# A2 Plane Iron Users



## woodbrains (17 May 2012)

Hello,

I have a theory, of which I am prepared to be proven wrong, but none the less curious about. Ahem... is the dislike of A2 steel plane irons and chisels more prevalent in free hand honers than jig honers? My notion is that a jig will allow a greater number of strokes on the stone at the required angle with just enough extra precision to allow a sharper edge on the more difficult A2 steel, therefore, jig honers are more likely to get the best from this steel and tend to like it more than freehand sharpeners. I have used Hock A2 cryo and really like the stuff. On the plane iron tests which Bugbear recently directed us to, Hock A2 was said to out preform that of LN and LV at 30deg honed bevels, which might have something to do with my liking of it. I have only recently got a LV BU jack, but have not used for long enough to come to any conclusions. My LV shoulder plane has an A2 iron which I get on fine with, though admittedly not used for the same purpose as bench planes so not a great comparison, but compares favourably to other shoulder planes I use.

One stipulation, though, anyone who says 'for or against' must actually sharpen their irons to a reasonable degree. People who think rubbing their irons on a concrete slab, or equivalent and then saying they don't like them, will be discounted.

Here is my contribution to start (and perhaps end?)

Vote FOR Hock A2, in block plane, Jack Plane, 04 smoother; Veritas Jig, Japanese waterstones to 6000 or 8000 grit depending on the job.


I will say that I used to sharpen with oilstones, Surgical black Arkansas and chrome oxide strop for years with good results on O1 and the likes. It was getting some A2 which initiated the change to Japanese stones as they do take ages to get a fine enough edge on oilstones IMHO. Since changing, I have never looked back, these are just so quick to get a superior edge.

Mike.


----------



## Cheshirechappie (17 May 2012)

Never having used A2 irons, I'm afraid I've nothing constructive to contribute.

However, perhaps I might be permitted to extend the question. Has anybody noticed differences in use between A2 cryogenically treated steel, and A2 non-cryogenically treated cutting tools?


----------



## Jacob (17 May 2012)

woodbrains":1bnpc7sh said:


> ........ is the dislike of A2 steel plane irons and chisels more prevalent in free hand honers than jig honers? .......


Not as far as I know. I have no problem with the two A2 plane blades I use (Veritas and Hock). In fact they seem easy to sharpen freehand, much to my surprise considering the bad press. I wonder whether it's down to different batch variations and luck of the draw?


----------



## woodbrains (17 May 2012)

Cheshirechappie":1qadffhh said:


> Never having used A2 irons, I'm afraid I've nothing constructive to contribute.
> 
> However, perhaps I might be permitted to extend the question. Has anybody noticed differences in use between A2 cryogenically treated steel, and A2 non-cryogenically treated cutting tools?



Hi,

This was something I wondered about, and perhaps this will get mentioned if anyone thinks this is a worthwhile thread to contribute to.
I am unsure whether LV is cryogenically treted or not, it doesn't seem to be well identified. For a while, Steve Knight did some O1 Cryo which (with limited data) was reputed to out perform regular O1. I believe Ron Hock has subsequently made the irons for Steve Knight in plain O1 and perhaps this situation has now changed too, so this line of investigation is limited, unless anyone here knows better.

Mike.


----------



## woodbrains (17 May 2012)

Hi,

Just checked and LV's A2 irons are not crogenically treated, but double tempered, air hardened as ar LN. So it would be Hock versus LN, LV inthe cryo, non-cryo test, at least for plane irons. If anyone is brave enough to own the new Stanley Sweetheart planes, they might have something to say about their A2 irons.

Does any lucky sod have Blue Spruce A2 chisels?

Mike.


----------



## Derek Cohen (Perth Oz) (18 May 2012)

I do not see freehand vs guide honing to be the issue with A2. I freehand hone (- mostly - but also use a guide),

If one uses the appropriate honing and polishing media, then working with A2 is almost as easy as O1 steel.

For example, Shapton Pro ceramic waterstones, which are pretty common place these days, are by far the better media than oil stones or the older waterstones, such as the generation of King stones still sold several years ago. I now use Sigma waterstones, and they make light work of even more abrasion-resistant steels, such as 3V and M4.

The other factor is whether one hones a micro bevel or a full face. Obviously one is going to create more work than the other and influence your perception of the steel.

Regards from Perth

Derek


----------



## Jacob (18 May 2012)

Interesting. So far woodbrain's hypothesis appears to be completely wrong - freehanders find no prob with A2 steel! 
TBH in use I notice very little difference - this is because I tend to do a quick hone, little and often, whenever I feel the need. I would need a time & motion observer with a stop watch to tell me which blades need most work.


----------



## Ollie78 (24 May 2012)

I have the A2 blade in my Veritas block plane. I have no issues honing it freehand using water stones. I can only compare it to standard Stanley blades really or my Japanese chisels. It seems slightly harder to hone than the Stanley blades (ie. slower) but it holds its edge for considerably longer and seems to just get `sharper` somehow.
Never tried honing jig so can`t comment on that method.

