New Lee Valley Mortise Chisels

[lowell holmes]

http://www.popularwoodworking.com/wp...SE_BY_HAND.pdf

Check this article . It's the best I've seen. You don't need to be destructive when chopping mortises.

[Patrick Chase]

I think you are really wrong here, Patrick. The tapering really needs only be in proportion to how accurately the chisel is ground. The more accurately the angles are ground and the more consistent the thickness, the less need for any tapering. And any tapering, front to back or along the length, should not be enough to be noticeable in use. The chisel ought to be secure in the cut, not need to be held from twisting by hand manipulation.

Obviously you're somebody who prefers registered mortise chisels, along the lines of what L-N sells today (though there are many examples through history). I think that's a perfectly reasonable subjective preference, but it doesn't preclude the possibility that other chisel configurations are also valid.

If you look at classic pigstickers, the modern Ray Iles version thereof, Narex, and now Veritas they're all tapered by ~1 deg on the sides ("front to back" as you call it).The same is true of many 18th and 19th C mortise chisels - I'll let Joel fill in specifics if he cares to. That's far more than is (or realistically was even in the 18th C) needed for grinding accuracy. It's done on purpose to prevent binding and allow the back<->side edges to do all of the work.

That front-to-back taper isn't a problem, because your thesis that a small amount of rotation about the long axis of the chisel compromises registration is incorrect. The effective width of a chisel rotated by 'angle' is blade_width*cos(angle), so 1 deg of rotation due to front-to-back taper would result in a reduction of 100*(1 - cos(1)) = 0.015%. In other words, a 1/2" mortise chisel would "lose" 0.00007" of registration due to that much rotation. At 2 deg the same chisel would "lose" 0.0003" (cos(small_angle) is very nonlinear). You're hung up on an irrelevancy in regards to the impacts of both front-to-back taper and shallow primary bevel. Any competent woodworker can keep a chisel straight to within a couple degrees, and that's sufficient in this specific case/orientation.

What DOES cause notable loss of registration is tip-to-bolster (lengthwise) taper. The Narex mortise chisels and apparently some 18th/19th C ones have such taper, the RI and Veritas (from what I understand) do not. For example the 1/2" Narex chisel loses 12 mils of width per inch of length, and at least for me that was enough to force me to focus on keeping the shaft centered in the mortise when cutting the bottom, or else the mortise would "wander" to one side or the other. I much prefer constant-width mortise chisels.

[lowell holmes]

Talk about splitting hairs , how deep of a mortise are you chopping. A 3/4" TO 2" deep mortise will not see the taper you are talking about. I checked my Narex mortise chisels and they do taper as you said. I have some LN mortise chisels. IMO, they are more of a sash chisel. Can you measure 0.00007". I can't and don't care to.

I like the LN mortise chisels when drilling the mortise and then clearing the mortise sides with the chisel, ala Becksvoort.
I favor my Ray Iles mortise chisels for most work. Also, I may very well might use a bevel edge chisel if it suits my need.

[Warren Mickley]

Patrick, I must have misunderstood your previous post. You wrote: "The sides do provide some jigging in rotation, but you shouldn't need that anyway as you should be able to guide the chisel to within less than the taper angle by eye and handle feel."

Now you talk as if modern chisels have a very tight registration and can hardly twist in the cut. One factor you seem to have not noticed is that twist can (and does) occur beyond the sidewalls of the mortise by compression of the sidewalls.

I do not like the LN mortising chisels.

It doesn't sound like you have much feel for 18th century mortise chisels.

[Joel Moskowitz]

I think Derek has it spot on.
There is more than one way to skin a cat. The trick is getting the cat to stay still and getting the appropriate tools for the way you plan to go about it.

The method I was taught (the same method Moxon describes) doesn't involve getting particularly clean sides as the sides are pared to the scribe lines after the basic chopping is done. The point of the mortise chisel is pure speed.

The main reason mortise chisel handles fail is the grain of the handle runs out oddly. This happens. Using a metal hammer or other crap is what I would call abuse and it doesn't figure here.

The reason the ferrule replaced the wide bolster is that fitting a chisel to a ferruled handle is dead easy and reliable. No ferrule requires more time/cost/skill in the forging and the fitting

Larry's chisels are very nice but I would not call them 18 century English. The handle style along isn't really English - more German. But big deal Larry likes them. I would guess they feel great in the hand and work great so so what.

[Steve Voigt]

I think Derek has it spot on.
There is more than one way to skin a cat. The trick is getting the cat to stay still and getting the appropriate tools for the way you plan to go about it.

The method I was taught (the same method Moxon describes) doesn't involve getting particularly clean sides as the sides are pared to the scribe lines after the basic chopping is done. The point of the mortise chisel is pure speed.

The main reason mortise chisel handles fail is the grain of the handle runs out oddly. This happens. Using a metal hammer or other crap is what I would call abuse and it doesn't figure here.

The reason the ferrule replaced the wide bolster is that fitting a chisel to a ferruled handle is dead easy and reliable. No ferrule requires more time/cost/skill in the forging and the fitting

Larry's chisels are very nice but I would not call them 18 century English. The handle style along isn't really English - more German. But big deal Larry likes them. I would guess they feel great in the hand and work great so so what.

Joel,

You've blown my mind with your reason for why the ferrule became so ubiquitous. So this thing that is taken for granted, to the extent that people are giving my the stink eye in this thread for suggesting it's unnecessary, is only there to make the handle-fitter's job easier? Wow. That's useful information.

I agree that Larry's chisels aren't 18th c. English (particularly with the bevels), but there's an article floating around somewhere, by Don McConnell, that discusses the somewhat murky origins of this handle. Wait, here it is. Anyway, like I said earlier, I prefer the simpler single-taper handles, but that's nitpicking.

I have to say, I don't follow you on mortising technique. If "pure speed" is the goal, why waste time paring? Not to mention that a bunch of mortises chopped with the same chisel (no paring) will be a lot more uniform in width than a bunch that have been pared. I'm glad it works for you, but I do think chopping only is preferable (though there are obviously situations, e.g. wide mortises, through mortises, where we have to pare).

[Joel Moskowitz]

Forging those nice wide bolsters is expensive. flush fitting a handle to a bolster is time consuming. Fitting a ferrule is dead easy and fast.

If you chop and pare to a scribe line (like Moxon describes) with a single stroke. It faster than trying to chop right to a line dead clean - especially with a through mortise.

Incidentally - do you know why bench chisels were sold in 1/8" increments. Mortise chisels were sold in 1/16" increments? The reason is that no matter if you are chopping to a specific width, or just scribing to whatever and then taking largest size mortise chisel that fits and then paring (at most one pass of 1/32" per side) everyone wants the flexibity to size their mortise and then chop it in one go. Bench chisels on the other hand are used for a larger variety of work, and multiple strokes are common. The only exception to that might be the base cut out for very narrow pins, where you would want to do it in one shot.

[steven c newman]

There are afew videos by GE HONG......watch them to see just HOW you are to do mortises...FAST. No messing around, he can through mortise a board in the time it took the type this post...

[Joel Moskowitz]

There are afew videos by GE HONG......watch them to see just HOW you are to do mortises...FAST. No messing around, he can through mortise a board in the time it took the type this post...

Can you send me a link - I googled them and didn't see anything (I might also be missing the obvious)

[Trevor Goodwin]

Steven you've provided no indication of how to find said videos. They don't come up on Google or Youtube. Are they on your hard drive perhaps

[Warren Mickley]

I think Derek has it spot on.

The method I was taught (the same method Moxon describes) doesn't involve getting particularly clean sides as the sides are pared to the scribe lines after the basic chopping is done. The point of the mortise chisel is pure speed.

So how long does it take to make a mortise 5/16 wide 1 1/2 inches long and 1 1/2 inches deep in oak, and then pare the scribe lines to finish the mortise?

[steven c newman]

Last time I went to watch one ON Youtube, all I typed in was GE HONG videos. Wasn't all that hard to do. It is hard to listen to, as they are in Chinese ( Mandarin). Might ask Mister Holcomb IF he can also find them. I did make a plane one time, following along with his videos...
IMAG0051.jpg
What he called an Edge plane. Those are the shavings it made, doing that little rebate.
IMAG0055.jpg
Not sure IF I can post a link...will look it up, when I feel bored...



Might try one of these? https:// www.youtube.com/watch? v=ctBgtmZGaU
Or.....http:// www.youtube.com/watch?v=N1bo6NVYCc0

It is also achived here at Saw Mill Creek....back in 2014.

[Joel Moskowitz]

That's what I did - nothing obvious came up.

Peter chops them differently than I do - although he is using a Ray Iles mortise chisel which I had significant input into its development - so as far as I am concerned he's doing it perfectly with no room for improvement.

Warren's question is a good one. Sadly, unlike Warren I don't have the opportunity to spend time building and building. For me tools are a profession, using the tools is a hobby. So Warren on a bad day is probably much faster than I am. The last time I timed myself on something like that IIFC it was about two minutes. And I remember I thought it slow. I am going back to work after vacation on Monday and if I can I will try to get some recent numbers.

[Stewie Simpson]

http://www.popularwoodworking.com/wp...SE_BY_HAND.pdf

Check this article . It's the best I've seen. You don't need to be destructive when chopping mortises.

First let’s look at D2’s

demerit: It’s no fun to sharpen. Setting up these
tools took longer than I expected because of the
D2’s stout personality. The backs (sometimes
called the “faces”) of the chisels were ground
at the factory quite well. But even though they
were close to perfect from the factory, taking
them that last step took a little longer. Sharpening
up the secondary bevel also took longer than
usual because of the D2’s pigheadedness.

[steven c newman]

I went right to it...as archived here. That video were part of a 4-6 page thread on that type of woodworking. And, to watch that fellow chop.......the swing has already started BEFORE the chisel is in place. And, IIRC, your 2 minutes would be two mortises all the way through for him.