Never by hand

[Lons]

NO, on second thoughts it won't, indeed can't happen, pigs might fly first surely.
F&C is a decent publication and the management not naive enough to start on a downward spiral.

In the highly unlikely event they did, how easily do back copies burn? :wink:

Bob

 

[Jacob]

:lol: :lol: I think I'm warming to the idea!

 

[Lons]

Now be charitable Jacob,
Don't try brainwashing those poor newbies who might buy the mag. thinking they might to learn something useful :wink:

Bob

 

[Jacob]

Now be charitable Jacob,
Don't try brainwashing those poor newbies who might buy the mag. thinking they might to learn something useful :wink:

Bob

It's more a question of de-brainwashing the gullible of all ages who have had their heads filled with nonsense.
Seriously - I'm really interested in the way that almost a whole generation of woodworkers have become so bewildered about such a simple issue.

 

[bobbybirds]

Now be charitable Jacob,
Don't try brainwashing those poor newbies who might buy the mag. thinking they might to learn something useful :wink:

Bob

It's more a question of de-brainwashing the gullible of all ages who have had their heads filled with nonsense.
Seriously - I'm really interested in the way that almost a whole generation of woodworkers have become so bewildered about such a simple issue.

You know what Jacob? I always roll my eyes when you start praising the convex bevel sharpening method and just shut my ears to it because I feel like I have heard it over and over blah, blah blah, BUT, I have just come to realize that I haven't tried it so how can I be critical of it?

I have a cheap set of Narex chisels that I used before buying my BS chisels, and I think I am going to give it a genuine try and see what kind of results I get. I KNOW I already get fabulous results with the method I use now, and I have no frustration with it at all, but I guess I am saying I am no longer going to be critical without experiencing it myself, and I am going to do so with an open mind and give a valiant effort...

Your constant nagging is having an effect! :wink: (hammer)

 

[Lons]

i understand what you're saying but I'm certainly not one of those "bewildered" Jacob and neither are any of the guys I come into contact with. We all have various ways and use those which suit us best. I don't know anyone who loses sleep over the subject of whether to use an oil stone, diamond plate or a machine.

I've already stated my position but I use diferent methods for my general chisels as opposed to my carving tools and when I owned a lathe, my edges were straight off the grinding wheel. I take less care with my "site" chisels which are abused and used by more than myself. I'm perfectly happy with my set up but keep an open mind and take on board what others do - I just don't see a need for dogmatism!
I spent many years using only oilstones / slipstones but find other methods better for my purpose in many cases.

Different strokes and all that.

Anyway, what are you doing up at this time of night - you have a magazine article to write do you not? :wink:

cheers

Bob

 

[bugbear]

Now be charitable Jacob,
Don't try brainwashing those poor newbies who might buy the mag. thinking they might to learn something useful :wink:

Bob

It's more a question of de-brainwashing the gullible of all ages who have had their heads filled with nonsense.
Seriously - I'm really interested in the way that almost a whole generation of woodworkers have become so bewildered about such a simple issue.

You should extend your knowledge of history. You started as a joiner in the 198o's, I believe?

I've read a rather large amount of historic material, including magazines and journals from before 1890.

Sharpening was a perennial topic then too.

The quest for a longer lasting, finer edge, achieved quicker, is as old as tool use.

BugBear

 

[Jacob]

......

You should extend your knowledge of history. You started as a joiner in the 198o's, I believe?

I started as a woodworker in the 60s. Didn't get in to joinery until the 80s

I've read a rather large amount of historic material, including magazines and journals from before 1890.

Sharpening was a perennial topic then too.

Not like it is now. Amateur woodworkers were starting to turn their attention to honing guides but the simple method as shown in Terry Connolly's video above, was standard for everybody.
I got stuck with guides too. They make logical sense but in fact aren't always that practical. My sharpening got much better and easier as soon as I stopped using them.

 

[bugbear]

......

I've read a rather large amount of historic material, including magazines and journals from before 1890.

Sharpening was a perennial topic then too.

Not like it is now.

Interesting. Is this based on anything other than your gut feel about what must have been? I would (truly) welcome evidence or knowledge.

