Why So Few Strike-Through Chisels?

[Zach Dillinger]

Jim, that is a boatload of hand dovetails, congrats! That said I'm still a little fuzzy on why the balance is worse with the extra handle weight. My cheap Stanleys seem to reposition fine, but admitted I haven't done the volume of work you have.

Zach, would a hammer be an inappropriate tool if the chisel was designed to handle it? I understand whailing away with a 3lb sledge wouldn't be nice for the blade, but why not design a chisel that can handle whatever tool you prefer? Like I asked Jim, i'm still unsure why the handle weight would be such a problem.

My hands would get very tired very quickly if I spent an entire day using a carpenter's chisel in place of a proper cabinetmaker's chisel. I would hate to use a chisel like you describe, as I prefer a more delicate, lighter, better balanced blade. I don't even like socket chisels, I much prefer 19th century tanged firmer chisels. If you haven't tried a proper cabinetmaker's chisel, there is really nothing that we can say to you to make you understand the difference. This is just something you have to feel to understand. And it is possible that you will never feel the difference. Not a bad thing, or incorrect, it just means it doesn't affect your work as much as it would mine.

As for preference of striking tool, I believe you've answered your own question. They don't design chisels like you describe for precision work, i.e. cabinetmaking, because most cabinetmakers simply wouldn't prefer them for their precision work. As I stated before, I don't think many of them would use a hammer to drive a chisel (I certainly wouldn't, even if the handle were steel) so the design is utterly unnecessary for fine work.

In my opinion, this is a solution searching for a problem. I don't believe it to be "superior" for cabinetwork. It may be superior for heavy work such as carpentry, but I'm not a carpenter so I don't care.

But I do appreciate the topic, as it is interesting to see what others prefer.