plane I think is very hard in reality. Unfortunately it is one of those things where many promoters make things out to be easier than they are in practice. With a little experience now I notice things like what looks like a casual grip actually showing the telltale signs of tight finger grip (the blanching of fingers when gripping).

I also think the community is poorly served by the lack of tutorials and emphasis on understanding what you're actually doing when you're planing to get to a result. The mark of success is usually just "beautiful clean shavings". At the start I was under the impression you just planed away and if your plane was long enough you'd get guaranteed straight and flat once you had full length shavings.

Chris

Originally Posted by IanW

tt, it's a trap I've fallen into. By the time you've been making things for 35 years, you have reached a level of competence that you are unlikely to improve on materially; you have filled your house & those of your offspring (mine make few demands on me, unfortunately ) with all the bits & pieces a sane person could need or desire, so you turn to other diversions. In my case it was making fancy tools - it started innocently enough - the first tool I made that I was pleased with was a shoulder plane (it got a page in FWW somewhere in the early 80s). Although it satisfied me at the time, years down the track it looks very amateurish to me, which is why I made another (and another....). I do have some pretty nice tools which are a joy to work with, but the irony is I just don't use them as much as I would have if I'd had them 40 years ago.

Although I would not have believed or understood it in the beginning, what worked very well for me was NOT having wonderful tools when I started out. Learning to extract the maximum from indifferent tools taught me far more about the function than if I'd been able to afford the "best" from the get-go. The difference between a well-fettled vintage Bailey and a L-N is more a matter of aesthetics & personal preferences than any functional difference. By all means acquire the best tools you can, I doubt you will regret too many (although you would be far from unique if you do acquire a few expensive tools that you just don't get on with!) But if you are interested in getting the best out of hand-tools, at some point, get yourself a few beaten-up things & try to make them work well. What they teach you will spill over to the fancy tools & you'll find yourself extracting even more from them & enjoying them more. I can almost guarantee it.....

Cheers,

Originally Posted by Cgcc

.......I also think the community is poorly served by the lack of tutorials and emphasis on understanding what you're actually doing when you're planing to get to a result. The mark of success is usually just "beautiful clean shavings". At the start I was under the impression you just planed away and if your plane was long enough you'd get guaranteed straight and flat once you had full length shavings....

Hear hear, Chris. I am lucky that in my day we had woodwork, metalwork or trade drawing one morning each week throughout grades 7 & 8. I was also lucky to have a teacher who was an ex cabinetmaker trained under the old apprentice system who knew his way round a marking gauge & a plane. I loved those classes, they were such a relief from the tedium of regular schoolwork! From Mr Lee I learnt one of the most valuable lessons of all & that was to make the tools do what you wanted them to do. Every project started with rough-sawn wood which we cut to size, & "dressed" by hand. Some blokes found it a bit tiresome, but luckily, it quickly clicked for me & I soon got the hang of it - we must have done that exercise dozens of times over the years. Most of us really enjoyed those "manual training" classes, the teacher often had to chase us out of the room when the lunch bell rang - something no classroom teacher would ever have needed to do!

I'm really grateful for those two years; by no means did it turn me into a master craftsman, but the familiarity with hand tools I acquired at such a young age stuck hard and when I took up 'serious' woodworking 20 years later, I was at least a rung or two up the ladder & knew some basics. I still often square up a board or two by hand because it's quicker than dragging out the thicky (which is usually half-buried under a pile of junk!), & setting up the dusty. Even if not much quicker sometimes, it's certainly much quieter & a hand-plane doesn't snipe a short board. So you'll maybe forgive me when I blather on that while wonderful tools are great (I'd be an utter hypocrite to say otherwise), what's more important to developing any skills is practise & persistence! I had confirmation of that so many times working in Asia, where I saw craftsmen turning out stuff that would be accepted in any shop, with the most basic of tools and quickly to boot....

Ian

Originally Posted by D.W.

The top line is a statement that makes for good marketing, but it's false (not your fault). V11 grinds more slowly than A2, it's more wear resistant and is at the upper end of its tempering range from LV, so it feels like it sharpens more crisply due to the tempering. But it does not hone as easily or as quickly.

SNIP

Sharpening difference between the two may not be noticeable because they both have chromium carbide. Grinding a length of metal off would probably be needed to actually see how V11 grinds more slowly on a grinding wheel or even CBN.

My practical advice is A2 from LN (what other choice do you have) and V11 from LV - if you start putting other manufacturer's irons in LV or LN planes, it's not addressing the real problem, which is sharpening speed.

