Originally Posted by
Warren Mickley
The "pigstickers" or "oval bolstered" mortise chisels were called joiner's mortise chisels when they appeared in the late 19th century. They were considerably heavier than mortise chisels from the hand tool era. Oval bolster and pigsticker are modern names. The sash mortise chisel also appeared in the late 19th century. Since there were industrial mortise machines in use during this time, it is difficult to sort out what trades did what or to make generalizations. Charles Hayward says that cabinetmakers used sash mortise chisels in the early 20th century. The pigstickers are very awkward for deep mortises that are not very long, as in a cabinet door frame. Some people today make shallow mortises for stub tenons for which the pigstickers are fine.
In the 18th century mortise chisels were considerably lighter and were not differentiated into two groups. The chisels illustrated in Diderot and Roubo were more like sash mortise chisels than "pigstickers".
Oval bolsters appeared long before the late 19th c., though I think Waren is right that they weren't referred to as OBMCs, but just as mortise chisels. Here are a couple screenshots from the Seaton Tool chest book. These chisels were presumably made in the 1790s, very much still in the "hand tool era."
IMG_2503.JPG IMG_2504.JPG
These chisels are pretty similar to my own OBMCs, which are probably early 20th c. Note the diagram of the oval bolster--the oval is perhaps not as pronounced as later chisels, but it's not that different. It's definitely true that these are smaller and more delicate than later chisels. The blades of these range from 5 5/8" to 6 1/8", whereas my later ones are up to an inch longer. The handles are similarly shorter on the Seaton chisels, so total length difference is 1 1/2" - 2", a substantial difference.
Another difference is that on most factory made OBMCs in the late 19th/ early 20th c., the handles at the narrow end are considerably wider and thicker than the bolsters, which is ugly, but easier to make. In the chisels above, the handles are nicely flush with the bolsters. I've reshaped several of my handles this way, flushing the ends to the bolsters and reducing the fat end by a commensurate amount. This makes the chisels a lot nicer to hold and use.
The most interesting thing about the second pic above is how pronounced the taper is, in both width and thickness. I bet most people today wouldn't buy a mortise chisel with such a pronounced taper in width; people tend to want their chisels to be exactly 3/8" or whatever, which is kind of silly if you're sawing the tenon to fit, but whatever.
Nonetheless, I just don't get why no one makes chisels like this. Why can't someone make a "pigsticker" with a simple high carbon blade and a decent beech handle? For that matter, why can't anyone make HCS bench chisels with thin tapered blades, octagonal bolsters, and no ferrules? Maybe this new Crucible outfit will make some. If not, someone should.
Last edited by Steve Voigt; 08-21-2016 at 11:24 AM.
"For me, chairs and chairmaking are a means to an end. My real goal is to spend my days in a quiet, dustless shop doing hand work on an object that is beautiful, useful and fun to make." --Peter Galbert
Reply With Quote
