AES
Established Member
@ D-W: Interesting. Forgive my ignorance, but what's a QUOTE: a vixen file UNQUOTE: please? And come to that, what does a backer for it look like please?
Forming chisel side bevels.
- Thread starter swagman
- Start date
Help Support UKworkshop.co.uk:
They (vixen) come in various sizes and shapes. Some like files, but some are just the toothy part with two holes on the end to be screwed to a fixture made for them.
They are milled tooth files made for car body work, but the older ones hold up surprisingly well (the new ones might, too, but new price is not great for a file that you're going to waste on steel work). The fact that they're an older design means you can often find them for cheap - in the US they turn up on ebay for $5 each or so from time to time, unused.
They have a half-roundish-type tooth that isn't ideal for what we're doing, but if you hold them on the diagonal and keep the flat on steel, they will pull steel off in long "hairs". Since the teeth are fairly sparse, they will cut well even as the teeth get a little dull.
I like them for infills, because sometimes you have a problem with a build and need to remove a lot, either for squaring a cheek or because there's tension in a body. On the last infill I made, I had to remove several hundredths because a cross piece (on a skew plane) put a lot of tension in the body. It was unavoidable given the design. What would've been unworkable was made a couple hours of rough work with the vixen, and quick draw filing after and the whole thing is flat and square (it took about 80 hours to make the plane, so a couple of hours gets lost in the details).
They are milled tooth files made for car body work, but the older ones hold up surprisingly well (the new ones might, too, but new price is not great for a file that you're going to waste on steel work). The fact that they're an older design means you can often find them for cheap - in the US they turn up on ebay for $5 each or so from time to time, unused.
They have a half-roundish-type tooth that isn't ideal for what we're doing, but if you hold them on the diagonal and keep the flat on steel, they will pull steel off in long "hairs". Since the teeth are fairly sparse, they will cut well even as the teeth get a little dull.
I like them for infills, because sometimes you have a problem with a build and need to remove a lot, either for squaring a cheek or because there's tension in a body. On the last infill I made, I had to remove several hundredths because a cross piece (on a skew plane) put a lot of tension in the body. It was unavoidable given the design. What would've been unworkable was made a couple hours of rough work with the vixen, and quick draw filing after and the whole thing is flat and square (it took about 80 hours to make the plane, so a couple of hours gets lost in the details).
I do have a Vixen file actually, mounted onto an Oak backer. It's a very handy file but not for the things I was talking about, way too coarse for that.
As luck would have it after reading this I did an ebay search and found someone selling some NOS USA made Nicholson Type A aluminium files, my favourite. Got a box for about £12 each, so pretty happy with that and they will last me many years as they are 12" files. I normally use 8" and wear out the portion nearest the handle first, with the extra length I might well be able to chop them off, make a new tang and get a second life out of each file.
As luck would have it after reading this I did an ebay search and found someone selling some NOS USA made Nicholson Type A aluminium files, my favourite. Got a box for about £12 each, so pretty happy with that and they will last me many years as they are 12" files. I normally use 8" and wear out the portion nearest the handle first, with the extra length I might well be able to chop them off, make a new tang and get a second life out of each file.
My apologies. I missed earlier where you mentioned hard plastics - definitely on the harsh side for those (the vixen).
They're wonderful for steel where there's any surface area, though, even though I see conflicting information about whether or not they're recommended for it (some sites say non-ferrous metals only). When you can get a box of used files (as you've done with the aluminum files) for the price of one new one, the durability of a single file becomes less important.
I'd say on something like a large infill, I'll blow through one maxi cut and one vixen in two planes. That's pretty economical. All of the other more precise filing (dovetails, etc.) doesn't work through the fine work files fast enough to count more than something like $10 of budget for them. So for about $20 total, I've got all of my metal removal and nearly all of the finishing covered (and in theory, it could be less, as both can be water honed here for about $3 each if you manage to build a large enough pile of used files to justify shipping to a liquid honing specialist).
They're wonderful for steel where there's any surface area, though, even though I see conflicting information about whether or not they're recommended for it (some sites say non-ferrous metals only). When you can get a box of used files (as you've done with the aluminum files) for the price of one new one, the durability of a single file becomes less important.
