Habitues of the porch and sons thereof,

several times in the last few years I have read in a blog or article or
some other account, of folks using thin paring chisels honed to 20 degrees.
They are often mentioned in the very final paring of dovetail base lines.
If I recall,  these are almost always old tools of Sheffield origins.
Anybody set up like this? Anybody have any to sell.  Are they really
significantly thinner? Does that, in fact, matter?

Thanks

Ron. A Kokomo Galoot who is looking forward to a day in the shop tomorrow.

Ron

I have a 3/4 and a 1” Buck Bros - pre WW1 I think.  The blades are so long and
so thin that you can flex them a little bit by bending at either end.  They are
excellent for all sort of, well, paring.

Ed Minch




On Dec 16, 2014, at 8:38 PM, Ron Harper  wrote:

> Habitues of the porch and sons thereof,
> 
> several times in the last few years I have read in a blog or article or
> some other account, of folks using thin paring chisels honed to 20 degrees.
> They are often mentioned in the very final paring of dovetail base lines.
> If I recall,  these are almost always old tools of Sheffield origins.
> Anybody set up like this? Anybody have any to sell.  Are they really
> significantly thinner? Does that, in fact, matter?
> 
> Thanks
> 
> Ron. A Kokomo Galoot who is looking forward to a day in the shop tomorrow.

On 12/16/2014 8:38 PM, Ron Harper wrote:and I snip/quote

 > several times in the last few years I have read of folks using thin
 > paring chisels honed to 20 degrees.   these are almost always old
 > tools of Sheffield origins. Anybody set up like this? Anybody have
 > any to sell.  Are they really significantly thinner?

I have a few thin ones:
A couple 1/4 inch wide chisels 5/64 thick, honed at 20 degrees.
1 1/2 inch wide 1/8 thick Howarth, honed at 17 degrees
They are my go-to parers for end grain; dovetails, through tenons,
and any other end grain that needs just that wee bit of trimming.
The wide one is nice for trimming draw-bored pegs.
The narrow ones are great for dovetails, they get right into those
pesky corners.

I think I acquired all these at Tools Of The Trade sales up here
in the Great White North.  The big wide Howarth was handle-less
and $7 IIRC.  Better than any new chisel costing 10 times that.
The narrow ones cost more, having handles and all, but are still
so much better than new ones.


-- 
Darrell LaRue
Oakville ON
Wood Hoarder, Blade Sharpener, and Occasional Tool User

Typically these were offered as pattern makers chisels. In pattern makers trade
catalogs I’ve seen these. Most edge tool makers didn’t specify what trade they
were for, but the presence in the pattern maker trade catalogs seems to support
this idea.

take a look at the second image from the top. There are very long chisels in the
tool cabinet on the wall.

http://toolemera.com/Photographs%20Of%20Trades%20%26%20Crafts/tradespat
tern.1.html">http://toolemera.com/Photographs%20Of%20Trades%20%26%20Crafts/trade
spattern.1.html <http://toolemera.com/Photographs%20Of%20Trades%20&
%20Crafts/tradespattern.1.html">http://toolemera.com/Photographs%20Of%20Trades%2
0&%20Crafts/tradespattern.1.html>
...............................
Gary Roberts
http://toolemera.com
http://toolemerabooks.com

"I'ld rather read a good book, than write a poor one." Christopher Morley




> On Dec 16, 2014, at 8:38 PM, Ron Harper  wrote:
> 
> Habitues of the porch and sons thereof,
> 
> several times in the last few years I have read in a blog or article or
> some other account, of folks using thin paring chisels honed to 20 degrees.
> They are often mentioned in the very final paring of dovetail base lines.
> If I recall,  these are almost always old tools of Sheffield origins.
> Anybody set up like this? Anybody have any to sell.  Are they really
> significantly thinner? Does that, in fact, matter?
> 
> Thanks
> 
> Ron. A Kokomo Galoot who is looking forward to a day in the shop tomorrow.

On 2014-12-16 6:38 PM, Ron Harper wrote:
> thin paring chisels
Darryl, Ed:

How thin are these chisels? How much do they taper in thickness?

Reason I ask is I have 3 vintage chisels which I consider to be parers, 
and they're all different, though of similar length blades (app 8in).

Marples boxwood handled BE, which tapers from about 7/32 to 5/32 in. at 
the tip,

Moulson Bros cranked which tapers from 11/64 at the crank to 7/64 in. at 
the tip, and

unidentified cranked which tapers from 3/16 to 5/32 in.

The Moulson Bros is fairly bendy, the Marples not at all.

Don

Ron Harper wrote:
> Habitues of the porch and sons thereof,
>
> several times in the last few years I have read in a blog or article or
> some other account, of folks using thin paring chisels honed to 20 degrees.
> They are often mentioned in the very final paring of dovetail base lines.
> If I recall,  these are almost always old tools of Sheffield origins.
> Anybody set up like this? Anybody have any to sell.  Are they really
> significantly thinner? Does that, in fact, matter?

