Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 16 to 28 of 28

Thread: Hardness of Vintage Irons - Subjective Thoughts?

  1. #16
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    PA
    Posts
    13,076
    Well, if it makes you feel better, the result of working irons by yourself from an annealed state is usually an acceptable iron that isn't as good as any commercially made piece of gear. And annealing an iron and rehardening it often doesn't do great things for it - it's OK once - but doing it repeatedly is probably not good because you, me and everyone else in the open atmosphere doesn't have the ability to heat the iron to critical and relieve all of its stresses and really control the temperature. I think the product of repeated annealing and rehardening is large grains or lots of internal stresses.

    Still, put that iron in the oven and see if you can get a little bit of straw color on it, and then try it on the stones. That part is perfectly safe and should only improve an iron that is otherwise unusable.

  2. #17
    Quote Originally Posted by David Weaver View Post
    And annealing an iron and rehardening it often doesn't do great things for it - it's OK once - but doing it repeatedly is probably not good because you, me and everyone else in the open atmosphere doesn't have the ability to heat the iron to critical and relieve all of its stresses and really control the temperature. I think the product of repeated annealing and rehardening is large grains or lots of internal stresses.
    A big factor in repeat hardenings is carbon starvation. Every time you heat the steel to magnetic, the carbon on the surface burns off. You can mostly neutralize this by using a preventative coating (homemade or bought from a place like Brownell's), and by using a carbon rich fuel, especially charcoal. But yeah, the average shade tree heat treater, with a propane torch and no coating, will see some degradation after multiple cycles.

  3. #18
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    PA
    Posts
    13,076
    Yeah, I forgot about that. It's unrealistic for a shade tree person to believe they could get an iron to critical and keep it there. George could tell us how well steel foil works, and how perfect it has to be since I know he's used it on A2 where critical is past where carbon begins to migrate.

  4. #19
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Williamsburg,Va.
    Posts
    12,402
    I have to use stainless steel foil on A2 steel. It will badly decarb if left naked in the electric furnace. Sometimes I have put a little Kasenite into the envelope to add a bit of carbon. I always would put a small piece of brown paper inside the envelope to burn oiff any air inside the envelope,and wrap it up as tight as possible. I use double crimping on the seams to avoid air getting inside. You have to be careful how much paper you put in the wrapper,as it will blow the wrapper open if you use too much,ruining your piece of metal.

    As for laminated plane irons,I always seemed to get the best wear out of those that I could BARELY get to file with a new,fine file. Hardness and toughness is a balancing act. Too hard,and the tiny sharp edge can break off,making the blade seem dull,when it is just broken away. Tempering introduces some toughness into the carbon steel.

  5. #20
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    PA
    Posts
    13,076
    Quote Originally Posted by Jonas Baker View Post
    Hello David,

    I would love to see a picture of this Iron and the plane it came with (you know the old "pics or it didn't happen" thing ) I have found a wide variety of hardness in the vintage laminated irons as well. My favorite iron is a 2 1/4 inch wide butcher that came in a Martin Doscher american made jack plane. I have an old Buck Cast Steel iron that is very hard and a bit chippy, so I guess it just depends.

    Best,

    Jonas
    Here's pictures of the plane and iron. I overextended myself a little on ebay for this one and spent about $80 shipped, but it's uncommon to find a plane in this good of condition with so little wear and not have to spend a few extra bucks.

    You can see the maker's mark on the iron, and it may be a bit tough to make out after the SMC image budgetizer takes a bite out of the file size, but there's an anvil at the top that says "W&P" and has two hammers crossed over it.

    The iron and cap iron are made with consderable care given that they're not 200 years old, and the plane bottom, as you can see, has a very tightly made mouth, but unlike inferior planes, the escapement is properly made on the inside to give room for the plane to work when the iron is set. Chips are efficiently ejected straight up when the cap iron is set close and a very thick chip is taken, instead of clogging as they will on a lot of later american planes.

