Just how flat should Iexpect my new chisel ?

[Woody Alan]

Hi

I have recently ordered some Ray Isles London pattern chisels. I liked the boxwood Octagonal handles and the review of one of the leading mags gave them the thumbs up. I checked with Ray isles and they confirmed that they are Ashley Isles blades, so I jumped in. When I received the chisels I was initially quite disappointed at the crude finish of the blades, heavy grind marks, the bevels on the sides were randomly ground at different angles with no relationship to the size of the blade, the distance between the edge of the bevel and the back of the blade was also a random feature. the sides of the chisels were not straight and/or ground to a square edge. But... the backs of the blades were nowhere near flat one or two being 0.25mm concave. Oh yes three of the chisels were 3/4" shorter than the others in the set of 11, they were returned for replacement, another if I had flattened the back the bevels would have blended into the back. Am I expecting too much here or is it to be expected that one has to effectively "grind" a chisel into shape yourself. I took a look at a couple of Sorby's that I bought a few years ago and they are ground quite precisely. I must admit I am wondering if the negative sentiments about Sorbys are not a little misplaced. Should I return the full set, I guess I am not happy. I would be interested in general thoughts around this experience. I also had a familiar reaction when I complained "we sell 100's of these and haven't had a problem" can this be true, although it has to be said that they are more than willing to comply with any action I wish to take, am I really the only buyer with any expectation of quality standards?

Cheers Alan

 

[MikeW]

fwiw, there have been a growing number of similar complaints concerning AI chisels.

I personally would continue exchanging until I received something I was happy with or simply return them altogether. I don't know how much patience I would have through the exchange process, but I would last a try or two.

Tis a pity because I had long wanted some since they came out, but these complaints seem to be increasing. At first, there were more compaints coming form Europe, but the US is seeing its fair share too.

The only Sorby's I have are the paring chisels and I have been very happy with them, but they too have their compaints. I did need to steepen the bevel in order to get them to hold an edge in the types of wood I use, which tend to the hard to very hard woods, Bubinga, Cocobolo, Bloodwood, Verawood, Wenge and Ebony.

Take care, Mike

 

[Paul Chapman]

Hi Alan,

If I had bought a supposedly quality set of chisels and they were as you describe, I would send them straight back. And if they can't send you a decent set I would send them back again and ask for your money back.

It's very sad that so many firms that built a reputation on good quality now seem to be producing such poor quality tools.

Paul

 

[Alf]

From what you describe, Alan, I'd be sending them back. I don't have a clue what AI are up too, but they seem to be dropping the ball in a big way at the moment. For a while I had a sneaking, and totally unfounded, suspicion that all the good chisels were being sent over to the (more demanding?) 'Muricans and British customers were getting left with the seconds on the basis we'd be more forgiving, but if problems are appearing in the US too then obviously that's not it. Unless demand has out-stripped the supply of chisels they're getting right... :roll: Very disappointing for the purchaser.

Cheers, Alf

 

[Anonymous]

Alan

Firstly, without meaning to cause offence, many of your points seem to be about cosmetics rather than performance issues and to me would not be a concern as they do not affect the chisels performance.

My AI chisels were about 0.25mm concave on the back (I too was initially disappointed) but it didn't take long to flatten the lot. Even as supplied, they were quite usable as concave is much better than convex. You are buying hand-made chisels, and they are not ground but finished on a sort of linisher (on the curved end of the belt).

If you really want dead flat chisels out of the box (and to pay someone to flatten them for you), then spend £50 each at Lie Nielsen, for around £11-15 each you get AI chisels and simply flatten them yourself.


If you exchange them, you will be dissapointed again as they next set will be ground concave on the back, and the next, and the next.....

Flatten them and have a lifetimes use of a very good tool.