Wow!!! That was impressive. I'd like to talk to you about the factors and properties influencing grinding...

On a slightly different steel. What do you think of D2. Years ago there was a collective order done for D2 plane and chisel blades. I purchased 3 plane blades and at present have only used one. I have never in my 40 years of wood work used a blade that could hold up so well. E.g. I, years ago, decided I'd make my own plantation shutters for the house - by hand. That meant I had to hand plane 320 shutter blades at 500mm long each, out of (because I was economising) finger joint pine. My shoulders would be fine today if I went with the high grade hoop pine instead... That D2 blade crashed through hundreds of finger joints over the 320 meters (planed both sides) of shutter blade stock. I don't know if many here know how destructive finger joints are to a plane blade edge, but they can destroy it in a few passes. Over that whole time I think I rehoned maybe 2 times, buffed a couple more. I simply couldn't kill that plane blade. Lee Valley, Lee Neilsen... add what ever super duper tool maker you like. None have blades that came remotely close to what was produced for a collective order here.

HI SD, I was in on that buy of plane blades , i thought they were M2 or High Speed steel,but that is only my recollection, they were a poor fit to most stanley planes for which they were intended and rather than opening the planes mouth to fit and other adjustments i sold them on,great they were a success for you, Ross

There is a fundamental difference between A2 and PM-V11 that appears to have been ignored (or I did not see it). Both may contain chromium carbides, but the way they use this is different and is relevant. "PM" stands for "powder metal", and the way the steel is made results in a grain structure which is as fine as O1. A2, on the other hand, is a much coarser steel (see D2, below). The net result, when sharpened, is that the PM-V11 has the fine edge of O1 but with durability beyond A2.

I have M4 steel as well, which is also a powdered composition, and this is another coarse-grained steel (large, abrasion-resistant carbides), which takes a very fine edge.

D2 is not a powdered steel but produced conventionally. It has terrific abrasion-resistance, but the edge is made up of larger carbides. These cannot be honed to as fine as either O1 or PM-V11. I used to hear good things about D2 from Philip Marcou, the planemaker from NZ. He made blades for his planes from D2, but sent them out for special heat-treating. The result was a durable edge which was easier to sharpen. However - theoretically - it should not achieve an edge to rival O1 or a PM steel.

Lastly, when sharpening these steels, the playing ground is levelled when hollow grinding. This reduces the amount of steel to work to a minimum. The sharpening media becomes less critical.

Regards from Perth

Derek

Originally Posted by woodsurfer

HI SD, I was in on that buy of plane blades , i thought they were M2 or High Speed steel,but that is only my recollection, they were a poor fit to most stanley planes for which they were intended and rather than opening the planes mouth to fit and other adjustments i sold them on,great they were a success for you, Ross

hey woodsurfer

I may have been an earlier order as the blades I have were really thick, 8.5mm, and only for wedged planes (see attached).

I have one in a jack plane (built in 2009). 2" wide and 5/16" thick D2.
























Still going strong.

Regards from Perth

Derek

Originally Posted by derekcohen

There is a fundamental difference between A2 and PM-V11 that appears to have been ignored (or I did not see it). Both may contain chromium carbides, but the way they use this is different and is relevant. "PM" stands for "powder metal", and the way the steel is made results in a grain structure which is as fine as O1. A2, on the other hand, is a much coarser steel (see D2, below). The net result, when sharpened, is that the PM-V11 has the fine edge of O1 but with durability beyond A2.

I have M4 steel as well, which is also a powdered composition, and this is another coarse-grained steel (large, abrasion-resistant carbides), which takes a very fine edge.

D2 is not a powdered steel but produced conventionally. It has terrific abrasion-resistance, but the edge is made up of larger carbides. These cannot be honed to as fine as either O1 or PM-V11. I used to hear good things about D2 from Philip Marcou, the planemaker from NZ. He made blades for his planes from D2, but sent them out for special heat-treating. The result was a durable edge which was easier to sharpen. However - theoretically - it should not achieve an edge to rival O1 or a PM steel.

Lastly, when sharpening these steels, the playing ground is levelled when hollow grinding. This reduces the amount of steel to work to a minimum. The sharpening media becomes less critical.

Regards from Perth

Derek

There's a lot false in what's said here.