Low bevel angles cut easier, but are only permissible
if the wood/steel combination allows it. Hard wood
and weak steel needs higher angles, or the edge will
crumble.

I wouldn't use a long "pattern makers" paring chisel
for dovetail baselines. The ergonomics is wrong, you're too far
from the action.

But a nice old fine paring chisel of common length works
just fine. Almost made for the job...

  BugBear

> several times in the last few years I have read in a blog or article or
> some other account, of folks using thin paring chisels honed to 20 
> degrees.

Actually, I grind almost all of my chisels to 20 degrees.  No these 
aren't
pattern makers, but bench chisels and firmers that do hard work.  
They're
a mixture of W. Butcher, D.R. Barton, and Buck Brothers mostly.  They 
seem
to thrive at 20 degrees.

For really thin shavings, I have several Berg and Sandvik chisels that I
grind to 15 degrees.  They'll take it and hold it in my experience.

Mike in Sacto

Michael Blair wrote:

> For really thin shavings, I have several Berg and Sandvik chisels that I
> grind to 15 degrees.  They'll take it and hold it in my experience.

What woods are you using? I'm guessing that
experience wouldn't hold true for our
Australian friends ;-)

  BugBear

I have a couple of patternmakers chisels and gouges - perfectly flat
backs - 20-22 degree cutting angle and they never see any timber
harder or more knotted than was used for making patterns, soft even
grained etc  (I use them on Thuja or Aust Red Cedar and they have to
be sharp)

I have just finished framing up some benches in old recycled
concretealyptus (some of it was Corymbia - spotted gum and knowing
where it came from was probably cut around 1860) and I was tempted to
use a jackhammer on some of the rebates.  Mortices were drilled out
useing a brace with 14inch throw and it was bl**dy hard work..  How
to quickly tell if the snail on your augur bit is single or dual lead
- get started with a twin lead in this stuff and grind to a very quick
halt.

This timber will never see those sort of chisels but good quality
bevel edge or firmers with 30 or 35 degree bevels will handle it

Neil

----- Original Message -----
From: "paul womack" 
To:"Michael Blair" , "oldtools porch" 
Cc:
Sent:Wed, 17 Dec 2014 10:59:49 +0000
Subject:Re: [OldTools] Thin paring chisels

 Michael Blair wrote:

 > For really thin shavings, I have several Berg and Sandvik chisels
that I
 > grind to 15 degrees. They'll take it and hold it in my experience.

 What woods are you using? I'm guessing that
 experience wouldn't hold true for our
 Australian friends ;-)

 BugBear

 ------------------------------------------------------------------------
 OldTools is a mailing list catering to the interests of hand tool
 aficionados, both collectors and users, to discuss the history,
usage,
 value, location, availability, collectibility, and restoration of
 traditional handtools, especially woodworking tools.

 To change your subscription options:
 http://ruckus
.law.cornell.edu/mailman/listinfo/oldtools

 To read the FAQ:
 http://swingleydev.com/archiv
e/faq.html

 OldTools archive: http://swingleydev.com/archive/">http://swingleydev.com/archive/

 OldTools@r...
 http://ruckusl
aw.cornell.edu/mailman/listinfo/oldtools

Ron Harper wrote:


"several times in the last few years I have read in a blog or article or
some other account, of folks using thin paring chisels honed to 20 degrees.
They are often mentioned in the very final paring of dovetail base lines.
If I recall,  these are almost always old tools of Sheffield origins.
Anybody set up like this? Anybody have any to sell.  Are they really
significantly thinner? Does that, in fact, matter?"

Length as well as delicacy is the essence of a paring chisel. In the 1890 Buck
Bros. catalogue they offered 1" tanged firmers at 5-1/2" long from bolster to
tip, and long firmers at 6-1/2" long. A 1" wide tanged paring would be 8-1/2"
bolster to tip. But they also offered millwrights' firmer chisels that were
8-1/2" long; these would have been sturdy but heavy, difficult to control for
delicate work. In 1890 Buck didn't offer butt chisels, probably on the
assumption that you would wear down longer chisels to butt length (and indeed I
have the nucleus of a Buck cast steel set with blades 3-1/2" tang to point, of
which only 2" is blade.)

If you're trying, say, to clean up a long, narrow groove or dado, the delicacy
of the chisel definitely does matter. All my narrow chisels (1/4" and under) are
thick at the butt end, often thicker than they are wide, and this makes them
useless for some tasks. And, of course, the main use for a paring chisel
properly so called isn't just paring, its paring a long way away from the edge
of the workpiece, using the long flat back for self-jigging (which is why you
can't just turn a short chisel upside-down). Lie-Nielson's claim that they can
change their stock heavy butt chisel into a paring by putting a long handle onto
it is laughable, right up there with the transmutation of the elements.