Ollie


----------



## yetloh (25 May 2012)

I have cryo and non-cryo A2 blades and hone with a guide but i am really not a fan of either. I find the dge obtainable is nothing special either in sharpness or longevity. I use water stones up to 12,00o grit or sometimes diamond paste, depending how the fancy takes me. I find Japanese lminated blades superior for edge quality and comparable for longevity. The Quangsheng T10 seems superior in both respects.

Jim


----------



## bobbybirds (26 May 2012)

woodbrains":366op4ju said:


> Hi,
> 
> Just checked and LV's A2 irons are not crogenically treated, but double tempered, air hardened as ar LN. So it would be Hock versus LN, LV inthe cryo, non-cryo test, at least for plane irons. If anyone is brave enough to own the new Stanley Sweetheart planes, they might have something to say about their A2 irons.
> 
> ...



I do have a full set of the BS bench chisels as well as some of his other offerings. They take and edge very well and I have no problem keeping one.


----------



## JohnCee (26 May 2012)

I will never understand the antipathy some people show towards the LN A2 blades. IME they are beautifully manufactured, easy to sharpen, take a great edge and hold it for a long time.


----------



## custard (26 May 2012)

JohnCee":25vh2cbs said:


> I will never understand the antipathy some people show towards the LN A2 blades. IME they are beautifully manufactured, easy to sharpen, take a great edge and hold it for a long time.



+1


----------



## Jacob (27 May 2012)

JohnCee":n1su0i0g said:


> I will never understand the antipathy some people show towards the LN A2 blades. IME they are beautifully manufactured, easy to sharpen, take a great edge and hold it for a long time.


It's because people have experienced real problems, unless they are making it up, which seems unlikely. There have been reports of crumbly edges going back a long way and a general consensus that honing below 35/30º is not viable.
Not my experience, or yours I presume, but that's the reason. 
I wonder if there is a lot of variation in quality?


----------



## mtr1 (27 May 2012)

I had real problems with my A2 LN iron that I didn't make up, see here. 

LN traced it back to a time when their Rockwell tester was not working properly, once they realised, they recalled all the planes but a good few slipped through the net.


----------



## Modernist (27 May 2012)

mtr1":25s8q00h said:


> I had real problems with my A2 LN iron that I didn't make up, see here.
> 
> LN traced it back to a time when their Rockwell tester was not working properly, once they realised, they recalled all the planes but a good few slipped through the net.



That sound like marketing department speak to me. I doubt if their process is such that they reject many. Personally I have had the full range of experience from superb to useless with no apparent common thread. Having said that the corner dropped off my AI 01 chisel recently on first use so hardening and tempering problems are not confined to A2.


----------



## woodbrains (27 May 2012)

Hello,

My OP was a bit cheeky, really, as I know hand honing can be just as effective as jig honing, and indeed do both myself as suits. What I am really trying to establish is why there is such a great polarisation in opinion about A2. Quality control problems aside, there must be some differentiator to account for the split in opinion. Jig honing could give that extra level of precision that A2 might need to get it a degree or two sharper, whereas the less demanding carbon steel would gain a lot of fans by being a bit less demanding. It appears that the free hand honers who like A2 also have a very disciplined and precise sharpening regimen, which suggests A2 does need to be fussed over a little more to get the best results.

Is there anyone who previously disliked A2 then changed their sharpening methods and found they disliked it less. Perhaps an oil stone sharpener changing to Japanese stones or scary sharp, or someone stropping who did not before?

Mike.


----------



## Jacob (27 May 2012)

woodbrains":crpg71ic said:


> Hello,
> 
> My OP was a bit cheeky, really, as I know hand honing can be just as effective as jig honing, and indeed do both myself as suits. What I am really trying to establish is why there is such a great polarisation in opinion about A2. Quality control problems aside, there must be some differentiator to account for the split in opinion. Jig honing could give that extra level of precision that A2 might need to get it a degree or two sharper, whereas the less demanding carbon steel would gain a lot of fans by being a bit less demanding. It appears that the free hand honers who like A2 also have a very disciplined and precise sharpening regimen, which suggests A2 does need to be fussed over a little more to get the best results.
> 
> ...


It's not a split in _opinion _it's a split in _experience._ Some people have had a poor experience, some have not. Trying to blame it on honing seems very improbable. For a start, my freehand honing isn't "disciplined and precise" yet I get good results


----------



## yetloh (27 May 2012)

Jacob":2e3do0s2 said:


> JohnCee":2e3do0s2 said:
> 
> 
> > I wonder if there is a lot of variation in quality?



i am told that there is A2 and then there is A2 by the person who first introduced it as a steel for plane blades. In my experience, his blades don't crumble but some others do, which fits with your hypothesis that there are significant variations in quality.

Jim


----------



## JohnCee (27 May 2012)

Edges will crumble with all steel if the bevel angle is too low. How low is too low depends on the type or treatment of the steel, that's all you need to keep in mind.


----------



## yetloh (27 May 2012)

JohnCee":29zag5i0 said:


> Edges will crumble with all steel if the bevel angle is too low. How low is too low depends on the type or treatment of the steel, that's all you need to keep in mind.