-V11 is not close to as fine as O1. Whatever the mechanism is that makes it feel sharp is a combination of being at the upper end of hardness (which also causes the factory irons to be a little bit chippy) and what I think is the case - that chromium carbides may have better slickness in wood than vanadium
-A2 is about as fine as V11, but for a different reason - because as an ingot steel, it is not beyond he limit where carbides would coarsen. Both M2 and A2 share this property - that they are not much improved by PM. V11 on the other hand would be unusable without PM. So would many of the very high carbide content steels
-D2 is available in three formats - ingot conventional, sprayform and PM

it is true that at least when I was buying planes, LN's heat treater was doing a better more uniform job with the carbides than LV. LV made a statement about carbide modification (through cryogenic treatment or whatever else - cryo isn't the only way to modify the carbides) along the lines of "the edge life in testing was about the same either way". In that case, LV doesn't terminate their quench with cryo treatment, so their A2 irons are more coarse than LN's. If you look at Brent Beach's edge pictures and compare the two along with the hock cryo, you will see it. Cryo also gives better hardness potential in something like A2, which struggles to be tempered and still be 62 and not chippy. V11's equivalent spot on the tempering spectrum is about 63 hardness instead of 62.

d2 ingot results in coarse carbides. There are situations where this doesn't matter. They also limit toughness as big carbides crack and propagate cracking, which ultimately leads to breaking - the measurement that toughness testing accounts for. D2 was a very popular die steel because there are a lot of conditions where it wears better than A2 or O1 that coarse carbides don't matter.

It was popular in knives when it was ingot only because the wear resistance was better than carbon steel knives and a lot of knife people like a coarse edge - a coarse edge slicing will result in longer edge life than a smooth edge, the opposite of planing.

Iles stated that they were using PM D2 in their mortise chisel. Whether it's used in anything else, I don't know. I remarked on the UK forum that I was surprised recalling those chisels (long gone now) that I don't remember any edge coarseness issues and one of the members stated that Ray Iles is using PM D2 and not ingot D2. Sprayform is between the two of those and results in toughness and coarseness between the two, but is cheaper than the PM process.

The lighter colored bits in these micrographs are carbides.

Ingot D2 micrograph: https://i1.wp.com/knifesteelnerds.co...pg?w=750&ssl=1

PM D2 micrograph: https://i2.wp.com/knifesteelnerds.co...pg?w=750&ssl=1

XHP/V11: https://i0.wp.com/knifesteelnerds.co...pg?w=750&ssl=1

O1 steel: notice how much finer the structure is than V11: New Micrographs of 42 Knife Steels - Knife Steel Nerds

A2 - presumably just normalized and air quenched. The few big carbides are distracting - they're about 10 microns. When you look at XHP/V11, you can see what looks like finer carbides, but there are plenty of groups joined together measuring around 10 microns: https://i2.wp.com/knifesteelnerds.co...68%2C582&ssl=1


And for good measure - 26c3, which is what I use for most chisels. The surplus carbides in this one are iron carbides, the distribution is neater and they limit the amount of carbon that ends up in solution in the lattice between carbides - very high hardness, and good toughness at high hardness - turns out better the less it sees a furnace and the more it sees quick forge heat treatment because fast cycles vs. oven soaks result in less carbon in the lattice and more in the carbides:

https://i2.wp.com/knifesteelnerds.co...68%2C580&ssl=1

At any rate, V11 is not as tough as A2, the grain isn't finer than LN's version, but it's maybe more well behaved than LV's version. it can get a point or so harder at similar temper, but PM D2 was be between the two with better toughness and wear resistance closer to V11.

None are as fine as O1 or especially 1095, but there is a story of what's happening in the lattice that goes along with carbides to give the whole story. O1 isn't a high toughness steel. 52100 is. the pictures of them under the microscope don't look much different.

New Micrographs of 42 Knife Steels - Knife Steel Nerds

There are probably similar wear resistance steels to XHP that would make a better plane iron and a better performing chisel, but they also have vanadium or niobium carbides. 10V is probably one of those and the reason that I perked up when it was reported that 10V was being used in an australian plane.

XHP is a good steel - I think if LV bothered to make their O1 chisel at 62 hardness instead of 58-60, they would outperform their V11 chisels, and grind and sharpen twice as fast as V11. Lack of toughness of V11 is what sent me back to O1 for actual woodworking after being so thrilled with the initial test results. That lack of toughness can't be fixed and is partially hidden by high hardness - it can't be fixed because the carbide volume is high and cracks start in carbides unless the matrix itself has too much carbon in solution and there aren't any large carbides - 1095 is a case of that. Silver steel and 26c3 seem to get past that by seeding iron carbides that will be an easy home for excess carbon.