    I can't complain too much about the price given what I've seen from a lot of the boutique makers lately, and i'm not talking about Larry. Larry makes nice planes. Some of the other things popping up make me think I should create a set of videos advising beginners what made a good plane when planes were sold to professionals who knew. P1030559.jpgP1030560.jpgP1030561.jpgP1030564.jpgP1030565.jpg

    You can see how much iron is there, and how clean it is. My irons don't have the bright mirror of a synthetic stone because I'm using a broken in washita stone. This iron was frozen solid into the sides of the plane and I had to stand on the plane to get the iron out, and then float the sides of the plane to make enough room for it to get back in. It was out of use for a while. The iron had a line of rust across it where the cap iron made contact, but that was it.

    I'm sure I get more out of things like this than most people do.

  6. #21
    I guess I would not get excited about the hardness without seeing a pattern. I kind of doubt that they were manufactured hard with the idea that the craftsman would temper it to suit himself;probably the maker could temper it faster and more reliably. One can however temper an iron by placing it on a wood or coal stove and watching the color.

    Sandstone seems to have been the common coarse stone for centuries. Sandstone can vary in grit size, consistency, and strength of binder. Moxon says grinding was done on either a wheel or a flat sandstone. Roubo suggests that the flat stone is very common but I gathered he preferred the wheel. Nicholson talks about grinding wheels, coarse rub stones, and Turkey stone hones. Grindstones in the 18th and early 19th century tended to be 20 inches in diameter or so; very little hollow grind. I think that in your situation, David, I would use a coarse stone to get the thing sharp then just use the Washita and Arkansas to refine the edge, just removing the scratches.

    Here is the flat grinding stone from Roubo
    roubo sharpening.jpeg

  7. #22
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    PA
    Posts
    13,076
    I think my question about the hardness is misinterpreted, but maybe it's tended that way because everyone sees spec sheet hardness as ideal, and in this case, I think a couple of points softer on the C scale would be better.

    The iron grinds slowly, but now that the primary has been properly ground, it's not a big deal. I have a pink wheel on my grinder, which is a wheel that grinds cool enough that you do not need to bring water to your grinder. I have made the edges of irons hotter with sandpaper. I can grind an iron like this for several minutes to re-establish a primary and cool it by wiping it slowly across my palm. I did complain a bit about how it grinds harder, but mostly because that makes the initial bevel restore take 5 to 10 minutes instead of 1-2.

    I wouldn't buy another iron like this again just to get the hardness, and I am on the cheap side so despite having many more planes than I need, I often buy them for curiosity on price. I do like to avoid anything that might be overly soft consistently, but I am curious about whether or not any of the makers had a habit of making them hard. It is certainly true that german razor makers generally made their razors harder than english makers. I never asked anyone why, but I've had enough examples and have seen enough other people make the same statement to know that it's the case.

    What's maybe a little more fascinating to me is that despite the considerable age of this plane and the iron, the iron only had rust where the iron and cap iron contacted each other near the edge, and removing that was not much of an issue. The rest of it was in excellent shape without pitting or rust, and it was almost perfectly flat. The cap iron is carefully made and accurate, as is the whole plane, and the bottom is just slightly convex along its length, just how I would've prepared it. And then seemingly it was set aside, but not in some place that it would rot and rust away.

    I did finish it with a washita that I do not disturb the surface of, and because I had a freshly ground primary, that wasn't difficult to do.

  8. #23
    I was trying to get info on another Sheffield maker Thos. Ibbotson because of a lot of their pigstickers on e-bay and i came across a UK forum where I guy said he got rid of all his non Ward chisels because of the Ward's edge retention. I assume it is the same Ward as Ward and Payne . Quite a few users confirmed his opinion.

    I have an Ohio try that loses its edge quite suddenly. It does not seem to degrade but then suddenly i can not get it to cut at all. I just got a Sandusky "The Fulton" in the mail that was at 18 degrees. Out of curiosity i think i'll try it at that angle when i get some time. It did not look like someone ground it to make it look shiny for pics on e-bay. It looked like the last user had it that way. There were three little nail holes on the sole along one edge and it the body was slanted like a dovetail plane.

