Chisel Handles

[Jacob]

don't imagine that fancy shapes have much to do with utility and usability

Haven't you heard of ergonomics?

Cheers :wink:

Paul

Nothing very ergonomic about "LPOH (London Pattern Octagonal Handles)", which is my point.

 

[woodbrains]

The term "London Pattern" crops up all over the place. Does it mean anything, other than being a bit of commercial hype?

I guess everyone has the right to own or make a chisel handle any freeking shape they want with any material they want just because they can

Yes by all means, but don't imagine that fancy shapes have much to do with utility and usability - they are (were) added to sell tools.

Commercial hype had nothing much to do with it. These things developed ages ago, when all regions of the country had their own patten tools, London pattern screw drivers, Warrington and Exeter pattern hammers, Lancashire pattern pincers etc. There were lots more but the ones that remain were the ones that stood the test of time regarding usefulness and practicality. So I suppose London pattern handles still exist because they are useful, attractive and practical in the right measures.

There is also a consensus of opinion that well made tools, those that instill some sort of pride in their owner, actually inspire the user to do their best work. Something more than the fact that the tools are well made in their functionality, but the way they look and feel just make you feel relaxed and happy and just simply make you raise your game over using a bit of tarnished, pitted steel with an ugly handle. I think some love old tools for the same reason; their perceived history instills a state of mind that inspires one to do thier best work. For others, it might be a brand new tool, made using the latest materials and technology that inspires them to do thier best. Others again like to make thair own tools, to give them something commercial offerings cannot. I personally have facets of all these in my character, in that I make some tools, own some useful oldies and some brand new ones. The ones I make are a bit more considered, though, than a bit of roughly hewn firewood hammered onto a bit of scrap iron from the reject pile. The tool has to perform well and look and feel good to make me work well.

What you have to realise, Jacob, is that this forum is populated by people who like hand tools and their enjoyment is more than just using them.
Mike.

 

[bugbear]

]Nothing very ergonomic about "LPOH (London Pattern Octagonal Handles)", which is my point.

Was it?

Really?

Because this is the first time you've mentioned it.

One might justifiably suspect it's a retrospective attempt to justify yet another sour gripe against people who enjoy finely made tools.

BugBear

 

[AndyT]

Two points in one post:

1 I think that the purpose of London Pattern handles is as a marker of quality - you'd expect a chisel with a handle like that to have a blade of the best steel, carefully made, accurately shaped. The handle says 'treat me with respect - I'm for fine cabinetwork, not for grubbing out old rotten windowsills.' Unsurprisingly, old catalogues show that tools with London Pattern handles were dearer than the ordinary lines.



2 I've made quite few handles, as a novice woodturner. My biggest mistake was to stop when I had got a decent finish all over but with the handle still too large. You have to get the diameter just right for your hands. A tiny bit too big and you get something much more tiring to hold. So I would advise that you find an existing handle which is comfortable for you, and copy it as closely as you can.

 

[Jacob]

.....
What you have to realise, Jacob, is that this forum is populated by people who like hand tools and their enjoyment is more than just using them.
Mike.

What you have to realise Mike is that this forum is also populated by people who like using hand tools and their enjoyment is more than in just owning them. So ergonomic issues are as important to them as styles/fashions and knowing where one ends and the other begins is interesting.

Actually the chisel handle pattern which has stood the test of time more than any other is the plain, simple, vaguely carrot or thin barrel, sorta shape often found in box wood and various colours of plastic.

Nice to see people making ornamental handles - why not go the next step and start smocking your aprons? :lol: Actually I have got embroidery on mine- it says Axminster. I keep trying to pick it off.

 

[Cheshirechappie]

2 I've made quite few handles, as a novice woodturner. My biggest mistake was to stop when I had got a decent finish all over but with the handle still too large. You have to get the diameter just right for your hands. A tiny bit too big and you get something much more tiring to hold. So I would advise that you find an existing handle which is comfortable for you, and copy it as closely as you can.

That's a very good point. Most commercial handles, especially for the smaller size chisels, are way too big.

For a general idea, the beech handle on my vintage 1/8" bevel-edged is 5 1/4" long including ferrule, and is 7/8" diameter at it's widest. The ferrule is 1/2" diameter and 1/2" long. The blade is 4 1/4", including the bolster. The whole chisel is light, balanced and lovely to use.

 

[DTR]

So ergonomic issues are as important to them as styles/fashions and knowing where one ends and the other begins is interesting.

Actually the chisel handle pattern which has stood the test of time more than any other is the plain, simple, vaguely carrot or thin barrel, sorta shape often found in box wood and various colours of plastic.

It's already been stated in this thread that "the octagonal pattern does feel better in the hand". Obviously it's all subjective as no two pairs of hands are alike. As there are still original octagonal handles extant, and especially as chisels are intended to take a beating, I'd say that qualifies them as standing the test of time. Another factor that cannot be ruled out is that round handles are easier to mass produce than octagonal handles.

At the end of the day I expect that AndyT's comment is true and it's the size not the shape that is most important.

 

[Jacob]

.... As there are still original octagonal handles extant,

Not many - I guess there weren't many to start with

and especially as chisels are intended to take a beating,

Not the "LPOH (London Pattern Octagonal Handles)". They are totally unsuited for heavy work as the sides would shear above the neck. Maybe that's why there aren't many about.

 

[DTR]

Not many - I guess there weren't many to start with

Did you not see my comment about octagonal handles being harder to mass produce, or are you just ignoring it?