 

[woodbloke]

I agree - if they don't cut the mustard, send them back. Having said that, my set of LN chisels took me about 2 days to flatten the backs on coarse, fine and extra fine DMT stones, so most hand tools IMO need a degree of fettling to bring them to an acceptable standard. A concave bow of .25mm wouldn't take too long to remove tho' if you decided to keep the chisels - Rob

 

[ike]

Hi Alan,

I know what you mean about the general finish. They are hand linished rather than surface ground. I'd rather see nicely ground steel, but of course from a purely practical aspect it makes no difference in their use. 0.25 mil concavity wouldn't take long to flatten. AI production methods are very traditional and it looks as though almost every step of chiselmaking is done by hand and eye. Precision? - no, skill? undoubtedly. I overcame my initial feelings just looking at them for the first time, after I started using them. For me at least, I like the feel and balance (although much of that is down to the handles). Fortunately, mine hold a good edge.

Sorry to hear of another unhappy buyer. It's seems a bit of a lottery buying AI bevel edge chisels.

To be fair to AI I think their core business is woodcarving and turning tools, by nature involving mostly hand forging skills rather than precision grinding to micrometer flatness tolerances. The bevel edge range is a more recent addition where the carryover of their established production methods does not quite mesh with the expectation of precision ground dimensions and finish for bevel edge chisels as produced by other manufacturers.

I do hope you eventually find some chisels you can really enjoy.

cheers,

Ike

 

[Woody Alan]

Thanks to all who have taken the time to reply. Everyone's thoughts have been mulled over. Interestly the one which crops up in my head is the fact that most of my points are cosmetic (no offence taken ). That's true, but that doesn't mean it doesn't impact on how much effort is required to put these chisels into shape or the feeling of the amount of lack of care and attention that's been put into their initial shape. If I had shaped these on a linisher and thought it was nearly flat I wouldn't be able to pass it out without a quick reference to a straight edge. I have now measured the concavity with digital vernier rather than feeler guage and it's 0.34mm and that's after I have made a small start on flattening. I have now put in a piccy so you can at least see the bevel inconsistency and length. The two short ones I returned and the 6th one along I returned for the bevels being so close to the back when flattened would intrude into the back of the chisel.
Cheers Alan

 

[Chris Knight]

Woody,
The lengths and the side bevels are definitely things you should be concerned with. Send them back!

 

[Anonymous]

Thanks to all who have taken the time to reply. Everyone's thoughts have been mulled over. Interestly the one which crops up in my head is the fact that most of my points are cosmetic (no offence taken ). That's true, but that doesn't mean it doesn't impact on how much effort is required to put these chisels into shape or the feeling of the amount of lack of care and attention that's been put into their initial shape. If I had shaped these on a linisher and thought it was nearly flat I wouldn't be able to pass it out without a quick reference to a straight edge.

Alan

I really hope no offence was taken.


I spoke to AI's production manager on the phone for about 1/2 hour before ordering mine and they do not claim to grind the backs flat, nor try to.
They take the view that whatever they do, the user will fettle and flatten the backs and that a slightly concave chisel is vastly superior to a convex one.

At the end of the day, if you are unhappy, you need to take the action that will make you happy.

 

[Wiley Horne]

Hi All,

This is the second lengthy thread of recent vintage which reflects negatively on Ashley Iles bench chisels. Earlier test reports and user reports were always good on AI chisels, and this is true on both sides of the big water.

Now my experience with Ashley Iles is with their carving gouges, and I find them to be among the most satisfying tools I own. They are built to last; the steel is hard and uniformly so; the round handle sits well in my hand and is not skimpy; the ferrules are right and tight; they are delivered sharp (in the US at least) requiring only a light strop to bring them to critical sharpness. Over time, I tend to lengthen and lower the bevel angles, but that is purely preference.

In short, I like the Ashley Iles brand, and am concerned that something is amiss in respect to their bench chisels, which is having an impact on their brand overall. This is a highly respected firm of long standing. Yet it almost seems that the bench chisels and the gouges are under separate management.