  9. #24
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    PA
    Posts
    13,076
    Same maker, I think. I don't know if I've had ward stuff before, but this iron made me pay attention because it's difficult to work the back.

    I can imagine that folks might get a brand favorite (like you're saying about the Ward) and cast off everything else they have given a chance.

    The real gems to me are the irons that seem to hold an edge a normal duration, but that sharpen up very easily. The ward I mentioned in this case is a novelty given its hardness, but I wouldn't want all of my irons to be like that.

  10. #25
    Quote Originally Posted by David Weaver View Post
    Well, if it makes you feel better, the result of working irons by yourself from an annealed state is usually an acceptable iron that isn't as good as any commercially made piece of gear. And annealing an iron and rehardening it often doesn't do great things for it - it's OK once - but doing it repeatedly is probably not good because you, me and everyone else in the open atmosphere doesn't have the ability to heat the iron to critical and relieve all of its stresses and really control the temperature. I think the product of repeated annealing and rehardening is large grains or lots of internal stresses.
    I agree with you that the carbon content can be compromised with repeated heating, but I don't think grain sized is affected. When iron is heated to the critical temperature, the crystal structure changes from body-centered cubic to face-centered cubic. There is a slight increase in density. When it is cooled it changes back to bcc. If it is cooled very slowly, the crystals have time to grow large and thus the steel is annealed. When it is quenched small crystals form very rapidly in a jumble. Thus it is hardened. My feeling is that any previous crystal history is erased when heated above the critical temperature.

    I certainly do agree with you, David, about the quality of some 19th century gems. Very easy sharpening combined with very fine edge and very fine edge retention. If on an ease of sharpening scale a2 is 6 and o1 is 10, these tools might be 18. Current manufacturers might take notice.

  11. #26
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    PA
    Posts
    13,076
    There is something subtle about the irons that I missed when I was blasting everything away with aluminum oxide and harder abrasives. I'm convinced that the older irons don't really like that stuff, I know the japanese irons don't, but they are harder and it's easier to differentiate.

    When I say something subtle that I missed, it's the matched near perfection of an iron that is of pure carbon steel and that is sharpened with natural stones simply (even with a single washita that the surface has been allowed to break in with use), and how much more satisfying it is to use that and sharpen quickly. The diemaking steels did not really facilitate that so much because they're not made for those stones, and when you branch away from tools with straight edges (smoothers and jointers, etc), the ability to grind and hone properly and very quickly and then see the edges last surprisingly long after a simple and quick routine is ...well, it's just nicer to work with.

    I certainly don't spend a larger balance of my time sharpening, and I don't have any irons that aren't defective that leave me wishing they'd last longer. I'm not sure I could explain it that well, but I sure could prove it in the shop to someone who was with me for a couple of hours of work from rough to finish.

  12. #27
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    PA
    Posts
    13,076
    By the way, re: the change in crytalline structures - what I don't know and have never looked at (and probably never will) is whether or not the changes in crystalline structure occure effectively and completely when a shade tree hardener attempts to do all of the operations with nothing more than low light (e.g., how long does metal have to be at critical temperature to achieve the change in structure completely - is it instant?). Either way, you're probably right that the much greater danger is overheating and carbon migration.

  13. #28
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    PA
    Posts
    13,076
    One more iron to add to the bunch, from this plane - a maker that I haven't seen before, but I don't think it's uncommon. Dwight and French. It's soft feeling on the stones and sharpens very easily, but surprisingly takes no damage when used heavily. It's either wrought or soft mild steel, the cap iron and the iron both have high carbon steel inlaid, which makes the iron look older than it is (no older than about 1850, and possibly 50 years newer than that).


    P1030590.jpg

    The plane is something common from new york - one of the baldwin marks, but I can't remember which. It's a nice plane, though.

    (for some reason, I'm bottom feeding planes with cosmetic issues off of ebay right now, I guess out or curiosity regarding the different irons)
    Last edited by David Weaver; 03-04-2014 at 8:47 AM.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •