Did oldtime craftsman flatten their plane irons?

[Frederick Skelly]

This morning I found myself wondering how much of our sharpening ritual is modern "druthers". Specifically, did our ancestors spend much time flattening and polishing the back of plane irons and chisels to a mirror finish? Or did they get them "sorta flat", polish to maybe the equivalent of 220 grit, and call it good enough?

I'd sure enjoy a history lesson on this from George, Warren or anyone else who knows old techniques. (Wish Dave was still here - he'd also have something fascinating to tell us. Sigh.)

Thanks guys!Fred

[Kees Heiden]

Over on the ukworkshop forum there is a guy named Jacob. He is running a holy war against flat backs on chisels and plane irons. He never gets tired of learning everyone around that flattening backs is a modern fad.

I would agree with him if I didn't alwas acquire irons with pitting and heavy dubbed edges on the back. So I continue polishing backs, but keep my efforts centered on the last 1/2" or so.

[Tom M King]

Not claiming to be an expert, but I have one of each, and several of some older bench planes, a couple of hundred molding planes, and a good number of other types. The one "new" plane, as in newer than made in the 1970s, is a LV shooting plane. The only plane iron I've worked on, that belongs to me, that had a flat iron back is the LV shooter.

[Phillip West]

I come from a a family of woodworkers, mostly green woodworkers making Appalachian style furniture but I have most of our family tools. Not one of the plane iron or drawknife had the back touched..bevel only.

[Brian Holcombe]

I would not be surprised if most often they simply lift the iron slightly to make a back bevel. Likely keeping it shallow enough that it could be ground past pretty quickly.

[Mike Brady]

Good topic! Sure beats: "which handplane should I buy first?".

[Graham Haydon]

"Flattening" no. Just removing a wire edge effectively, don't need a flat back to do that. I pretty much agree with Jacob on UK Workshop forum. I would not be insulting as to call it a fad but I don't think a flat chisel back or plane iron is needed for anything.

[Lasse Hilbrandt]

I guess it is much easier to remove the wire edge if the back is uniform, and you should only have to do that once.

[Gordon Harner]

The evidence observed from the old tools that I have seems to indicate that only the bevel was worked. You really have to wonder how the craftsmen got such great results in the eighteenth century. Another mystery. Or, are the antique tools available today the ones that were used lightly or by the joiners trade?

[Glen Canaday]

I make a few passes each time I take it to the stones. Just a few swipes.

I don't know what others did in the way back when, but that is what I was taught to do.

[Mike Henderson]

I've bought a number of old Stanley planes. The only one that had an iron with a flat back was one I got from another woodworker. It's obvious our ancestors did not flatten the back of their plane irons.

I've also bought a number of antique chisels - mostly Swan and Whiterby cast steel - and none of them ever had a flat back. It's clear to me that our woodworking ancestors did not flatten the back of their tools.

Mike

[Kees Heiden]

The evidence observed from the old tools that I have seems to indicate that only the bevel was worked. You really have to wonder how the craftsmen got such great results in the eighteenth century. Another mystery. Or, are the antique tools available today the ones that were used lightly or by the joiners trade?

Well, actually I think it is very rare to find a tool from a fine cabinet maker. The majority of the tools must have been from carpenters and the like. So it is indeed difficult to draw conclusions from old tools found in the wild.

[Dave Anderson NH]

I am fortunate enough to have 2 1/2 sets of hollows and rounds, a 45 degree carpenters set made in NJ and a 50 degree skewed cabinetmakers set by Griffiths of Norwich UK. Neither had the backs flattened. It is the same with almost every wooden molding and bench plane I own. Same-O, Same-O for all of my antique chisels and other edge tools like spoke shaves and drawknives. The absence of any evidence of back flattening anywhere would lead me to believe is a modern day idea, fad, protocol, or what have you. Additionally most tools had multiple bevels leading me to believe that in the past they were much less fussy about bevel angles.

Now back to sharpening with my Turkey stones and whale oil.

[Kees Heiden]

You are probably right Dave. Now I think about it, I also have a few highly pitched hollows and rounds. And indeed, backs are not flat.

I think those men only cared about wiping the burr after honing the bevel. And you dont need an absolute flat back to reach the burr.

[Steve Voigt]

Most of the responses here are saying the same thing…that the old tools you own don't have flat backs, so nobody ever flattened their backs. I think this is a suspect line of reasoning. Very few of us own tools made before the late 19th century (there are some exceptions, I know), and most were made in the 20th c. Either way, nearly all were sharpened and used in the 20th century. Your prize chisel with the rounded back may have been bought new in the early 1900s, and last used and sharpened by the buyer's grandson in the 50s.

Now, if this is what you mean by "ancestors," fine. But if you mean "what did cabinetmakers and carpenters do in 1800, when there weren't any power tools to help", then I don't think you can draw any conclusions from the tools you own.

A related question that people sometimes ask is "did previous generations flatten their stones?" And most people will respond with "all the old stones I've seen are dished." But in The Joiner and Cabinetmaker, written in 1839, it states that workers would be fined for not dressing their stones and leaving them flat. Unfortunately, we don't have any plane irons and chisels that we know for sure have been unused since the early 1800s, and that we know were only used by competent workers. So we really can't say.

Anyway, I don't have an answer to Fred's question. But what I am sure of is that if we draw all our conclusions from 20th c. woodworkers, whether from looking at their tools or reading their books, we're looking in the wrong place.