Clico - End of an Era

[D_W]

I'm not sure what people here do for sharpening, I'd assume there's a lot of oilstones.

One thing I did in secret was sell off the washitas that I'm not using (I gave a couple away, too). That leaves me about about 4, not because I use 4, but because two are unmarked stones and odd (one is narrow and the other is short). My two favorites turned out to be not labeled, and I've used them for everything but a very few items (you'd be surprised how well they do with a japanese chisel has a wrought iron back - the fact that the chisel is harder just means the edge is finer).

I know there's an appreciation (or at least was at one time) in the UK for the type since there are so many on ebay originating there, but they're at a premium, too. I love them, they sharpen everything nicely.

Passed on a Norton Queercreek stone this past weekend. Was fairly flat, but had a few nicks. Flea market guy wanted $40 for it, no case, and wouldn't budge to the $10 I offered. Have a smaller NOS Norton Queercreek in a box, with label, somewhere in my accumulation. Never have used one though.

As far as the Spyderco's go, I like them: Jury was out for months on the "Ultrafine", but after at six months of regular use, a few flattenings on a diamond plate, in spite of being artificial, either it or me has settled into how it works best and I get a great edge. Unlike most American woodworking forums, the UK guys don't get the shorts in a knot talking about the latest jigs etc. Much, much more practical about the craft, which is very refreshing, and I suspect most here roll their eyes at some of our Yankee bloggers.

$40 is double as much as they should be. I've got one that Mel Fulks gave me, and I'll admit I haven't tried it too much yet, but I've got other sandstone hones and there's just something they're missing that novaculite has. The japanese stones are different, like arks, they have some bite and at the right level of hardness they are somewhere between sharpening and polishing. The sandstones, though (and I have used a coarse sandstone and a hindostan hone a fair amount) just feel like second line stones compared to arks and other more desirable naturals - not surprisingly given that they sold for a fraction of the cost of arks and the pros would've had the good sense to use whatever's best.

I like the concept of the spydercos, too, but haven't used mine quite so much because of the love for the washita. I like the concept through because the particles are fixed on the stones which means you can use them slowly and with different touch and not remove much metal in a situation where you are just trying to refresh what is already a near good edge.

 

[Vann]

I'm not sure what people here do for sharpening, I'd assume there's a lot of oilstones.

WHOA :!: You guys are turning my lament at the loss of old skills into a sharpening thread :shock: ? (hammer)

Something that's come out of this discussion though, is that the cryogenic treated irons aren't hand-forged anymore (I hadn't realised that). That's another old skill wiped-out. Damn!

Cheers, Vann.

 

[Tony Zaffuto]

I'm not sure what people here do for sharpening, I'd assume there's a lot of oilstones.

WHOA :!: You guys are turning my lament at the loss of old skills into a sharpening thread :shock: ? (hammer)

Something that's come out of this discussion though, is that the cryogenic treated irons aren't hand-forged anymore (I hadn't realised that). That's another old skill wiped-out. Damn!

Cheers, Vann.

That is a disappointment as the prior Clifton iron (and to a bot of a lesser extent the "StaySet") was the plane! I can fly through quick touch ups on my #3 by popping the bottom portion of the the chip breaker off, hone and have everything back together pronto.

 

[D_W]

I wonder whether any of us would be able to tell the difference. It doesn't make that much sense to cryo treat O1 steel, but it must be a demand (marketing-wise). The result is probably the same practically, but the etch that's replaced the stamp looks cheaper (the iron looks like it's a lot cheaper, though, too - though I'm not in the market for any of that kind of stuff).

 

[Sheffield Tony]

I wonder whether any of us would be able to tell the difference. It doesn't make that much sense to cryo treat O1 steel, but it must be a demand (marketing-wise). The result is probably the same practically, but the etch that's replaced the stamp looks cheaper (the iron looks like it's a lot cheaper, though, too - though I'm not in the market for any of that kind of stuff).

I would guess it is cheaper. Laser cut from gauge plate -vs- hand forged from round bar ? But I suspect that it is not really about cost; the etching is a thing Thomas Flinn are already equipped to do for their saws. The forging of the old Clifton irons, along with the augers, was what Clico did that was a bit special. The castings were no doubt subcontracted, and still can be, but the iron couldn't easily be made in the way it used to be.