But my point is that some A2s will crumble when others don't when sharpened at exactly the same angle and with similar usage.

Jim


----------



## woodbrains (27 May 2012)

> Jacob wrote.
> It's not a split in _opinion _it's a split in _experience._ Some people have had a poor experience, some have not. Trying to blame it on honing seems very improbable. For a start, my freehand honing isn't "disciplined and precise" yet I get good results




Hello,

I'm not suggesting people have opinions _without_ experience, in which case, it is all the same. A2 has likers and loathers, whereas O1 doesn't have the same polarising effect--everyone agrees it is good. Therefore there is something that each individual does consistently i.e. sharpening, or, to a lesser extent, the use to which they put the tool, but have different experiences with the steel. In my opinion it is perfectly likely that the sharpening is a cause of the difference. Those who sharpen_ better_ may have a slight advantage in their experience using the A2, than those who do not.

Incidentally, it is perfectly feasible to sharpen both A2 and O1 consistently poorly and not discern the difference between the two, either. We are talking about achieving the finest possible edges here. Perfunctory simply will not do with the sort of work I and many others like to do.

Mike.


----------



## Jacob (27 May 2012)

woodbrains":1dayq2ts said:


> ....... A2 has likers and loathers, whereas O1 doesn't have the same polarising effect--everyone agrees it is good. Therefore there is something that each individual does consistently i.e. sharpening, or, to a lesser extent, the use to which they put the tool, but have different experiences with the steel. In my opinion it is perfectly likely that the sharpening is a cause of the difference. Those who sharpen_ better_ may have a slight advantage in their experience using the A2, than those who do not.


So you said at the beginning! No point in conducting a survey if you are going to ignore the results - everybody else has come to the blatantly obvious conclusion that there is variation in the steel and that it has nothing at all to do with sharpening.


----------



## JohnCee (27 May 2012)

yetloh":1e1lsij7 said:


> JohnCee":1e1lsij7 said:
> 
> 
> > Edges will crumble with all steel if the bevel angle is too low. How low is too low depends on the type or treatment of the steel, that's all you need to keep in mind.
> ...



yebbut there's also similar variation in o1, only people don't go on about it so much.
One of my set of ashley iles o1 chisels has a crumbly edge, for example.....


----------



## Jacob (27 May 2012)

JohnCee":3s2fkcl1 said:


> yetloh":3s2fkcl1 said:
> 
> 
> > JohnCee":3s2fkcl1 said:
> ...


.Presumably because it doesn't happen so often.


----------



## woodbrains (27 May 2012)

Jacob":1a77ifmg said:


> woodbrains":1a77ifmg said:
> 
> 
> > ....... A2 has likers and loathers, whereas O1 doesn't have the same polarising effect--everyone agrees it is good. Therefore there is something that each individual does consistently i.e. sharpening, or, to a lesser extent, the use to which they put the tool, but have different experiences with the steel. In my opinion it is perfectly likely that the sharpening is a cause of the difference. Those who sharpen_ better_ may have a slight advantage in their experience using the A2, than those who do not.
> ...



We are not talking about variation in steel--that is a quality control issue. Clearly if someone gets a dud, they won't like it. No, two A2 tools from the same manufacturer, within QC tolerances, given to two woodworkers. One likes one does not, why? This is what I am trying to find out as the same senario with O1 does not have such a polarising effect, it would seem.

There haven't actually _been_ any results yet; just some likers saying so and some dislikers saying not. This, we already know.

Mike.


----------



## Jacob (27 May 2012)

4 people have no complaint as they have had no problems. 3 have had problems and that is why they complain. Perhaps you should give them some advice on honing techniques? Could you describe yours in detail so they can see where they are going wrong? 
Personally I don't need any advice, not having a problem with A2.


----------



## JohnCee (27 May 2012)

woodbrains":3ryp3pwf said:


> One likes one does not, why?
> Mike.



because one doesn't know how to sharpen properly.


----------



## woodbrains (27 May 2012)

JohnCee":3givsgg6 said:


> woodbrains":3givsgg6 said:
> 
> 
> > One likes one does not, why?
> ...



Hello,

A likeminded individual, and it only took 2 pages of posts to find you! Now that is a result.

Mike.


----------



## Jacob (28 May 2012)

JohnCee":39pntx00 said:


> woodbrains":39pntx00 said:
> 
> 
> > One likes one does not, why?
> ...





JohnCee":39pntx00 said:


> ......
> yebbut there's also similar variation in o1, only people don't go on about it so much.
> One of my set of ashley iles o1 chisels has a crumbly edge, for example.....


So obviously you have one chisel you don't know how to sharpen properly! 
What exactly are you doing differently with that chisel? Once you tell us that, the mystery will be solved. :lol: :lol: 
Er, _why_ are you doing it differently with that one chisel, or is that a silly question?