For anyone else still reading this - if you're buying tools for wood that are made of D2, it's a very reasonable question to ask if the D2 is Powder D2 or if it's the older ingot type, which has been around for almost 200 years.

Hey Derek


The D2 blade above certainly has been far superior to even the PM-V11 blades I have. To make the shutter blades that I mentioned above, each one had to have 4 passes per side, and each shutter blade had at least 1 full width finger joint. So in total that plane blade crashed through about 1300 finger joints. It never chipped in all that work. It also, through out, never really lost its sticky sharpness. What I mean by that is: how acute of an angle can the edge stick to my nail instead of slide along the top. The more acute the sharper it is... It would always grab my nail at an acceptable angle. I'd also say it hones to a sharpness equivalent to O1. Maybe we got lucky and have some really well made and tempered blades...

By comparison my PM-V11 blades can't go even four passes over primed pine without them losing their ability to grab the nail. With all the hype I expected better to be honest.

Originally Posted by The Spin Doctor

Wow!!! That was impressive. I'd like to talk to you about the factors and properties influencing grinding...

On a slightly different steel. What do you think of D2. Years ago there was a collective order done for D2 plane and chisel blades. I purchased 3 plane blades and at present have only used one. I have never in my 40 years of wood work used a blade that could hold up so well. E.g. I, years ago, decided I'd make my own plantation shutters for the house - by hand. That meant I had to hand plane 320 shutter blades at 500mm long each, out of (because I was economising) finger joint pine. My shoulders would be fine today if I went with the high grade hoop pine instead... That D2 blade crashed through hundreds of finger joints over the 320 meters (planed both sides) of shutter blade stock. I don't know if many here know how destructive finger joints are to a plane blade edge, but they can destroy it in a few passes. Over that whole time I think I rehoned maybe 2 times, buffed a couple more. I simply couldn't kill that plane blade. Lee Valley, Lee Neilsen... add what ever super duper tool maker you like. None have blades that came remotely close to what was produced for a collective order here.

I've used D2 sparingly. It kind of resides between A2 and V11 if it's PM, and even the sprayform type probably fits that.

In the ray iles mortise chisels that I had, I understand RI states that they were (are they still available?) PM D2 and not the ingot type. hardness potential is about like A2 (62 hardness can be had without too little toughness).

The wear resistance should also be between V11 and A2, maybe smack in the middle. If you have a carbon steel iron (nobody really does unless you have really old planes) or an oil hardening iron (between a plain steel and something like A2) of the same hardness, you'll be able to tell that D2 planes longer at the same hardness.

In terms of getting past glue in finger joints, it probably comes down to some ideal combination. As in, the iron is hard enough that the edge doesn't deflect, and the chromium carbides hold up to glue well, and perhaps a very good heat treat.

One of the things that I've learned making chisels is that you can test something like 26c3 (a plain steel), which tolerates 64 hardness in a sweet spot temper, and something like O1, which will be 62 or ever so slightly under at the same tempering level, and in a bunch of tests see very little different. if you find the limit of O1, though, in a really hard wood - it's less hard, so less strength before the edge deflects, and it's actually a little tougher than O1 even though it's higher hardness - then suddenly the 26c3 will hold up well for a while or seemingly indefinitely where O1 doesn't.

Long story short, PM D2 is a good steel. D2 ingot type is coarser but could be OK for people who don't care about the coarseness, and I think you observed a good example of D2 that was well matched to what you're doing.

I would call the Iles mortise chisels that I had "a good example of D2", also, because it suffered nothing that D2 is usually criticized for.

Much of what we see from one steel to another is both the quality of hardening and tempering and where the tempering finish is targeted. E.g., if I made you a 61.5/62 hardness O1 chisel and you bought an LV chisel in O1 where the hardness spec is a lower target, you'd sign the praises of my chisel as sharpening more crisply and holding up better. And the only thing different would be the tempering spec.

You may also find if I made you an iron at that spec and then you bought a hock iron and really were averse to chipping (hock targets 62-64 hardness or something), that you'd think my iron was more reliable in creating a line-free surface. but it's not because there's something wrong with the hock iron - they're just tempered hard and some people like that. I can make an identical iron to a hock by tempering 50 degrees F cooler than I like for O1 - can isn't hypothetical, I've already done it.

