Paring chisel thickness

[Cheshirechappie]

I'm not sure that flexibility is always a good thing with paring chisels. It undoubtedly helps sometimes, but there are other times when a long, rigid chisel is better.

However, it's not that often that a standard bench chisel won't do the job - paring chisels are most definitely specialists, and for most people most of the time, unnecessary. Nice to have occasionally, but not an out-and-out necessity.

 

[D_W]

Long firmers are necessary for timber or large joinery work (mortises). For everything you'll do in the shop, you'll much appreciate a true firmer (actually paring). The flex makes it far easier to make paring cuts.

If a cut is too heavy for a paring cut, I'd have to ask the person doing the work why they weren't malleting in the first place.

In the case of most of the folks doing hobby or furniture type work, I don't think there's any need for large timberwork type firmers (or something like the narex paring chisels, which have sort of a rubbery steel that's not that hard and a very large cross section)./

 

[D_W]

I can't seem to edit the above post. What I should've said is "true parers" are what most will appreciate.

George Wilson once said to me (because I wasn't going to spend the money to get "real parers") that the flexibility keeps them from diving into a paring cut).

Is that precisely what's better? I don't know. I just know they're easier to pare accurately with.

 

[David C]

Just a few Japanese paring chisel thicknesses just behind the bevel.

Iyori 15 mm wide, 3.5mm thick,

Koyama 3.5

unknown 2.6

Ouichi 3.8

Tools for working wood in NY have special thin ones from Nishiki San.

David

 

[D_W]

David, are those all usu type (flat top) vs. the shinogi (triangular) type?

I only have two japanese paring chisels now, but they are old kiyotada chisels and drastically different in thickness even though they're the same maker. I won't post their thicknesses, because it's irrelevant (the maker is long deceased).

 

[David C]

David,
Yes, these are all flat (or slightly dished top) . I like these lot.

I have some with the triangular section, but these are not comfortable to bear down on during the cut.

Best wishes,
David C

 

[JohnPW]

Here are some thickness measurements.

From top to bottom (width - thickness at edge, near bolster)

Brades 22mm - 2.7mm, 4mm

Marples 25mm - 3.5, 5.5

I Sorby 26mm - 4.2, 6.2

Robert Sorby 19mm - 2.9, 5

The Brades is the one mentioned in my previous reply, just says "Brades, Cast Steel".
The Marples and I Sorby are very similar and both have a round bolster but the I Sorby is exactly 0.7mm thicker, both maybe dating from the 50s or 60s. And the Robert Sorby is a modern tool from about 15 years ago.

I think for flexibility the thickness needs to be 3mm or less, even at 3.5mm it's quite rigid. But's it's not a big deal as you might need to grind metal off if there's pitting on the flat side and that would make it thinner!

I've only used them a bit and the main difference I've noticed so far is the weight, I think I need to use them more to notice whether the thickness makes any difference during the cut.

 

[Saer Llongau]

I am curious to know how many others have this feature in their paring chisels ....

As mentioned before, I use Kiyohisa slicks. As purchased ...

Regards from Perth

Derek

Just a quick comment on Kiyohisa. There's an old and grumpy blacksmith in Niigata who's work is a little bit better than what Kiyohisa turns out and he charges half of what Kiyoei charges. The ease with which he works shirogami-ichi-go is a joy to see and he will happily do a full hardness chisel when asked by my cousin. The finish isn't as nice as Kiyohisa though because he's all about how it performs. What you mainly pay for with Kiyohisa is the name and finish, in that order.