----------



## woodbrains (28 May 2012)

Jacob":2yyca1eh said:


> So obviously you have one chisel you don't know how to sharpen properly!
> What exactly are you doing differently with that chisel? Once you tell us that, the mystery will be solved. :lol: :lol:
> Er, _why_ are you doing it differently with that one chisel, or is that a silly question?



The only mystery is, why you keep going on about quality control issues when I have re-iterated half a dozen times what I'm trying to find out. One owner having a dud chisel or plane iron in a batch, that will not hone an edge, is a manufacturing defect. I am wondering why, perfect A2 tools, from the same manufacturer, are loved by some and hated by others. Logically, there must be something differerent about the way they are sharpened, or used, that causes the difference as the tool is a constant in this case. I am wondering why there is such a strong feeling for or against A2 over more regular high carbon steel. It is not difficult, or at least I thought it wasn't.

David Savage dislikes Blue Spruce chisels, for example, yet someone here gets along fine with them, Why the split? They are clearly fine tools in all respects, but use A2 steel. What is it about the stuff? Is it just that some traditionalists are determined to dislike new-fangled stuff, while others are willing to embrace it, so find things to like or dislike about it whether it is their or not?

My idea was that people would simply state that they liked/disliked A2, what media they used to sharpen it and to what degree of grit size and if they used a jig or not. I thought I might see a trend that could explain the split. Since we cannot get over incidentals like QC issues, then I don't think we will ever get a sample big enough to draw a conclusion.

Mike.


----------



## JohnCee (28 May 2012)

Jacob":1jwgj2mq said:


> JohnCee":1jwgj2mq said:
> 
> 
> > woodbrains":1jwgj2mq said:
> ...



No, I have one chisel that I have to sharpen at a higher angle than the rest, otherwise the edge crumbles.


----------



## bobbybirds (28 May 2012)

woodbrains":5lymc5ri said:


> Jacob":5lymc5ri said:
> 
> 
> > So obviously you have one chisel you don't know how to sharpen properly!
> ...



I sharpen my BS chisels and LV A2 plane irons with water stones at 30/35 degrees. My current set-up which I have used since starting with hand tools is a King 1000 and a Norton 4000/8000 combo. I also strop on horse hide with green paste for quick touch ups... To re-establish a primary bevel and to flatten my water stones I have a 325/1200 diamond plate. 

This set-up has always served me well, but lately I am wanting to experiment with ceramic stones. Not to really get a finer edge, but just to see if it does speed up sharpening a bit as I tend to have sharpening afternoons rather than sharpen after every use, so the time savings might be nice...


----------



## Kalimna (28 May 2012)

bobbybirds - do you have a BS paring chisel also? If so, what angle do you sharpen it at, as I find the edge seems to crumble quite easily at any 'normal' paring angles.

Cheers,
Adam


----------



## Modernist (28 May 2012)

Kalimna":10k0n2nm said:


> bobbybirds - do you have a BS paring chisel also? If so, what angle do you sharpen it at, as I find the edge seems to crumble quite easily at any 'normal' paring angles.
> 
> Cheers,
> Adam



If I'd bought a BS chisel only to find it crumbled I think I'd be using it to sever my jugular :evil: Interesting that the A2 virus has spread this far.


----------



## Kalimna (28 May 2012)

Problem is, I don't know whether it is user error in sharpening/in use/in not sharpening often enough/in poor expectations of what I should be able to pare. For instance, let's say I sharpen at 25 degrees (which seems a bit low for the consensus on A2, but somewhere near the norm for a paring chisel), how long in use (say, on 1/2-1" oak) before it should require re-sharpening? 10 minutes? 30 minutes? An hour? A couple of days worth? I know this all depends on how one 'attacks' the wood with the tool, but in rough ball-park terms is all I would like to know.
And would 30-35 be appropriate for a paring chisel in A2?

Cheers,
Adam


----------



## Modernist (28 May 2012)

I don't think you've got a hope at anything less than 30 deg, certainly not 25. That tends to support the idea that A2 is not for paring. IMHO it is a hard wearing steel for higher angle edges 32-45 deg, particularly smoothers for difficult grain, but can sometimes take a good edge at 30 deg.


----------



## Kalimna (28 May 2012)

Thanks Brian, that rather confirms what I have suspected.
Cheers,
Adam


----------



## Jacob (29 May 2012)

And David Savage says the same here.
Seems to be a convincing answer to Woodbrain's question i.e. nothing at all to do with sharpening _technique_ but more to do with the fact that _you can't usefully sharpen it at all_ except to an angle above 30º.


----------



## JohnCee (29 May 2012)

I think there would be fewer problems if sharpening was more widely regarded as the very simple process it is, rather than some arcane ritual that requires a "technique".


----------



## Jacob (29 May 2012)

JohnCee":2str4o4c said:


> I think there would be fewer problems if sharpening was more widely regarded as the very simple process it is, rather than some arcane ritual that requires a "technique".


Absolutely! Still wouldn't solve the A2 prob; whatever technique, simple or arcane, you can't get a usable edge below 30 ish - according to many, but not all, users.