BugBear

 

[AndyT]

I've never worked as a professional woodworker and doubt that I have read as much old material as BB but would just like to mention one other aspect of sharpening which I think has not seen so much discussion. (Disclaimer: I've not read every word of every sharpening thread!)

At school in the 70s, we were shown how to sharpen on an oilstone - quick and easy, just like in the video Jacob linked to. All the tools in the woodwork shop were sharp. We used to bring penknives in to sharpen on the oilstone and Mr Jackson would do his magic with a few figure of eight swipes. That's what I thought tool sharpening was.

When I came back to woodwork in middle age, things seemed to have moved on. The Axminster and Rutlands catalogues had big sections with a bewildering variety of kit. Oilstones were still there, but alongside waterstones, ceramic stones, diamond stones, diamond paste, honing compounds, abrasive papers - all in a range of grits, sizes and brands. Some of these items cost hundreds of pounds. I was left with a nagging feeling that there must have been some progress made in the development of new kit and that other people judged it worthwhile to pay quite a lot of money for it. I now know (from discussions on here) that every bit of that kit will have its enthusiastic supporters somewhere. I also know I did not need to buy one of everything!

So what might be more use in a magazine article than just a jig/no jig discussion would be a chart showing each sort of sharpening medium rated against criteria such as:

- purchase price
- usable life time
- tools / steels that can't be sharpened with it
- fineness of edge achievable
- speed of use
- compatibility with guides
- cleanliness of use
- portability
- space requirement.

 

[Jacob]

......

I've read a rather large amount of historic material, including magazines and journals from before 1890.

Sharpening was a perennial topic then too.

Not like it is now.

Interesting. Is this based on anything other than your gut feel about what must have been? I would (truly) welcome evidence or knowledge.

BugBear

I was there, in the 50/60s at least. AndyT was there. Do you think we are making things up?

 

[Racers]

Wow Jacob you where around in the 1890s, so you are what 150 years old. :wink:

Pete

 

[Lons]

I was there. AndyT was there. Do you think we are making things up?

I was there as well Jacob and can relate to Andys experience as we had our own version of Mr Jackson but that doesn't mean things haven't moved on. Oldest isn't always best and the variety of edged tools seems to have grown as well. (or at least the availability of them to everyone has).

Andy.

That's a great idea and something I would certainly be interested in reading.

cheers

Bob

 

[Jacob]

......
- tools / steels that can't be sharpened with it.......

My only experience of known to be different steel is several A2 blades which are absolutely no problem freehand on oil stones.

 

[riclepp]

Surley, sharpening is down to the end user and how they want to go about it?? I use scary sharp system and a honing guide, and sometime when I can't be bothered to get all that stuff out I use an oil stone.

 

[Jacob]

Surley, sharpening is down to the end user and how they want to go about it?? I use scary sharp system and a honing guide, and sometime when I can't be bothered to get all that stuff out I use an oil stone.

Yes of course you can do what you like.

 

[dj3d]

[/quote]You know what Jacob? I always roll my eyes when you start praising the convex bevel sharpening method and just shut my ears to it because I feel like I have heard it over and over blah, blah blah, BUT, I have just come to realize that I haven't tried it so how can I be critical of it?

I have a cheap set of Narex chisels that I used before buying my BS chisels, and I think I am going to give it a genuine try and see what kind of results I get. I KNOW I already get fabulous results with the method I use now, and I have no frustration with it at all, but I guess I am saying I am no longer going to be critical without experiencing it myself, and I am going to do so with an open mind and give a valiant effort...

Your constant nagging is having an effect! :wink: (hammer)[/quote]

That's a great idea. It would save me few quid and Jacob the hassle of putting pen to paper. Two birds with one stone, I like it. It's that convex bevel that sits uncomfortably with me. I'm assuming you wont be keeping your findings to yourself :lol:
Derek

 

[Jacob]

You know what Jacob? I always roll my eyes when you start praising the convex bevel sharpening method and just shut my ears to it because I feel like I have heard it over and over blah, blah blah, BUT, I have just come to realize that I haven't tried it so how can I be critical of it?

I have a cheap set of Narex chisels that I used before buying my BS chisels, and I think I am going to give it a genuine try and see what kind of results I get. I KNOW I already get fabulous results with the method I use now, and I have no frustration with it at all, but I guess I am saying I am no longer going to be critical without experiencing it myself, and I am going to do so with an open mind and give a valiant effort...