I am wondering--and please forgive this suggestion if it is inappropriate--if perhaps Tony and a couple of the moderators might make contact with whoever is in charge at Ashley Iles (is it Barry Iles?) and have a discussion on the subject of 'what's up with AI bench chisels?' Perhaps this could focus the issue for AI, and lead to remedies and a general clearing of the air.

Wiley

 

[Chris Knight]

Are we talking about Ashley Iles or Ray Iles I wonder?

Alan's original post spoke of Ray Iles chisels with blades by Ashley. I would reckon Ray is the seller in this case and needs to sort it. Problems reported here in the recent past have focused on Ashley Iles chisels made and sold by them. Those complaints were about steel quality rather than the sorts of problem now experience by Alan.

I agree with you Wiley on the carving chisel front. I only own a few but they are very good.

 

[Woody Alan]

Hi All again

Tony I have absolutely no problem and no offence being taken. What you said focused my mind on that which I felt I was unhappy with, sorry it appears I singled you out, I was just responding with the thoughts you stimulated. That was the point in making the post, to see the varying views people have. If we all thought the same how dull would it be Just as a by the by, now several opinions have returned I will say I own a set of Lie Nielsens and two cherries (neither go up into this size range) so do have these as a reference , I didn't wish to cloud the actual issue by mentioning that or get into the why??? suffice it to say I like to have nice things, not a collecter per se. Nice as in, do they work/comfortable and aesthetically please me! not to draw the respect of my peers blah blah ( I don't have bucketfulls of them just those and 4-5 sorby's carving gouges) . I am like this in everything I own, so drive the wife nuts obviously Actually if I had the time I would track down a set like Those I saw Chris had.
Chris.. yes Ray isles handles with the blades from Ashley (Barry) sold by Rays Old tool store

Cheers Alan

 

[Alf]

The backs just seem to be a fact of chisel-buying life unfortunately. The bevels and lengths are of more concern to me, and why I advised sending them back. The handles are nice though; just a bit big (I know, don't tell me - freaky hands strikes again... :roll: :lol: )

Cheers, Alf

 

[CHJ]

As someone who only has a few very abused chisels to his name (they stay sharp and do what I want, thats why they are still around) but as someone who has spent a lot of years in and around engineering workshops I cannot for the life of me see why a manufacturer of high quality hand forged steel tools cannot produce them to a standard that will allow them to be offered up to an automated finishing system to enhance their consistency of finish and appearance.

Carving tools I can see are even more user specific and likely to be modified to his/her needs but a premium chisel like a plane blade should be good to go at the level of precision expected by the purchaser IMO.

I always appreciate the skills of a craftsman and his ability to achieve a finished item with the minimum of equipment but to rely on one or two individuals who are prepared to stand in front of a linisher for hours on end is obviously not producing the presentation that the customers are expecting.

If some sort of selection was being applied to match or grade the sets to give some form of consistency that would help, lets face it not even ball bearings are made to size, just selected for best fit so that the finished item meets the spec.
The time spent doing this can not be more costly than satisfying disgruntled customers or overcoming adverse publicity.

I could even see an advantage in offering the product as "As Forged" or as "Finished and Graded Set" to meet the differing camps of customers.

Having bought steel from the Iles camp at various shows to make my own tools I can say that I have always been treated to the "personal touch" with help and guidance in selecting what I wanted as opposed to just a sales push. Having said that I get the impression that the business is a bit like Morgan Cars, producing a quality product desired by some but doing it the hard way in a modern world.

(Getting me wooly and going up the shed.)

 

[Shady]

This thread has got me thinking:

Alan, I believe that you are quite right to request the 'bevel problem' and the 'length problem' chisels replaced. The bevel issue in particular is quite unacceptable in a working tool - it's almost as though they've been ground by an apprentice who doesn't understand the function of the tool... :?