----------



## bugbear (29 May 2012)

Jacob":2jw64vc5 said:


> JohnCee":2jw64vc5 said:
> 
> 
> > I think there would be fewer problems if sharpening was more widely regarded as the very simple process it is, rather than some arcane ritual that requires a "technique".
> ...



I thought 30 was your normal honing angle, so A2 = no problem.

BugBear


----------



## woodbloke (29 May 2012)

JohnCee":36zz1axn said:


> I think there would be fewer problems if sharpening was more widely regarded as the very simple process it is, rather than some arcane ritual that requires a "technique".


It is a simple process, agreed, but different people use different techniques to get the end result and that's where a lot of the confusion arises, but the important thing is that end users obtain the edge they're looking for, by whatever means - Rob


----------



## bugbear (29 May 2012)

woodbloke":ketjaexa said:


> It is a simple process, agreed, but different people use different techniques to get the end result and that's where a lot of the confusion arises, but the important thing is that end users obtain the edge they're looking for, by whatever means - Rob



http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Dn8vzTsnPps

 

BugBear


----------



## yetloh (29 May 2012)

woodbloke":1q2j3wba said:


> JohnCee":1q2j3wba said:
> 
> 
> > I think there would be fewer problems if sharpening was more widely regarded as the very simple process it is, rather than some arcane ritual that requires a "technique".
> ...



Absolutely, Rob. My technique is quite differenr from yours, but so what.

So far as the Blue Spruce is concerned, a paring chisel that needs to be sharpened at 35 deg sounds to me like a contradiction in terms. I sharpen my Japanese paring chisels at 25 and have no problems.

Jim


----------



## Jacob (29 May 2012)

bugbear":2ouvfimh said:


> Jacob":2ouvfimh said:
> 
> 
> > JohnCee":2ouvfimh said:
> ...


Yes I have no problem with it on the two plane blades I have, in spite of my peculiar sharpening techniques.


----------



## bobbybirds (29 May 2012)

Kalimna":y6fkgtyj said:


> bobbybirds - do you have a BS paring chisel also? If so, what angle do you sharpen it at, as I find the edge seems to crumble quite easily at any 'normal' paring angles.
> 
> Cheers,
> Adam


I have a set of 4 DT paring chisels yes, and I have always kept them at 30 degrees with no micro-bevel. They pare well and no crumbling issues.


----------



## Kalimna (29 May 2012)

Thanks for that - may I ask a further question in that how long would you expect a sharpening to last whilst paring before needing redone? I know there are caveats with such a question, but a ball park figure would be good.

Many thanks,
Adam


----------



## Modernist (29 May 2012)

I think paring is impossible to estimate owing to the large number of variables but I have planed all morning with a 30 deg A2, cleaning up window frames in DF before needing to re-sharpen. When all the conditions are right it can be incredible with regard to edge life.


----------



## Kalimna (29 May 2012)

Thanks Brian - that also confirms what I already suspected. That I dont sharpen my plane blade enough 

Cheers,
Adam


----------



## bobbybirds (30 May 2012)

Kalimna":3nxg1rrh said:


> Thanks for that - may I ask a further question in that how long would you expect a sharpening to last whilst paring before needing redone? I know there are caveats with such a question, but a ball park figure would be good.
> 
> Many thanks,
> Adam


Hmmmmm.... Tough question to answer because of all the mitigating factors such as material, amount of paring needed depending on how well my sawing skills held up cutting tails etc... As an example, I just did a smaller case in cherry that has a total of 20 half blind DT's for which I used my 1/2 for all the paring except of the inside corners for which I used a fishtail. I fully sharpened it before starting and completed all on them with just some quick stropping on horsehide with green paste a half dozen times or so in between just to keep it extra sharp. No crumbling experienced...


----------



## Kalimna (30 May 2012)

BB - thats really quite helpful also. It gives me a good idea what to expect from a single sharpening. Also, it suggests that I might benefit from stropping inbetween sharpenings too.
One of the main problems I find when trying to learn woodworking without a direct tutor is what to expect from a tool, and how to use that tool effectively. Frequently reading from a book is difficult to translate into actions (in my hands at least!).

Thanks,
Adam


----------



## bobbybirds (30 May 2012)

Kalimna":2pv3uez4 said:


> BB - thats really quite helpful also. It gives me a good idea what to expect from a single sharpening. Also, it suggests that I might benefit from stropping inbetween sharpenings too.
> One of the main problems I find when trying to learn woodworking without a direct tutor is what to expect from a tool, and how to use that tool effectively. Frequently reading from a book is difficult to translate into actions (in my hands at least!).
> 
> Thanks,
> Adam



In my humble opinion, you can never really go wrong sharpening a bit extra when learning, just so you know how things perform when they are working at their peak and you get good practice. As you practice more, you will notice the little things that indicate to you that things are not performing up to expectations and you will start sharpening a bit less and less. I find stropping has made the biggest difference to me in regards to how often I put blade to stone. If things are starting to feel a bit dull it takes just a few swipes freehand on the green compound impregnated horse hide strap and you're popping hairs again...


