stanley chisels

[skeetstar]

Folks first off, this is a great site and I really value the insight and experience of the posters here. In no small way this site has helped ro rekindle my interest in woodwork after a 'career' in big Corporate IT. I'm loving every minute, learning vast amounts from experience (mistakes!) and at last beginning to turn out simple work that I don't look at and say 'I could have done that better'.

Anyway, reason for the post. When I was a lad in the late 60's early 70's my father was given a set of 6 Stanley chisels by the widow of a carpenter, a freind of the family. They have languished in the garage for 40 plus years until now. I thought I have a crack at getting them into working order.

My experience is that they take a lot of work to get a shaving edge, and even then it doesn't seem quite as sharp as I can get my Narex ones. Is this cos they are old and good quality and just need working at, or because they are old and junk.

The second photo shows my efforts at flattening the back. The darker section is not hollow on the back of the tool, it is convex, and will take me some time to grind flat. All the set of 6 are like this to some extent.

Question is, in view of their age, are they worth persevering with, and getting sorted, or should I just use them for hacking away at things and opening paint cans?

Views welcome

 

[Phil Pascoe]

Persevere - they're well worth it. 5001s are the mutt's nuts.

 

[Jacob]

.....
The second photo shows my efforts at flattening the back. The darker section is not hollow on the back of the tool, it is convex, and will take me some time to grind flat. All the set of 6 are like this to some extent.
Question is, in view of their age, are they worth persevering with, and getting sorted, or should I just use them for hacking away at things and opening paint cans?

Views welcome

5001s top class chisel. Slightly brittle hard steel so good for fine work, not for site work.
You don't need to flatten the face; that's just a crackpot new woodwork fashion.* The slight concavity (edited) makes them easy to sharpen - it's supposed to be there. Removing it is a waste of time and subsequent sharpenings become slightly more difficult.
Just sharpen them (5 minutes max?) and use them, what is there to get sorted?

PS I don't know which silly person invented this fashion but he has wasted a lot of peoples' time and spoiled a lot of chisels as a result - you get stories where someone has spent a bomb on a matching set of posh ones and the spent a week flattening them and spoiling them in the process. Madness. :roll:

 

[G S Haydon]

Ha! Stay away from a paint can or send 'em to me .

I like this chap's videos. Content heavy but very sensible https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z7iYFusg0Tc

 

[Biliphuster]

5001s top class chisel. Slightly brittle hard steel so good for fine work, not for site work.
You don't need to flatten the face; that's just a crackpot new woodwork fashion.* The slight convexity makes them easy to sharpen - it's supposed to be there. Removing it is a waste of time and subsequent sharpenings become slightly more difficult.

Do you mean concave? I don't know of anyone that purposefully makes the backs of chisels convex. Concave backs in my opinion are the easiest to sharpen (that is, turn the burr).

P.S. Graham has a couple of very good videos regarding sharpening chisels and flat vs hollow stones you may want to look at.

 

[Jacob]

5001s top class chisel. Slightly brittle hard steel so good for fine work, not for site work.
You don't need to flatten the face; that's just a crackpot new woodwork fashion.* The slight convexity makes them easy to sharpen - it's supposed to be there. Removing it is a waste of time and subsequent sharpenings become slightly more difficult.

Do you mean concave? I don't know of anyone that purposefully makes the backs of chisels convex. Concave backs in my opinion are the easiest to sharpen (that is, turn the burr).

P.S. Graham has a couple of very good videos regarding sharpening chisels and flat vs hollow stones you may want to look at.

Oops yes concave. All the new chisels I've ever had have had slightly concave faces. This makes first sharpening very easy - just a few seconds. It gets progressively more difficult (slightly) as the hollow disappears and they eventually end up slightly convex along the length. Either way it doesn't affect performance (except in the world of fantasy woodwork!)

 

[Jacob]

Ha! Stay away from a paint can or send 'em to me .

I like this chap's videos. Content heavy but very sensible https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z7iYFusg0Tc

Too long for me- but anyway he sounds like an obsessive flattener.
If the bevel angle is reasonably well ground at 30º it shouldn't take more than 30 seconds to "prepare" a new chisel. i.e. no "preparation" required just sharpen and go. Otherwise send it back.

PS friction due fresh machine marks is lost immediately when the face is first applied to a stone to remove the burr. It doesn't matter that you can still see them as long as their sharp edges are taken off.

 

[G S Haydon]

He talks quite a bit Jacob but he points out you only need one stone, you don't need to spend a great deal of time for a good edge unless you want to and he gives a guide of about 30deg for sharpening. Sounds just like you .

 

[Jacob]

He talks quite a bit Jacob but he points out you only need one stone, you don't need to spend a great deal of time for a good edge unless you want to and he gives a guide of about 30deg for sharpening. Sounds just like you .

That's alright then! :lol:

 

[Graham Orm]

Anyway, reason for the post. When I was a lad in the late 60's early 70's my father was given a set of 6 Stanley chisels by the widow of a carpenter, a freind of the family. They have languished in the garage for 40 plus years until now. I thought I have a crack at getting them into working order.

My experience is that they take a lot of work to get a shaving edge, and even then it doesn't seem quite as sharp as I can get my Narex ones. Is this cos they are old and good quality and just need working at, or because they are old and junk.

The second photo shows my efforts at flattening the back. The darker section is not hollow on the back of the tool, it is convex, and will take me some time to grind flat. All the set of 6 are like this to some extent.