That said, I'm always a little surprised by anyone - of any experience with hand tools - who would want them 'ready to go' out of the box... In this case, I'm referring to the back concavity thing. I would never 'trust' a blade (chisel, plane, shave, saw) that I had not personally fettled. Whatever the likes of L-N might say, I suspect that factory economics would not allow them to sell tools at realistic prices with properly sharpened blades. As the rep commented, a concave back is far preferable to a convex one, and may actually help speed fettling (like a japanese chisel), so long as it is not insanely excessive... I just always assume that I'm going to flatten the back and, quite possibly, regrind various bits of the blade to get it just as I like it... For me, I don't feel confident with a blade that someone else has 'mucked about with', and claims it's useable. (this is not to imply anything about their intentions - just a comment on my 'feeling' about a tool). I don't 'like' them until I've tuned them... The only exception is machine tool blades, where I have to accept the balance/precision issues outweigh my liking for edges that can pop hairs...

After all, if they were traditional japanese chisels, you'd expect to flatten the back, seat the hoop, oil the wood and quite possibly welly the blade with a hammer to get the shape you wanted.

Any comments? others disagree? Note that I don't excuse the apparent inconsistent functionality - that's not on...

 

[CHJ]

...major snip... For me, I don't feel confident with a blade that someone else has 'mucked about with', and claims it's useable. (this is not to imply anything about their intentions - just a comment on my 'feeling' about a tool). I don't 'like' them until I've tuned them... snip......

Shady, surely all tools manufactured by someone other than yourself have been 'mucked about with' as you put it, I do understand a craftsmans symbiotic relationship with his preferred tools and accept that most 'as new' items have to be cosseted into the fold.

...snip...Note that I don't excuse the apparent inconsistent functionality - that's not on...

I can only endorse your sentiments, and see no reason why they should not be of a standard that facilitates use straight from the box with the very minimum of sharpening, and which allow people more discerning of their requirements to be able to fettle them in a consistent manner and with a minimum of effort. As I inferred before, machine finishing the backs to a standard, albeit minimally concave and with consistent bevels is not a major task.
A person buying the best they can afford for the first time may well not have developed the skill or knowledge to go that extra bit on the tuning front, to my mind it would be criminal if they were put off good steel by frustration at first results marred by a tool that needs an expert to tune.

 

[Chris Knight]

Shady,
You make some interesting points. At the end of the day, I suppose "Caveat Emptor" always applies but I also think that some minimum standards apply and I reckon AI or RI have fallen short of these in the present case.

A knowledgable woodworker might well expect to rework the backs of edge tools or a plane sole, no matter how costly the tool - although the amount of work for more expensive tools should not IMO require more than a "touch-up" The case of Japanese chisels (and planes too I guess) is well documented, although I would not expect to do much more than seat the hoops in a decent set.

However, in the absence of defined standards, I think one has to turn to "common sense " (arrghh!!) or exemplars. Using these standards, I think it is plain that the random length problem Alan experienced is beyond the pale for any kind of set of chisels. The side bevel issue might alas, be more common than not but for an experienced woodworker, probably represents the most objectionable feature of these chisels and in any rational discussion would also be ruled unacceptable

 

[Shady]

Chris - quite agree - that bevel issue is bizarre. Interestingly enough, on reflection, I wouldn't be so fussed about the random length ones: although it implies less than impressive quality control, it shouldn't actually affect functionality - given the lengths shown.

However, I think on balance that your 'viewpoint' is correct - the amount of work required should not be more than a touch-up, if they wish to be seen as quality tools - and indeed, that's exactly how I approach L-N or Veritas tools. On that basis, this is a shame. It's the implicit lack of attention to detail that is contrary to everything we expect at this sort of price point.

I could make some nice skew dovetail chisels out of the smaller ones... :wink:

 

[Alf]

It's the implicit lack of attention to detail

That's the thing; if they let this obvious stuff go, what are they doing when it comes to less visible stuff such as heat treating? That's what I'd be wondering.

Cheers, Alf