----------



## Jacob (31 May 2012)

So have we answered WB's OP and shown that there is_ nothing_ wrong with these parrots, apart from the fact that some of them have been found to be dead? :lol:


----------



## yetloh (31 May 2012)

Couldn't have put it better myself, Jacob.

Jim


----------



## woodbrains (31 May 2012)

Jacob":1xhq89dp said:


> So have we answered WB's OP and shown that there is_ nothing_ wrong with these parrots, apart from the fact that some of them have been found to be dead? :lol:



I didn't ever say there was anything wrong, I actually quite like A2 steel plane irons in their place. I have no A2 chisels to comment on those. As far as answering my question; yes and no. It still seems there is a definite split between those that like A2 and those that don't, so I wasn't under any false impression there. As to what causes the difference, I still don't know, there wasn't enough data, only more conjecture and no conclusion can be drawn on that.

There are a few things which spring to mind about some of the comments. Is there anything wrong with a paring chisel that has been honed to 30-35 deg? The conventional wisdom is that a chisel is sharpened to the lowest angle that will hold up, steel or work dependant. It doesn't matter what the steel is or even if you know what it is. Sharpening in a ball park of 25deg and if it doesn't hold up well, increase incrementally until it does. The number you finish up with is not important in itself, other than for future repeatability. Just because some chisels hold up at lower angles does not necessarily mean that those that need higher are somehow defective. You could argue that the lower angle requires less effort to push, and I would agree to a point, but if that edge dulls just a trifle (but still eminently usable, I don't meen blunt), the initial advantage is perhaps lost. Let us suppose 5 paring strokes took the edge off a carbon steel blade to the level of a slightly less acute but well sharpened A2. Then all things are equal in terms of resistance to the cut, or effort to push the tool, if you prefer. But the A2 will remain at that level for much longer. It may just require a new way of thinking. I am ceratin that comments about sharpening not being arcane were made in the bronze age, when the bloke that invented iron pointed out that wafting a bit of flint over the edge of the new stuff just wasn't going to work the same as before. It is different stuff and can be advantageous or not, dependant on the job at hand, how well it is sharpened (and it does require a little more fussing and knowledge to do so) and the mindset of the user. What it is not, is exactly the same as the stuff we have already, but better!

Mike.


----------



## bugbear (1 Jun 2012)

woodbrains":3d1o14ds said:


> There are a few things which spring to mind about some of the comments. Is there anything wrong with a paring chisel that has been honed to 30-35 deg? The conventional wisdom is that a chisel is sharpened to the lowest angle that will hold up, steel or work dependant.



I think a lot of the trouble and confusion comes from the fact that for many, many years there was only one kind of steel.

So what we think of as "perfectly normal, usual, obvious (etc) sharpening" is really a sharpening system evolved for a particular steel, long ago, and now taken for granted.

This extends to technique, bevel angles, sharpening frequency, use of grindstones, lubricant and choice of abrasives.

Introduce a new steel with different properties and things are up for grabs again.

If you think A2 is a "bit interesting" take a look at the highly resistant steels coming over to woodwork from the world of knives.

BugBear


----------



## woodbrains (1 Jun 2012)

bugbear":1qa9u0xt said:


> If you think A2 is a "bit interesting" take a look at the highly resistant steels coming over to woodwork from the world of knives.
> 
> BugBear



Hello,

T10 steel, the stuff many of us have tried in either Quiangsheng planes, or as replacement irons in their regular planes, was originally used for swords in China, I believe. There is something 'different' about this steel, too, though not as marked as A2, it definately feels different on the stone to Clifton irons, say. I notice Ray Iles does some D2 plane irons as well, though I am loathe to try them at the minute, since my Japanese stone won't sharpen that and I don't want to invest in diamond or ceramic stones at the minute, to give the stuff a try. I would be interested to hear what any one who has used this thinks. While I think about it, does anyone use any of the powder metal plane irons Holtey produces--if he indeed still does--as replacements for Bailey type planes. Now who thinks sharpening is simple?

Mike.


----------



## jimi43 (1 Jun 2012)

I put a QS T10 in my 100 year old infill panel plane and it has been honed a couple of times....

Not because it needed it...because I was bored and _*thought*_ it needed it! 

I had a few jobs to do with it the other day and am still surprised how long it holds its edge...how sharp I can make it and how well it has settled into its new home.

Jim


----------



## JohnCee (1 Jun 2012)

woodbrains":1ysf61k9 said:


> T10 steel, the stuff many of us have tried in either Quiangsheng planes, or as replacement irons in their regular planes, was originally used for swords in China, I believe. There is something 'different' about this steel, too, though not as marked as A2, it definately feels different on the stone to Clifton irons, say. I notice Ray Iles does some D2 plane irons as well, though I am loathe to try them at the minute, since my Japanese stone won't sharpen that and I don't want to invest in diamond or ceramic stones at the minute, to give the stuff a try. I would be interested to hear what any one who has used this thinks. While I think about it, does anyone use any of the powder metal plane irons Holtey produces--if he indeed still does--as replacements for Bailey type planes. Now who thinks sharpening is simple?
> 
> Mike.