SD, David's testing has been quite exhaustive and he is in a better position than most (amateurs) to know what's up with steels. I cannot debate these issues as I do not go looking at edges with microscopes, as David has done. Perhaps i buy into the advertising of Veritas, but then I have no reason to disbelieve the research they offer as well as the practical results I have obtained. David has also raved about PM-V11 in the past, and backed up the results from Veritas. So his about face is something I find confusing.

Regarding the D2 results, I cannot comment as I have only ever used the blade I have for rough work, not for smoothing. In this regard it has held up well, but I have not compared it to anything. The fact that I consigned it to a jack says something about my expectations for the steel (that is was not the ideal steel for a smoother), which were prevalent around 2009, when I built the plane.

I was planing Tuart today, very hard and bone-dry. I used O1, A2, M4 and PM-V11. They all worked well (over a 2-hour session). None were used for long enough to wear out the edge.

Regards from Perth

Derek

Originally Posted by The Spin Doctor

Hey Derek


The D2 blade above certainly has been far superior to even the PM-V11 blades I have. To make the shutter blades that I mentioned above, each one had to have 4 passes per side, and each blade had at least 1 full width finger joint. So in total that blade crashed through about 1300 finger joints. It never chipped in all that work. It also, through out, never really lost its sticky sharpness. What I mean by that is: how acute of an angle can the edge stick to my nail instead of slide along the top. The more acute the sharper it is... It would always grab my nail at an acceptable angle. I'd also say it hones to a sharpness equivalent to O1. Maybe we got lucky and have some really well made and tempered blades...

By comparison my PM-V11 blades can't go even four passes over primed pine without them losing their ability to grab the nail. With all the hype I expected better to be honest.

if you had a microscope, you'd be able to find the culprit pretty easily. Short edge life is always chipping or deflection.

I think LV is tempering the V11 irons on he high side, and if they're not doing the heat treat, someone else is. Hard tempering gives a feeling of high sharpness, but i can also lead to an edge that fails by chipout easily. There's an art to finding the highest strength before toughness is compromised.

(strength - how much energy it takes before an edge moves at all. there are more measures than that, but the first bar of strength measures is one that we find most useful because deformed edges aren't useful in woodworking)

(toughness - how much total energy it takes to break something. toughness isn't really a problem until it is - meaning, we don't need super toughness in woodworking like you'd want in a mower blade or a machete, but if it's lacking so much that a strong edge cracks, then that's a problem).

I've received about half a dozen messages from people who find the LV irons chippy, but most don't like to make negative comments about such things in an open forum. V11 is a longer wearing steel, but the situation has to allow for it to perform without defect. In my opinion, it makes a wonderful wonderful kitchen knife that's functionally stainless (not as stainless as a typical lower carbon kitchen knife steel like wusthof would use).

The answer for both steels that are too soft (that deflect) or too hard (that chip out) is to modify the tip of a tool some way or another - steeper angle can be one.

it is possible that you can get better wear out of a lower wear steel if it allows an edge thinner than a higher wear steel, though. Or put a different way, even though V11 is a longer wearing steel than D2, you may not be able to modify it to hold up without making the initial angle so steep that it still doesn't wear longer.

Originally Posted by derekcohen

I have one in a jack plane (built in 2009). 2" wide and 5/16" thick D2.


Still going strong.

Regards from Perth

Derek

Do you remember these? I got two sets. Finished one and started these but lost momentum.

Originally Posted by derekcohen

SD, David's testing has been quite exhaustive and he is in a better position than most (amateurs) to know what's up with steels. I cannot debate these issues as I do not go looking at edges with microscopes, as David has done. Perhaps i buy into the advertising of Veritas, but then I have no reason to disbelieve the research they offer as well as the practical results I have obtained. David has also raved about PM-V11 in the past, and backed up the results from Veritas. So his about face is something I find confusing.



Derek

let's be accurate on purpose, derek. I've explained the difference between a standard test where V11 shines an then actual use at least a half dozen times. I doubt you've missed it.

here's what I did:
* tested about 35000 feet of planed edges with a variety of plane irons. I expected some to chip, others not to chip, and didn't expect the V11 irons to last twice as long as O1. In the end, M4 outlasted V11 a little bit. Nothing else did. to my surprise ****no iron chipped ****, not even A2 which has a reputation for it. This is an idealized test - planing and already flat and planed edge.
* I didn't remember seeing this advantage using a custom plane and a low angle plane prior, except that I had poor edge life of O1 in the BU planes - but that's partially due to the too-soft temper that LV gives them. I learned that later.