Your constant nagging is having an effect! :wink: (hammer)

That's a great idea. It would save me few quid and Jacob the hassle of putting pen to paper. Two birds with one stone, I like it. It's that convex bevel that sits uncomfortably with me. I'm assuming you wont be keeping your findings to yourself :lol:
Derek

I wish someone could explain to me what is wrong with the convex bevel. It obviously worries people but nobody can explain why. There's no logical objection to it, and it works in practice. What is the problem?

 

[richarnold]

You know what Jacob? I always roll my eyes when you start praising the convex bevel sharpening method and just shut my ears to it because I feel like I have heard it over and over blah, blah blah, BUT, I have just come to realize that I haven't tried it so how can I be critical of it?

I have a cheap set of Narex chisels that I used before buying my BS chisels, and I think I am going to give it a genuine try and see what kind of results I get. I KNOW I already get fabulous results with the method I use now, and I have no frustration with it at all, but I guess I am saying I am no longer going to be critical without experiencing it myself, and I am going to do so with an open mind and give a valiant effort...

Your constant nagging is having an effect! :wink: (hammer)

That's a great idea. It would save me few quid and Jacob the hassle of putting pen to paper. Two birds with one stone, I like it. It's that convex bevel that sits uncomfortably with me. I'm assuming you wont be keeping your findings to yourself :lol:
Derek

I wish someone could explain to me what is wrong with the convex bevel. It obviously worries people but nobody can explain why. There's no logical objection to it, and it works in practice. What is the problem?

I cannot explain what is "wrong with a convex bevel, all I can do is explain why it doesn't suit my own particular needs. As a full time proffesional woodworker I'm constantly sharpening chisels, and plane irons. This means I have to do it as quickly and efficiently as possible. I earn my living working wood, not sharpening tools. Its been over 30 years ago since "old Arthur" taught me to shapen my tools and I'm still using the same method today. Incidently Arthur was taught by my grandfather so the tradition proberbly go's back well over 100 years. In our workshop a convex bevel was considered sloppy workmanship. Chisels and irons were hollow ground on the old wolf bench grinder. Incidently this was done freehand with no use of a tool rest. you learned the angle from instinct. Arthur always told me that if you used a rest you could use to much pressure and burn the steel to easily. The hollow grind always gives you two reference surfaces when you place the blade on your chosen stone. This allows you to "feel" the bevel as you hone. This for me is what makes the sharpening process so quick and efficient. I can usually repeat this honing thee or four times before the bevel becomes flat, After this I lose the ability to "feel" the bevel, and it's back to the grinder. One other thing sharpening stones that were not flat were considered to be a sign of a shoddy tradesman and "old Arthur" would not have tolerated that!.

 

[AndyT]

I wish someone could explain to me what is wrong with the convex bevel. It obviously worries people but nobody can explain why. There's no logical objection to it, and it works in practice. What is the problem?

Ok, strictly in the interest of peace and goodwill to all readers, let's have a little try at explaining.

I suspect that in some of these discussions, we are not all talking about the same things, so let's try some pictures and work out what Jacob means by a rounded bevel and why some people might think it's a bad thing. When I first read about rounded bevels on here, I think I got the wrong end of the stick, but I now think I might understand what is meant.

Have a look at my first diagram. It's a cross section of a chisel. The black line is the short of sharpening you might get with a jig - it's ground at 25° and then honed at 30°, so you get two angles where flat surfaces intersect, at X and Y.

I've then superimposed an orange line, showing what I think a rounded bevel is. The difference is that the sharp intersections at X and Y have been rubbed away below the places where they would have been.

Taking away that extra bit of metal - which was never going to cut anything - is the 'rounding'. I really can't see anything wrong with it.
Down at the tip, the cutting edge is much the same, even if we're measuring the angle of a tangent to the curve instead of the angle of a flat surface. It's still sharp.

So why the apparent objections?

My guess is that at first glance, people might be imagining that this is a rounded bevel:

That is a chisel with the flat side rounded where it shouldn't be, and is not going to cut in the way that we need a chisel to cut.

So, Jacob and everyone, are my diagrams helpful?