I still think it's simple. I have no difficulty sharpening my Ray Iles D2 irons with waterstones.
The only thing that makes sharpening plane irons difficult sometimes is when they are warped. The more exotic steels can then cause nightmares trying to get the backs flat. I gave up on Quangsheng irons for this reason.


----------



## woodbrains (1 Jun 2012)

JohnCee":bu94xsfz said:


> I still think it's simple. I have no difficulty sharpening my Ray Iles D2 irons with waterstones.
> The only thing that makes sharpening plane irons difficult sometimes is when they are warped. The more exotic steels can then cause nightmares trying to get the backs flat. I gave up on Quangsheng irons for this reason.



Hi,

I'm surprised at you having trouble with Quiansheng irons. The few I have were the flattest and finest polished from new as I could hope. I think only the LV irons I have were marginally better and I mean marginal. It is also funny that the chrome content in the D2 is very high which should make it impossible to get a really keen edge, it is almost stainless steel, and the silicon and Vanadium make it hard, too. The T 10 should be infinitely easier to sharpen and the edge much keener. I don't care what you say, there is more to this sharpening malarchy than meets the eye.

Perhaps you should have sent the Quiangsheng blade back as a dud. Workshop Heaven seem to have the best QS irons around, if you did not get yours there, you should give them another go.

Mike.


----------



## JohnCee (1 Jun 2012)

woodbrains":3c3ruql3 said:


> Hi,
> 
> I'm surprised at you having trouble with Quiansheng irons. The few I have were the flattest and finest polished from new as I could hope. I think only the LV irons I have were marginally better and I mean marginal. It is also funny that the chrome content in the D2 is very high which should make it impossible to get a really keen edge, it is almost stainless steel, and the silicon and Vanadium make it hard, too. The T 10 should be infinitely easier to sharpen and the edge much keener. I don't care what you say, there is more to this sharpening malarchy than meets the eye.
> 
> ...



Bought 2, both badly warped across width. Usual exemplary WH customer service, replaced without question. The 2 replacements were initially flat. One has remained so, the other is now warped. I'm sure Matthew would replace this also, but I'm afraid I decided life was too short by this point. No reflection on WH, I continue to be a very happy customer.
I really don't know if I have ended up with very untypical quangsheng steel. The stuff I have seems to skate over an XX-coarse diamond stone and defy all flattening attempts. The D2 is a doddle in comparison. You're right, the edge is not great, but getting it to take the best edge it can is not difficult.


----------



## yetloh (1 Jun 2012)

I too am surprised that anyone has difficulty sharpening the Quangsheng blades. I find the T10 steel takes and holds a better edge than what I consider to be the much inferior A2. So it's no contest so far as I am concerned.

Jim


----------



## jimi43 (1 Jun 2012)

yetloh":29inlla1 said:


> I too am surprised that anyone has difficulty sharpening the Quangsheng blades. I find the T10 steel takes and holds a better edge than what I consider to be the much inferior A2. So it's no contest so far as I am concerned.
> 
> Jim



+1

Totally agree....

And...mine came with a flat face which has stayed flat.

I don't see a huge difference between a good old 01 and my T10...but the only A2 iron I have I wouldn't buy any more again. I think my view might be different if I were to use another sharpening system...but that ain't going to happen any time soon.

Jim

Jim


----------



## JohnCee (1 Jun 2012)

yetloh":16ww1xxq said:


> I too am surprised that anyone has difficulty sharpening the Quangsheng blades. I find the T10 steel takes and holds a better edge than what I consider to be the much inferior A2. So it's no contest so far as I am concerned.
> 
> Jim



I don't have any difficulty sharpening the flat ones (I also have a QS block plane with a flat blade). They're OK. Prefer A2.


----------



## Kalimna (1 Jun 2012)

Well, I am seriously considering the purchase of both a QS No.7 and a new blade/cap iron for a 4 1/2 from eBay. And it will be an interesting comparison work and sharpening wise to the LN 5 1/2 and Hock blade/cap iron in a cheap Stanley no 7. 
At the stage i am on the woodworking learning curve, Im not sure I will be able to detect the difference in use, but some of the metal I have had to grind away seems a damn site harder than others.

Cheers,
Adam

As a side thought, how about this for a 'rough' comparison of the steels mentioned so far:
O1 - easiest to sharpen, finest edge, doesnt last very long. Useful for final finishing/general.
A2 - Tougher steel, longer lasting edge, not quite as fine an edge and a bit trickier to sharpen. Useful for general flattening.
D2 - Damn tough. Not as fine an edge, hardest to sharpen. Useful for hogging material (?v good for scrub use?) and for those averse to frequent sharpening


----------



## woodbrains (2 Jun 2012)

Kalimna":3u2ni3pw said:


> As a side thought, how about this for a 'rough' comparison of the steels mentioned so far:
> O1 - easiest to sharpen, finest edge, doesnt last very long. Useful for final finishing/general.
> A2 - Tougher steel, longer lasting edge, not quite as fine an edge and a bit trickier to sharpen. Useful for general flattening.
> D2 - Damn tough. Not as fine an edge, hardest to sharpen. Useful for hogging material (?v good for scrub use?) and for those averse to frequent sharpening



Hello,

In a nutshell, this is pretty much it and knowing this goes a long way to using the right tool in the relavent circumstances. Just as there is no such thing as a universal tool, there are no universal steels and the variety we can get our hands on all adds to the scope of the work we can do and the enjoyment.