 

[D_W]

I wonder whether any of us would be able to tell the difference. It doesn't make that much sense to cryo treat O1 steel, but it must be a demand (marketing-wise). The result is probably the same practically, but the etch that's replaced the stamp looks cheaper (the iron looks like it's a lot cheaper, though, too - though I'm not in the market for any of that kind of stuff).

I would guess it is cheaper. Laser cut from gauge plate -vs- hand forged from round bar ? But I suspect that it is not really about cost; the etching is a thing Thomas Flinn are already equipped to do for their saws. The forging of the old Clifton irons, along with the augers, was what Clico did that was a bit special. The castings were no doubt subcontracted, and still can be, but the iron couldn't easily be made in the way it used to be.

Yeah, I should've been clear about that, I'm not implying it's "cheap looking", but that the price is in fact actually much lower than it was when they were forging them. They were about 80 bucks over here when the laser cut hock irons were less than half of that, which made them a tough sell. They probably still won't sell over here because we have a gaggle of various irons offered.

I agree with sentiment about the stamp, I think it was special looking, as an amateur sometimes toolmaker, I get a lot of mileage out of those details (deep stamps with a lot of character), but I'd imagine the average white collar tool show buyer probably doesn't. I didn't when I was a beginner. Those things show maker pride above and beyond boasting about kaizen or inventory systems or any other such thing companies boast about that takes the humanity out of the tools.

I don't think the average customer will have the sense to notice any difference between a forged iron and a cut and treated iron, though, either (nor maybe would they without the cryo treatment). I sound cynical saying that, but the quality of O1 bar stock heated and tempered well (when the stock is good quality to start with) is pretty good already. Wear resistance follows hardness after that if chipping doesn't occur.

I don't know of anyone else actually hammering irons outside of japan, and I suspect (or have been told) that quite a lot of japanese irons claimed to be hand forged are made from preliminated stock from the mill (I'd assume it's rolled together under heat given how uniform the lamination is) - that hand hammering via power hammer is saved for the older and more skilled smiths, and I'll bet that will for the most part disappear in the not too distant future. That prelaminated japanese stock is also good (cleaner alloy and higher carbon than most western stuff), but not what people expect when they think of a power hammer smashing everything together. The knives for the most part are definitely made of prelaminated material - and even the cheapest make western knives look pretty bad, partially because of the material and partially because they're not afraid to harden them.

It's a shame to see things like that forging end, but buyers buy on price because they're buying 5 times as much stuff as they need. 95% of the buyers will have no clue why a stamp like the one that was in the clifton irons is a special thing.

 

[G S Haydon]

"95% of the buyers will have no clue why a stamp like the one that was in the clifton irons is a special thing."

That's the hard thing about the whole concept. Unless someone with exposure is willing to explain why it's unique, special etc it wont get traction.

 

[D_W]

"95% of the buyers will have no clue why a stamp like the one that was in the clifton irons is a special thing."

That's the hard thing about the whole concept. Unless someone with exposure is willing to explain why it's unique, special etc it wont get traction.

I don't think anything will gain traction at this point. I have an urge to go on a long term comparison of everything I've ever bought, but I don't still have it all in possession. I see way too many people who are "trusted advisors" and instructors who are linked to retailers and who are not giving unbiased recommendations. That kind of thing drives away anything that creates cost in production because it promotes selling something that costs the least to make to the most it can be sold for (usually to beginners).

At any rate, I think but for a small section of folks who appreciate why things were done the way they were at the end of the era of incremental improvement, most of the rest of it is a lost cause in the era of $150 imported electroplate diamond hones and other such things.

 

[Cheshirechappie]

The main reason the "old ways" were used in times gone by was because, at the time, they were the most economical methods of production available. Now that technology has moved on, they may no longer be. That's certainly the case with plane irons, which can now be cut more economically from rolled flat stock. The act of rolling has a similar (not quite exactly the same) effect on metal grains that forging used to, so there's no real loss of quality on that account. Certainly, reports from users on irons by people like Ray Iles, Ron Hock and so on don't suggest that their products are in any way inferior or underperforming - it also means they can make irons in relatively small quantities, because they don't have to cover the capital and running costs of forging plant, or pay the huge energy costs (huge in the UK, anyway) of running a furnace.

There are some small niches left in which forging is still the economical way to make things - Ashley Iles and Henry Taylor still make chisels the old way, by multiple-strike forging and hand-grinding. In the case of some the more complex shaped carving chisels, it would be hard to think of any other way of making them, and both firms being long-established, they have long since paid off the capital costs of their forging plant and specialist tooling for it (in Ashley Iles' case, they're still using many of the dies that Ashley himself made when he first started back in Sheffield in the 1950s.)

On the cryogenic treatment of O1 steel, there was a comment by Peter Sefton (of this parish) a few months ago reporting results of some blind trials he did with his students of Clifton plane irons. He said there was a definite difference in edge life, some irons lasting much longer than others. He didn't know, but suspected that the longer-life ones were cryos. Given that the process is an extra step in the manufacturing process, and thus an extra cost, I'm pretty sure Flinn's wouldn't be doing it if there wasn't a noticable benefit - and no, I don't think they're cynical enough to just do it as a marketing con. I don't understand the metallurgy of cryogenic heat treatment, but it does seem to have beneficial effects in at least some circumstances.

 

[D_W]

Cryo treatment takes the large carbides and distributes them more evenly in the steel. It tends to have more of a benefit when the steel is a type that has large carbides without it (like A2 does). Thus, in theory, A2 cryo irons should be substantially finer wearing (and without small chips) if they are done. Cryo treatment costs something, but it's not a great deal (certainly not like paying someone to operate a hammer).

I don't know what things are like in the UK in terms of customer demand, but one thing that you'd see american buyers getting hung up on is A2 irons from LV not being cry treated, and there's more benefit there.

I've revised my thoughts (except for outright crappy irons that chip out easily and leave lines on work - those are defective) that anything that's a good iron is pretty much the same as a super fabulous iron and if it isn't, then most of the shavings are too thin and we're wasting time.

I guess what I'm saying is even if there's a material benefit in tests, it's not something that amounts to much in making things. It's like hardened teeth on a saw vs teeth that need to be filed. That's only a big deal if we don't know how to sharpen a saw quickly.

 

[Andy Kev.]

"95% of the buyers will have no clue why a stamp like the one that was in the clifton irons is a special thing."

That's the hard thing about the whole concept. Unless someone with exposure is willing to explain why it's unique, special etc it wont get traction.

And with that you have put your finger on one of the monumental weaknesses of British industry, at least in the area of woodworking and that is the reluctance to enthusiastically blow one's own trumpet a bit and to commission some decent advertising.

I took up woodworking about two years ago and for a good while I believed that the only two decent makers of tools were Veritas and Lie-Nielsen. The reason why that is so is that they are all over the internet and the magazines, so they are the ones you get to discover first. The only good word I heard for Clifton planes was from one bloke on this forum. The result? Most of my planes, measuring and sharpening devices are made by Veritas. On the other hand most of my saws are the British Pax brand although that is no thanks to any attempt by the firm to generate a decent profile. It was rather a result of my researches on here. I'd love to own Clifton planes now that I know how good they are but it's a bit late as I can't afford to replace all my gear.

Consider as an example the Robert Sorby Pro Edge machine. It's a terrific bit of kit. If it were American we would have never heard the end of it (and well done to the Yanks that would be) but as it is, what is its market profile like i.e. to what extent has it registered in the average woodworker's consciousness in comparison to e.g. Tormek kit (which I believe may not be American but you get the point).

I have the impression that there's a similar situation with regards to machine tools in general. Everbody thinks, I guess, of Festool (German) but there's a firm called Sedgwick which advertises table saws and the like in Furniture and Cabinetmaking. Now if the ads are anything to go by, they make rock solid equipment of a quality which we used to associate with British industry but I've yet to come across a single account of one of their bits of kit. On the other hand Festool is another example of products being all over the internet and therefore in one's consciousness.

 

[MIGNAL]

They had to get rid of that stamp. . . . . . it was wonky. We can't have a wonky stamp on a hand tool !

 

[G S Haydon]

Andy, I think there are a few reasons for it. LN & Veritas were some of the most prominent tool makers to start producing when most hand tools were perhaps at their low point. They worked hard at creating an identity and it's been good good for them and they produce excellent products. They've even supported very traditional woodworking, Lie-Nielsen working with Folansbee, Larry Willimas and LV making Irons and Cap Irons for Steve Voigt http://www.voigtplanes.com/p/about.html

The modern line of tools are well developed and brilliantly made for people using them to add refinements to work where often the bulk of work is done by machines and for people needing a very safe first step into hand tools. Or for people who enjoy them as objects.