Question is, in view of their age, are they worth persevering with, and getting sorted, or should I just use them for hacking away at things and opening paint cans?

Views welcome

What you have is an early set of the 5001's. The yellow ring was on the first ones, they decided to nickel plate them and at the same time changed the ring to white. (How sad am I?). I have a double mixed set of yellow/white that I use for work. They are superb, hold an edge for ages and I've not had one chip or break yet. (I started using them exclusively a couple of months ago but although I use them on site, I'm careful not to abuse them).

I searched them out on Ebay when looking for an alternative to my Stanley FatMax's. The FatMax's would never stay sharp.

There are lots of views and opinions on sharpenning, from the sound of your knowledge you already know that flattening the back gives a much crisper edge. I've done this with all of my 5001's and they are all paper slicing sharp.

Do they really need to be that sharp? Won't they do with a quick rub on the stone every now and again? Yes they will work, but as someone who uses them constantly the difference between paper slicing sharp and quick rub sharp is huge. Mine just fall through wood, and usually bring a smile to my face.

For what it's worth, I hollow grind them to form a primary bevel, Then form a secondary bevel with a 400 grit diamond stone, then switch to a 1000 grit diamond stone, then a leather strop with alluminium oxide paste on it. I only remove the bur when I get to the strop. I use an Eclipse guide for all operations to give a consistent angle, even on the strop (drawn backwards only).

You have some benchmark chisels. Persevere, they are as good if not better than your Narex.

 

[Jacob]

.......flattening the back gives a much crisper edge. ....

Why? How?
Carvers don't flatten the backs and they want "crisper" edges than anybody. They even have very sharp double curved bevel edges. :shock:
It's very odd how this flat back delusion persists. At first glance it's got a superficial logic to it but it just doesn't stand up in theory or practice.

 

[bugbear]

The second photo shows my efforts at flattening the back. The darker section is not hollow on the back of the tool, it is convex, and will take me some time to grind flat. All the set of 6 are like this to some extent.

Here's some advice from Paul Sellers

https://paulsellers.com/2012/08/questio ... g-chisels/

BugBear

 

[skeetstar]

Thanks for responses fellas. Didn't realise that these would be that well thought of.
Will persebvere and get the whol set shaving sharp.

Thanks again for input, most welcome.

 

[Corneel]

.......flattening the back gives a much crisper edge. ....

Why? How?
Carvers don't flatten the backs and they want "crisper" edges than anybody. They even have very sharp double curved bevel edges. :shock:
It's very odd how this flat back delusion persists. At first glance it's got a superficial logic to it but it just doesn't stand up in theory or practice.

That's easy, carvers often use a double bevel, so both sides of the edge are polished, usually with a strop in their case.

A good chisel has a slightly concave back, so just rubbing the back a bit on polishing stone gives the back side of the edge the same quality as the bevel side. Not so perfect chisel backs are often convex. Just rubbing the back on the polishing stone won't reach the edge. The result is that the bevel side has a higher polish then the back. The result is that the lower polish level of the back defines the sharpness of the edge.

What to do? Accept, and live with the slightly less sharp chisel until the regular back polishes finally reached the edge. Or do it all at once, and work the back on coarse grit up to fine grit until it is flat (or slightly concave). I prefer the latter.

Both assuming that you can reach the burr to flip it over to the other side. The back doesn't need to be totally flat for this. Flipping the burr back and forth a few times weakens it enough to release it on a strop or in the wood.

 

[Jacob]

.......flattening the back gives a much crisper edge. ....

Why? How?
Carvers don't flatten the backs and they want "crisper" edges than anybody. They even have very sharp double curved bevel edges. :shock:
It's very odd how this flat back delusion persists. At first glance it's got a superficial logic to it but it just doesn't stand up in theory or practice.

That's easy, carvers often use a double bevel, so both sides of the edge are polished, usually with a strop in their case.

A good chisel has a slightly concave back, so just rubbing the back a bit on polishing stone gives the back side of the edge the same quality as the bevel side. Not so perfect chisel backs are often convex. Just rubbing the back on the polishing stone won't reach the edge. The result is that the bevel side has a higher polish then the back. The result is that the lower polish level of the back defines the sharpness of the edge.

What to do? Accept, and live with the slightly less sharp chisel until the regular back polishes finally reached the edge..........

The "regular back polish" may never reach the edge. The normal thing to do is to put more pressure towards the edge, or even raise the handle a touch, just enough to remove the burr. This results eventually in a slightly convex profile end to end which is what you find in almost all well-used old chisels. This doesn't affect use at all but is not quite as convenient to sharpen as a concave new chisel face.

 

[Graham Orm]

Safe to post I'm hoping as listing has ended. This is the highest I've seen them go for. http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/161753985222? ... EBIDX%3AIT

 

[lurker]

What really annoys me about the e bay description is he describes 1970 as vintage. It wa bluddy yesterday yer young whippersnapper :wink:

 

[Phil Pascoe]

O level year.

 

[RogerP]

What really annoys me about the e bay description is he describes 1970 as vintage. It wa bluddy yesterday yer young whippersnapper :wink:

... there are pages about the subject here...

http://community.ebay.com/t5/Archiv...intage-Definition-and-differences/td-p/883115

... but being fairly vintage going on antique myself I got bored with it after a bit.

 

[Bod]

Safe to post I'm hoping as listing has ended. This is the highest I've seen them go for. http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/161753985222? ... EBIDX%3AIT

Interestingly he gives the size in metric, I would have thought at that age they would have been imperial.

Bod