Mike.


----------



## GazPal (2 Jun 2012)

The only drawback to using/relying upon tougher steels can sometimes be a reluctance - element of laziness - toward re-whetting an edge. The resulting damage to a finish surface can sometimes prove catastrophic for the piece being worked upon, so - regardless of whichever alloy of kryptonite is in use - treat blades as though they need whetting as frequently as plain carbon steel and you'll seldom go far wrong. :wink: 

Most fairly complex honing operations should seldom take no longer than a minute or two per blade or iron. Regardless of steel alloy in use.


----------



## JohnCee (2 Jun 2012)

woodbrains":11rwnuhz said:


> Kalimna":11rwnuhz said:
> 
> 
> > As a side thought, how about this for a 'rough' comparison of the steels mentioned so far:
> ...



No it isn't. A2 can plane hardwood to a mirror finish. Ray Iles uses D2 for his infill smoothers. Go figure, as they say.


----------



## JohnCee (2 Jun 2012)

woodbrains":11rwnuhz said:


> Kalimna":11rwnuhz said:
> 
> 
> > As a side thought, how about this for a 'rough' comparison of the steels mentioned so far:
> ...



No it isn't. A2 can plane hardwood to a mirror finish. Ray Iles uses D2 for his infill smoothers. Go figure, as they say.


----------



## bugbear (2 Jun 2012)

jimi43":2lc061x6 said:


> I don't see a huge difference between a good old 01 and my T10




The "good old" blades are W1, not W1 and T10 is rather similar to W1.

BugBear


----------



## woodbrains (2 Jun 2012)

JohnCee":rjmy9lcy said:


> woodbrains":rjmy9lcy said:
> 
> 
> > Kalimna":rjmy9lcy said:
> ...



Where did anyone comment on the surface produced by the blades, stop inferring incorrectly, and we might get somwhere.


----------



## Jacob (2 Jun 2012)

woodbrains":1y6bm34q said:


> ........ we might get somewhere.


 :lol: :lol:


----------



## woodbrains (2 Jun 2012)

bugbear":itwva729 said:


> jimi43":itwva729 said:
> 
> 
> > I don't see a huge difference between a good old 01 and my T10
> ...


 I think this should read 'not O1 and T10 is rather similar...'

Bugbear is correct, W1 is the good old steel, but I don't think O1 is any more removed form it that T10. T10 is water tempered as W1, but the former is alloyed with nickel and silicon, (and possibly tungsten depending on the maker) which is not the same as W1. O1 is arguably closer in alloyant respects.

Mike.


----------



## jimi43 (2 Jun 2012)

woodbrains":9lyqwp0r said:


> bugbear":9lyqwp0r said:
> 
> 
> > jimi43":9lyqwp0r said:
> ...



Well you quench your steel in what you want...I get 01 Tool steel and quench it in oil...I don't use W1 from days of yore.....except when it comes with a tool attached at a bootfair! :mrgreen: 

And if we are being pedantic W1 was mostly quenched in brine. I am willing to stand corrected on this though...as is the wont of these threads....

Meanwhile I'll be in the shed turning up a handle for my good old Sorby firmer...using HSS (I have no idea what type of HSS it is...it just has HSS written on the shaft!)

Jim


----------



## yetloh (2 Jun 2012)

I'm losing the will to live...

Jim


----------



## woodbrains (3 Jun 2012)

> ="jimi43
> 
> And if we are being pedantic W1 was mostly quenched in brine. I am willing to stand corrected on this though...as is the wont of these threads....
> 
> Jim



Hi,

No, you a right, as in it is quenched in water (W) with a modified boiling point. Think about the temp steel is tempered and the BP of water! It is still referred to as water hardened steel, regardless. Or would you like me to call A2 as 'N2,O2, CO2, Water Vapour, trace Ar, Ne, He........' hardening steel? :roll: 

The real thing everyone is missing, is that it is not just the alloy, or method of tempering which imparts the characteristics we want in our steel. I think I am right in saying that only Clifton still hammer the steel billets for their plane irons, to get the required grain structure to give us sharper edge attainment and tenacity. The fancy pants alloys try to do this with just chemistry alone and to a certain degree, fail. I do have some stretch hammered chisels from Stubai which indicates there is still some proper toolmaking in Europe too, although these would be great chisels if the bevels were finer--ruined for a ha'peth of tar. When I get some funds I might replace with some AI's.

Incidentally, I don't think there is anyone in the US forging in this way and the LV and LN blades are machined fron solid bar. This might guarantee flat (?) backs but IMHO weak steel.

Mike.


----------