I'd say on something like a large infill, I'll blow through one maxi cut and one vixen in two planes. That's pretty economical. All of the other more precise filing (dovetails, etc.) doesn't work through the fine work files fast enough to count more than something like $10 of budget for them. So for about $20 total, I've got all of my metal removal and nearly all of the finishing covered (and in theory, it could be less, as both can be water honed here for about $3 each if you manage to build a large enough pile of used files to justify shipping to a liquid honing specialist).
Derek Cohen (Perth Oz)
Established Member
The files Stewie is using look amazing, and I'd be interested in getting a few to use on steel. However, for filing side bevels to creates fine lands, the process is too long for me. I have done this in a fraction of the time grinding the sides on a bench grinder. I made a jig to do this, used it for some chisels, but eventually just freehanded the sides. I'd say each side took under 60 seconds.
Here is a set of modified (vintage) Stanley #750 ...
The 1/8" chisel was originally 1/4" wide.
Anyone else tried this?
Regards from Perth
Derek
Here is a set of modified (vintage) Stanley #750 ...
The 1/8" chisel was originally 1/4" wide.
Anyone else tried this?
Regards from Perth
Derek
memzey
Established Member
David,D_W":vxbypm8x said:
I’ve re-honed my own files using a 10% dilution of hydrochloric acid. It works very well indeed. Usual safety requirements when working with corrosives apply.
memzey":982rz926 said:
Thanks for the suggestion. I've used phosphoric and a long soak, but it always leaves the files a bit brittle. By the time I make two steel planes with a float, they have a lot of tooth damage (you can see it well - they'll cut until they're well rounded), and I've not sent anything to Boggs here (who has a good reputation).
How much metal can you take off with HCL, and do you notice any brittleness after doing so?
I have probably freehand ground about half a dozen, and try to do it neatly enough that I can just leave the hollow on the chisel (and, of course, leave some of the lands so that the corners of the edge have a little bit of support). They work well - well enough that I dumped the koyamaichi DT chisels that I'd purchased years ago (which were nice, but a pain to sharpen if they took any damage...especially if you dropped one :shock: )
Er Stewie, did you mean to imply that you were working on the chisels in their hardened state?? That's why I was so impressed, but your later post strongly suggests you annealed the steel before you started.
Not to take anything away from your filing work, that's impressive either way, but I'm a lot less wowed by the file because any metalworking file worth its salt can file annealed tool steel, that's their bread and butter.
swagman":1xosl8d8 said:
swagman":1xosl8d8 said:
Not to take anything away from your filing work, that's impressive either way, but I'm a lot less wowed by the file because any metalworking file worth its salt can file annealed tool steel, that's their bread and butter.
Cheshirechappie
Established Member
Files are made from very similar tool steels to those used for edge tools, just not tempered back as much as most edge tools. They'll cut hard steels, but the harder the workpiece, the shorter the life of the file. About the hardest steels routinely filed are handsaws and chainsaw chains.
If anyone really wants to modify chisels, then I agree with Derek - grinding is the way to do it. That's the technique used by tool makers ever since the edges of chisels were first bevelled, and long before.
Filing heat-treated tool steels is just a quick way to wear out files.
If anyone really wants to modify chisels, then I agree with Derek - grinding is the way to do it. That's the technique used by tool makers ever since the edges of chisels were first bevelled, and long before.
Filing heat-treated tool steels is just a quick way to wear out files.
Ah, you annealed them first
I was thinking you’d found a cheap alternative to the vallorbe Valtitans
Nice file work all the same.
Are you going to take the handles off before you heat treat? Guessing plan is as per a basic carbon steel of take it to non magnetic then quench in oil?
I was thinking you’d found a cheap alternative to the vallorbe Valtitans
Nice file work all the same.
Are you going to take the handles off before you heat treat? Guessing plan is as per a basic carbon steel of take it to non magnetic then quench in oil?
Those simonds files are aboutas hard as any other decent file. It's only the interruption of otherwise single cut teeth that makes them special.
They are inexpensive for a reasonably well made file though, and the teeth go almost all the way to the end, which means you can hollow a plane bottom with them, which in turn means you can make the bottom of an infill plane ultra flat without any special tools other than a decent reference surface.