When I started doing actual woodworking with V11, it could not be sharpened in any reasonable way where chipout wasn't a problem in its edge life. Chipping is generally 1-4 thosuandths deep. A brisk sharpening session removes about 1 thousandth, and honing lengths of V11 takes twice as long as O1. In an idealized test where the toughness of the edges was never challenged, V11 wore almost exactly twice as long. I later found that Larrin thomas did a catra test (abrasion test that doesn't challenge toughness either, just pure wear resistance), and XHP lasts about double the length of time that O1 lasts. Larrin doesn't care for XHP because there are other steels that wear longer and have better toughness. they're not accessible to us as woodworkers- either they are even more expensive than XHP (V11) in stock form, or they are slow to machine because the carbides are vanadium, and would be very hard for the average person without a CBN wheel and diamon hone and loose diamond to sharpen.

After I did the plane iron test, I used the V11 iron from LV and some shop made XHP irons and went so far as to replace the irons in my jointers and smoothers with them.

And then they didn't return the same edge life and the sharpening was problematic. it's a myth that V11 hones faster than A2 - with every abrasive media, it hones more slowly. Kees heiden found that to be true by creating a machine and doing a test measuring it. If you get chipout in a V11 iron and want to actually hone all of it out, this becomes very apparent. if you grind an O1 iron and a V11 iron at same hardness on any grinding wheel, you will notice the V11 grinds much slower and creates a lot more heat (it's not heat tolerant compared to a high speed steel - it will lose some temper if it's overheated, but it does have less temper sensitivity than carbon steel. Unfortunately, that better tolerance of a little overheating doesn't make up for its grinding slowness)

In the end, I work more wood with less total sharpening time with O1 even though O1 doesn't wear as long. To actually remove four thousandths of a plane iron's length is something that nobody here comes close to honing by hand, and only when you start looking closely at these things in actual work do you find limitations.

LV did most of their testing in MDF as they described. MDF does nothing to challenge toughness, so they may not have noticed. if you do a standardized planing test like I did, then you will also not notice it because the iron is buried in a continuous clean cut.

As soon as you start planing anything with silica or with mill saw marks on rough lumber, etc, V11 can't deliver the theoretical edge life.

there is an enormous bias in hobby woodworking where people "feel what they read they will" and parrot whatever they see. I've seen it over and over with people claiming that V11 is faster sharpening than A2 - it's not. It's less tough and more readily releases its burr and in my opinion, it's tempered close to the top of its range. People will experience the same thing with a hock O1 iron - report improved sharpness because the iron is hard tempered and won't hold a burr. Japanese steel, same.

When I did the follow-up unicorn chisel testing, I figured V11 would hold up the best because LV said it would. the Iles chisel that I had (about 62 hardness O1, it's harder than their claim of 61) held up better than the V11 chisel that I bought fresh and new from LV, and was far easier to find a point where it doesn't chip. if it holds up better than an LN chisel in a test, the limit of toughness hasn't been found as the LN chisel will be tougher, but a point or two softer and thus may roll or deflect.

I have about $500 of unused XHP, so this was a big disappointment to me.

what's the right answer? If someone has an ideal planing situation where they're planing clean wood that has maybe nothing other than planer chatter and never threatening an interrupted cut (like sawmill marks on rough lumber), maybe they can get the most out of V11. I can't.

I don't see the point of it in chisels other than the fact that LV will make it hard and few people will make a hard chisel out of O1.

that is exactly what I've said elsewhere. I can unicorn a kitchen knife made of XHP and make the bevel thick by grinding my own knife and quite like it for knives. It's fallen out of favor with a lot of the knife market because people like Larrin can come up with other steels that cost the same, have higher wear resistance or the same and better toughness plus better stain resistance (stainlessness). they don't seem to care in the knife world about dealing with vanadium carbides. I don't like vanadium carbide in woodworking tools unless one is going to go all in - maybe 10V is OK, but I doubt i'll ever be widespread because it'll either be poorly finished or have a high cost of grinding.

I'm deeper into this stuff than almost anyone else - a lot of what i've learned is that it's hard to make use of certain things and been surprised by others. Performance of V11 in day to day varied work is one of those surprises, but there are probably woodworkers who do only fairly friendly things with planes.

I'm not surprised by spin doctor's results but would be surprised if he got a big board of clean wood and planed the edge of the board with the D2 and V11 and found the same relationship.