The more I walk through my own journey of woodworking the more I feel sure the most appropriate tools for making most items of furniture or joinery by hand had reached a plateau by the early 20th century. I can't imagine wanting to take sawn boards and prepare them with a range of bedrock's unless I was Popeye.

Unless there is someone credible who is willing to buy a British tool, claim it far superior to anything vintage or already out there (which is not the case regardless of maker it's a question of what style you prefer) then it's not going to happen.

Where I think there is an opportunity is by showing how to get the best out of the the tools they sell via social media etc. However, making good videos takes time and money. It also takes a long time to gain the following. It's a shame they don't use the hammer forge any longer, that was a USP. However they would have to get over the hurdle of various edge retention tests online rather than professional makers opinions that are much more worthwhile. Although David Savage has alway spoken highly of them "If you can find genuine forged high carbon steel you should definitely try it. Clifton make a really good genuine forged steel blade, “The Victor” plane blade is forged in Sheffield, I have these in my own planes and replaced an A2 blade from lie Neilsen to great effect." http://www.finefurnituremaker.com/woodworking-tools-2/

FWIW I think Ashley Iles chisels are far and away the best new fine chisels out there today. Sensible price and properly made. I have not had fist hand experience of other new British stuff so can't say regarding their performance.

 

[Tony Zaffuto]

Funny thing is, here in the States, Clifton and Pax (not so much Thomas Flinn!) got mention-maybe not that much, but nonetheless mentioned. Clifton was referred to as a "modern Bedrock" styles plane and Pax just as a Sheffield saw source. I own more than a few LV & LN products, and my Clifton #3 is the equal of both in their respective style, and may be a bit ahead with the forged blade. I own more than a few of the "boutique" make saws and my Pax sash saw equals & betters most of them, at less than 1/3 the cost.

My suggestion to "Thomas Flinn & Co."? Buy an American blogger, preferably one with a somewhat known name to tout your tools. Flinn already makes excellent, workman quality tools, so they're 3/4 there, all they need is a bit more positive exposure. I've checked the US sources for the forged blades and there still are a few floating around.

 

[D_W]

I think Steve Voigt has to make his own cap irons, there's nobody at this point making the vintage style.

I hope, and I realize that I'm not an influential guy because of how much I argue, but I hope we can get enough people wanting to build their own planes that the irons become publicly available (tapered, slotted and the right length for vintage planes). It'd be lovely if LV could figure out how to make the cap irons with a stamper, but that's really unrealistic given the size of the market. The two have to be made as a matched set for a good plane, though, because a good plane has identically matched irons and caps and not a whole lot of lateral slop for adjustment (it shouldn't be needed if the user of the plane keeps the iron in squareness with the cap edge).

 

[D_W]

Tony, do you think the 5.3 pound weight of the clifton number 4 is accurate? (i.e., is your 3 fairly heavy feeling?)

 

[Tony Zaffuto]

Tony, do you think the 5.3 pound weight of the clifton number 4 is accurate? (i.e., is your 3 fairly heavy feeling?)

Never handled a Clifton #4, but my Clifton #3 doesn't feel any different than my Bailey #3. Through the fall or winter months, I try to connect with you sometime when wife & daughter are at Ross Park Mall, & stop over, let you have a feel of it.

 

[Jacob]

Clifton 4 is 4lb 6 oz
Stanley SW4 is 4 11.
Both heavy beasts.
I don't see much point in either of them - just like everybody else I get suckered into buying these things by all the BS!
They are on my to-be-ebayed list

 

[D_W]

Clifton 4 is 4lb 6 oz
Stanley SW4 is 4 11.
Both heavy beasts.
I don't see much point in either of them - just like everybody else I get suckered into buying these things by all the BS!
They are on my to-be-ebayed list

We've all been there. I haven't seen a smoother in long term use that I settled into liking more than a stanley 4. In fact, I've never seen a better smoother of any type for actual use, whether it's weight, or whatever, and completely without regard to the fact that they're not very expensive to find.

At one point or another, I've had 7 4 1/2s, including one from LN and I still have a bedrock that has a non-essential part of the casting broken out. the 604 1/2 vintage bedrock weighs 5 pounds. No wonder they didn't sell many of them. i still have the bedrock, because it's damaged and I got it cheap, there's no great reason or reward in selling it, but I don't actually use it. It's too heavy.

 

[G S Haydon]

I do find some merit in heavy planes for limited applications. I like how assured they feel for fine finishing, that's why I assume they are popular for people who use machines quite a lot in their workflow.