They are inexpensive for a reasonably well made file though, and the teeth go almost all the way to the end, which means you can hollow a plane bottom with them, which in turn means you can make the bottom of an infill plane ultra flat without any special tools other than a decent reference surface.
memzey
Established Member
An hour in the HCL solution removes enough metal for you to be able to feel a faint ridge under your fingers denoting where the water line was. The files come up very sharp indeed and I have not noticed any particular brittleness. There can be quite a bit of crud to clean off afterwards depending on how many chisels are sharing the solution and what state they were in but nothing a brass brush can’t handle.D_W":32wzt2g6 said:
Phil Pascoe
Established Member
If you have a chisel with deep lands, why not just grind off the first half to an inch of the land? How often do you need to work into tight corners accurately any deeper than that? The sides of a bevel edged chisel don't do anything. Some of mine have just less than the first half inch done.
swagman
Established Member
What can I say Derek; under 60 secs per side bevel, on a al/oxide grinding wheel, and you didn't burn or impede the steel from overheating; very few could achieve that desired result in such a short time frame.
Andy; they are available in Aust. We have made some progress since the convict days.
Ed; the 1st chisel I posted was filed in its hardened state, the stainless steel rod I tested with the file should be around rockwell C #70, W1 tool steel is listed as #60. The W.M.Marples steel in its hardened state was too hard for this file. Not sure why given the results on stainless. steel. These will required annealing to file the side bevels.
Hi Tom; these W.M.Marples will require annealing 1st. The handles were/ are removed before heat treatment. I will trial a water quench.
Phillip; cant argue with your logic. I chose a different path with the full length side bevels.
Thanks for the clarification, re-impressed with the file then 
You might want to revisit your estimate of the hardness of that rod though! SS can't get that hard, nowhere close in fact. Mid-50s HRC is about the limit for a lot of martensitic stainless and if the rod was supplied fully annealed, which is the norm I believe, it'll be significantly lower than this (sometimes in the 20s, below even the softest vintage saw plate).
You might want to revisit your estimate of the hardness of that rod though! SS can't get that hard, nowhere close in fact. Mid-50s HRC is about the limit for a lot of martensitic stainless and if the rod was supplied fully annealed, which is the norm I believe, it'll be significantly lower than this (sometimes in the 20s, below even the softest vintage saw plate).
swagman
Established Member
Thanks Ed. Appreciate the feedback on the SS hardness.
Stewie;
Stewie;
Like memzey I resharpen files at home, and it can work remarkably well.
Why sharpen a vintage file when there are new files available everywhere? Because vintage files are broadly speaking better than most files made today except for the very best which cost an arm and a leg; you might get an old file for practically nothing, a 50th the price of new would not be hard at UK prices. I've taken files that were visibly worn (this is beyond the point that they no longer feel like they'll cut well) and made them 'bitey' again.
Strong acids aren't required, even lowly vinegar will do it although obviously a good deal more slowly than in hydrochloric or sulphuric acids! A day to a few days depending on the cut of the file (how coarse or fine, single or double), how worn the teeth are and the strength of the vinegar. It's very forgiving because it's so slow, hard to overdo it unless you completely forget about something and leave it in for a few weeks.
Many machinists, knife makers and other metalworkers say that files should be considered a consumable and used until they no longer cut efficiently and then discarded. But resharpening does work if a file isn't excessively worn, and can double or triple the working life of a file. Not only that, many users report restored files are better than new afterwards (q.v. the point above about the falling quality of new files) so resharpening them is by no means a false economy.
Why sharpen a vintage file when there are new files available everywhere? Because vintage files are broadly speaking better than most files made today except for the very best which cost an arm and a leg; you might get an old file for practically nothing, a 50th the price of new would not be hard at UK prices. I've taken files that were visibly worn (this is beyond the point that they no longer feel like they'll cut well) and made them 'bitey' again.
Strong acids aren't required, even lowly vinegar will do it although obviously a good deal more slowly than in hydrochloric or sulphuric acids! A day to a few days depending on the cut of the file (how coarse or fine, single or double), how worn the teeth are and the strength of the vinegar. It's very forgiving because it's so slow, hard to overdo it unless you completely forget about something and leave it in for a few weeks.
Many machinists, knife makers and other metalworkers say that files should be considered a consumable and used until they no longer cut efficiently and then discarded. But resharpening does work if a file isn't excessively worn, and can double or triple the working life of a file. Not only that, many users report restored files are better than new afterwards (q.v. the point above about the falling quality of new files) so resharpening them is by no means a false economy.
