Sharpening chisels - the old way?

[MikeW]

...If you get a better result standing on one leg with a handkerchief in your mouth and singing the first verse of The Hedgehog Song then go to it, my friend...

Can someone elucidate this wrong-side-of-the-pond person what exactly is the Hedgehog song? :lol:

Might be a technique I could harken to...

Take care, Mike
A Sharpening Relativist

 

[MikeW]

Ah, perhaps a Discworld reference...

That's quite a song. But I don't think I would want to have anything sharp around whilst... :shock: :lol:

Take care, Mike
A Sharpening Relativist

 

[Roger]

Hedgehogs Rule

..... and don't ask what a Hedgehog is !

 

[MikeW]

Hah, well that's about the umpteenth, but all varients, version I have seen.

Take care, Mike
Still a Sharpening Relativist

 

[dchenard]

So, are honing jigs progress?

If a person is happier and more content to use a jig, then it is better for them, period. Whether or not it is slower for them is irrelevant if that is what they like to use. Now for you, clearly jigs were a deterrent; for others, they are an attraction.

This is not aimed at you, specifically, Denis: To suggest that someone's methods are inferior when they get good results with them and are happy with it is actually kind of insulting. Now I don't think any of you intend to be insulting and also don't realize it is insulting, but it is. When you tell someone their practices are slow and you "moved beyond that", you are insulting them and their methods. I think this is why these discussions tend to get heated. Even if it could be 100% proved that using a jig is slower then not, and that the time invested in free-hand honing is paid back after 5 honings (I am making stuff up here), it still wouldn't prove that it is better, because not everyones goal is the fastest possible. Maybe they are happier with using a jig; maybe they are happier with rock-consistent bevels. Who are we to say what their goals are? I think there is a need to understand that not everyones goals are identical, and not everyone's desires are identical.

I often cross cut wood with a handsaw just because I want to and enjoy it. Does someone wish to tell me my methods are inferior because they are slow and require more effort?

OK, my last intervention here...

I understand Paul that your comments weren't directed at me personally, and I agree that there can be ways of conveying a message that are more insulting than others. This said, and this is the message that I've been trying to convey with great difficulty here, is that woodworking is in good part a matter of training one's hands, whether it be machine or hand tool operations. Using a jig runs contrary to that goal, in the sense that the user is shielded by the jig from taking the initiative of trying other methods that ultimately may very well help develop better skills. Freehand honing helps to develop hand-eye coordination, which is very likely to help the craftsman in his/her other hand tools proficiency.

One example that parallels the honing jig issue... A well known manufacturer/retailer (which I admire quite a bit) has come up with a jig system for cutting hand-cut dovetails. For a person starting out, this is a very tempting system, because it removes many of the potential errors of cutting DTs by hand. The angles are set into the jig, a magnet holds the saw in place while cutting, and the jig clamps to the work piece to eliminate shifting. No chances of crooked cuts. I'll bet that this system produces nice, clean, gap-free DTs more easily than doing them by hand. The price for this is potentially more layout (can't say for sure here), and having to carefully line up and clamp the jig for every cut, which slows things down quite a bit. But since the person gets satisfactory results with the jig, he/she might decide that it's not worth it to invest in learning to control a dovetail saw. So in effect the jig removes the desire to better one's hand skills, and that's what's been bugging me...

Hoping no one felt insulted by the above,

DC

 

[Lord Nibbo]

Someone mentioned Hedgehogs, Hmmm loverly with Marmite. :lol: :wink:

 

[Colin C]

Someone mentioned Hedgehogs, Hmmm loverly with Marmite. :lol: :wink:

Some one get his coat :roll: :wink:

 

[dchenard]

Someone mentioned Hedgehogs, Hmmm loverly with Marmite. :lol: :wink:

Some one get his coat :roll: :wink:

Cultural ignorance question, what the heck is Marmite? In French marmite is a large cooking pot...

DC

 

[PowerTool]

Cultural ignorance question, what the heck is Marmite? In French marmite is a large cooking pot...