Buck and, I presume, others made paring chisels in socket, bevel-edged, and BE
socket forms as well as square-sided tanged, but I have almost never seen a
paring chisel in other than tanged square-sided. I foolishly passed up a number
of them over the years, since I was trying to stick to bevel-edged socket
chisels. The closest I have to a paring chisel is a 1/4" L. & I.J. White  B.E.
socket which has 8" of blade below the socket. This is just scant of 1/8" thick
just behind the bevel, call it 7/64", but is 3/16" thick halfway along, and
11/32" thick at the butt end of the tip. This one has almost no flex to it,
doubtless due to its thickness in its rear half.

All this is beside the point of dovetail-cleaning chisels. These are very
definitely useful, and the lighter, shorter, and thinner the better. About five
years ago I made a skew pair 3-1/4" tip-to-bolster and 3/8" wide from short
blades my ex-boss had thrown in my direction (with lots of others) as "trash."
One is a Butcher's; the other is marked just "cast steel." No need to use
Sheffield, considering that no Sheffield blade was better than L.&I.J. White,
Swan, Charles Buck, Witherby, or a dozen other American makers. These are
definitely my go-to set for dovetailing, but I have often considered grinding
them from square-edged to bevel-edged (I could do it and they would be better
for it, but for my taste it would be too much interference with the historical
artifact.) And I have often wished that I had a set of 1/4" B.E. skews to go
with them, since even 3/8" is often too narrow for dovetails in half-inch stock.
My 3/8" set is about 8-1/2" long overall, but when I make my 1/4" set I think I
may reduce the blade length to 2-1/2" and the handles to 3-1/2." Length is
definitely not an advantage in cleaning out dovetails--- in consequence, this is
not a task for true paring chisels.

Tom Conroy
whose advice is worth what you pay for it, and sometimes a bit less.

On 12/17/2014 1:25 AM, Don Schwartz wrote:
>
 > How thin are these chisels? How much do they taper in thickness?
 >


I have a Marples tapering from 9/32 to 5/32
I use it for paring end grain on bigger work.

The Howarth tapers from 3/16 to 1/8 and it's great for paring.

The little 1/4 inch wide Sorby tapers from 9/64 down to 5/64
It's quite flexible and is my go-to chisel for paring dovetails.

-- 
Darrell LaRue
Oakville ON
Wood Hoarder, Blade Sharpener, and Occasional Tool User

Following on my own post, I checked 3 more 'paring' chisels for 
thickness data points.

New long Narex paring chisels from LV (perfect length for end-grain 
paring on a low bench) 0.22" at the tip

E.A. Berg 1" tang BE bench chisel w 2-1/4" of steel remaining, a fat 0.11"

E.A. Berg BE chisel w 4-1/4" steel remaining, 0.13" ( a reindeer hair 
over 1/8th)

No doubt the shorter Berg lost some thickness in flattening & honing.  I 
have another in very similar condition.

I'd be interested to know the thickness of NOS Bergs, as I don't have 
any :-(

Don


On 12/16/2014 11:25 PM, Don Schwartz wrote:
> On 2014-12-16 6:38 PM, Ron Harper wrote:
>> thin paring chisels
> Darryl, Ed:
>
> How thin are these chisels? How much do they taper in thickness?
>
> Reason I ask is I have 3 vintage chisels which I consider to be 
> parers, and they're all different, though of similar length blades 
> (app 8in).
>
> Marples boxwood handled BE, which tapers from about 7/32 to 5/32 in. 
> at the tip,
>
> Moulson Bros cranked which tapers from 11/64 at the crank to 7/64 in. 
> at the tip, and
>
> unidentified cranked which tapers from 3/16 to 5/32 in.
>
> The Moulson Bros is fairly bendy, the Marples not at all.
>
> Don

2 pre WW1 Buck, bought from the same guy, probably together forever:

3/4” wide,  12” , 7-1/2” to the handle,  .105" at the tip

2” wide, 13”, 7” to the handle,  .125 at the tip

Ed Minch




On Dec 20, 2014, at 5:01 PM, Don Schwartz  wrote:

> Following on my own post, I checked 3 more 'paring' chisels for thickness data
points.
> 
> New long Narex paring chisels from LV (perfect length for end-grain paring on
a low bench) 0.22" at the tip
> 
> E.A. Berg 1" tang BE bench chisel w 2-1/4" of steel remaining, a fat 0.11"
> 
> E.A. Berg BE chisel w 4-1/4" steel remaining, 0.13" ( a reindeer hair over
1/8th)
> 
> No doubt the shorter Berg lost some thickness in flattening & honing.  I have
another in very similar condition.
> 
> I'd be interested to know the thickness of NOS Bergs, as I don't have any :-(
> 
> Don