DC

This

Andrew

 

[Anonymous]

You must enter a message when posting

 

[engineer one]

well, mike w how can we answer about hedgehog songs. :?

i guess you have to think back to some older english tv programmes
to start thinking about our morris dancers( wonder who morris was?)
and then add in monty python,and you kind of get the idea i think :lol:

hedghogs are smaller porcupines who don't shoot their spines at you :twisted: but not sure if they are of the same family :lol:


as for hedgehog recipes, well they are supposed to be really nice when
roasted covered in mud, or is that another urban myth.

and marmite, well since so much french food is fast food these days, maybe you will discover a liking for our beef extract type spread and drink :twisted: :roll: plus of course we have bovril too :lol: :lol:

and rather like sharpening each to his own taste, as long as it is not groundhog day :lol:

paul :wink:

 

[garywayne]

Paul.

Re hedgehog cooking:-

Wrap in clay, place on fire, when clay is cooked so is said hedgehog, peel off clay, (spines come off with it), eat. It tastes good.

 

[dedee]

The comment about the DT guide has prompted me to respond.

I have one of those guides I used it and the results were very good. It gave me confidence in what was to me a black art. Now I know more of what the joint looks like, how it fits together, where the tolerances can be hidden etc I feel more inclined (and have done) to cut DTs without the aid of a jig.

I guess I could have learnt and discovered these things with some woodworking tuition but time and costs have not permitted.

I do woodwork for pleasure and it matters not a jot to the people who have appreciated my work thus far if the joints were made with or without a jig. The fact that they were made by hand at all impresses them.

For my own satisfaction and pleasure I will continue to cut them without the jig but I will never regret buying & I am happy to recommend it to others as a starting point.

Sharpening though is another matter . I must confess that I have never even tried to hone freehand - one day perhaps.

Andy

 

[David C]

It seems to me that some of the highly skilled freehand sharpeners are much ruder about the methods of us poor old crutch using cripples than vice versa?

Oi veh!

I wonder who gets the sharper tools most consistently.

David Charlesworth

If sharpening was easy for everyone there would not be so much discussion about it.

 

[bugbear]

All I can say is have a go, but with an open mind. Sorry, repeating myself, but the key things are 1. not lift the chisel above 30deg

If you have enough accuracy to do this, you could easily do perfect (small) secondary bevel.

If (OTOH) the occasional stroke is at 31, or even (gasp) 32, your terminal bevel (as suggested elsewhere) will slowly creep upwards.

BugBear

 

[Anonymous]

You must enter a message when posting

 

[mudman]

Well I for one am going to give The Grimsdale Method a try, it sounds like a valid and very efficient method of sharpening.
I do think that it will be difficult to return to the correct angle on each forward stroke but that should come with practice.

 

[bugbear]

It'll only creep upwards if you let it. You aim at 30 but build in a tendency to undershoot - by dipping the handle a bit. 30/31/32 doesn't matter exactly - infact more or less may be appropriate for particular chisel and nature of work.

But the problem is that the occasional too steep strokes are self perpetuating, and hence cumulative.

This is why all the old and wise books refer to the bevel gradually becoming rounded and too "blunt" (as they term it); we'd say "steep".

BugBear

 

[Anonymous]

You must enter a message when posting

 

[MikeW]

I think there are two philosophies at work here. Precision of angle as a goal and, well, imprecision is fine.

In seeming direct contradiction to the thread on precision, and as a person who generally hand hones, I don't strive for repeated precision in edge shaping. So I fall into the imprecision camp. I do strive for sharp--whatever that means to me.

If one subscribes to non-single bevel at some point the primary bevel needs reshaped. I would contend that what that shape/angle is isn't important. Just lower. Rounded or flat? What does it matter?

What Jacob has done is define a way that has a secondary, if you will, which is *mostly* at the desired angle he is shooting for--which to someone who hand hones knows, is close but not exact and doesn't over concern themselves with--and the remainder is simply lower albeit the shape is rounded.

Again, this is what I do to OBM chisels and rarely do I need to regrind, which is what one *has* to do if they subcribe to multiple bevel theory even using a guided system. There are ways around regrinding the primary bevels, but those are fussy and time consuming even with a guide. So most people I know who subscribe to multiple bevels at some point when the secondary bevel grows to encompass a larger portion of the bevel face, regrind.

Where I choose to get fussy with primary and secondary bevels is with paring chisels. But that's my choice.

I would contend that the only purists are those who subscribe to flat single bevel sharpening. All else is compromise one direction or the other.

Well, anyway. I thought I was smart enough to stay out of this. Guess I am dumber than I thought.

Take care, Mike