They are totally unsuited for heavy work as the sides would shear above the neck.

Why would they? If the sides taper into the neck it will be just as strong as a fully round handle.

 

[AndyT]

I've been to the workshop and had a look at some of the old chisels there. Unsurprisingly I found that the lighter chisels have more delicate handles. Ordinary bench firmers are a bit of a middle ground compromise.

One clear difference is that with a chisel that will be gripped in the fist and hit with a mallet, (such as a joiner's mortice chisel) the length of the handle needs to be longer than the breadth of a man's hand. Otherwise you'd be malleting flesh, not wood.

Pretty obvious really, but it's further proof that ergonomics is not a new idea and the many variations in tools were generally there for a good reason.

 

[Jacob]

..... proof that ergonomics is not a new idea .....

started here, 1.8 million years ago:

Tool use even older but pre-ergonomics would have been found objects. I expect there would have been a paleo-ergonomic era when people were choosing between found objects as tools, without getting around to shaping them to fit their little hairy hands.

 

[Paul Chapman]

Ah, those were the days, Jacob - none of your poncy wooden handles and honing guides for Neanderthal Man :lol:

Cheers :wink:

Paul

 

[jimi43]

Hey Rob...I tried the lilac on a LPOH...and it came out pretty good...

I have a nice little Sorby bevel edge chisel that has been in need of a new handle for simply ages...thanks for forcing me to get my act together!

BTW...before you say it...I don't like the long thin variety! :mrgreen: :wink:

Jim

 

[Klaus Kretschmar]

..... proof that ergonomics is not a new idea .....

started here, 1.8 million years ago:

If that was 1.8 million years ago we should be glad that the mankind didn't stop the toolmaking development.

To be honest: the Victorian pride of toolmaking is something, the British people should be very proud on. It's a centurys aged tradition that carries tons of culture. Jacob, your ancistors didn't build outstandingly designed tools just for commercial success, as I think. They did their very best to create tools that were functionally, ergonomically and lookswise the best they could do. And they influenced toolmakers all over the world with their fantastic work.

I'm deeply convinced that any user of a nicely crafted tool will appreciate it and moreover will be inspired to use it the best way he can. In former times as well as now.

Cheers
Klaus

 

[Jacob]

.....If that was 1.8 million years ago we should be glad that the mankind didn't stop the toolmaking development.

The move from "stone" to "deliberately shaped and sharpened stone" was the single most important design development in human history.

To be honest: the Victorian pride of toolmaking is something, the British people should be very proud on. It's a centurys aged tradition that carries tons of culture. Jacob, your ancistors didn't build outstandingly designed tools just for commercial success, as I think. They did their very best to create tools that were functionally, ergonomically and lookswise the best they could do. And they influenced toolmakers all over the world with their fantastic work.

I'm deeply convinced that any user of a nicely crafted tool will appreciate it and moreover will be inspired to use it the best way he can. In former times as well as now.

Cheers
Klaus

Yes of course I agree with that. But there is much more to good design than decorative details such as found on certain tool handles, however finely crafted. In fact this is a fundamental theme in the history of modern design as a whole - Modernism being largely an attempt to separate "good design" from mere decoration.
Good read - "The Roots of Modern Design" Herwin Schaefer - has much about the engineering and tool making origins of Modernism and the movement away from decoration, going well back in history.
Yes I do think that fancy tool handles are decorative, often commercial and not necessarily functional.

 

[bugbear]

Yes I do think that fancy tool handles are decorative, often commercial and not necessarily functional.

You must find the carved planes of Northern European workers completely beyond your understanding.

Some people like beautiful things - apparently you don't.

BugBear

 

[Jacob]

.....
Some people like beautiful things - apparently you don't.

BugBear

Nonsense. I just think that people shouldn't desperately seek justification for decoration on the grounds of utility - they should recognise it for what it is, whether it's a London pattern chisel handle or a curly saw handle.
Nothing wrong with decoration if you can afford it or the time to do it.
On the other hand modernism is about beauty in simplicity and plain utility. Though there is nothing modern about it - vernacular stuff from the earliest times has often been plain and simple. Tends to get overlooked - people recognise Shaker stuff for what it is (having been told) but don't see it in their own environment when the same sort of simplicity and beauty is found.

 

[bugbear]

.....
Some people like beautiful things - apparently you don't.

BugBear

Nonsense. I just think that people shouldn't desperately seek justification for decoration on the grounds of utility - they should recognise it for what it is, whether it's a London pattern chisel handle or a curly saw handle.
Nothing wrong with decoration if you can afford it or the time to do it.
On the other hand modernism is about beauty in simplicity and plain utility. Though there is nothing modern about it - vernacular stuff from the earliest times has often been plain and simple. Tends to get overlooked - people recognise Shaker stuff for what it is (having been told) but don't see it in their own environment when the same sort of simplicity and beauty is found.

Sounds more like minimalism than modernism.

Personally, I'd prefer a Lutyens home to a Corbusier one.

BugBear

 

[kirkpoore1]

.....
Some people like beautiful things - apparently you don't.

BugBear

Nonsense. I just think that people shouldn't desperately seek justification for decoration on the grounds of utility - they should recognise it for what it is, whether it's a London pattern chisel handle or a curly saw handle.
Nothing wrong with decoration if you can afford it or the time to do it.
On the other hand modernism is about beauty in simplicity and plain utility. Though there is nothing modern about it - vernacular stuff from the earliest times has often been plain and simple. Tends to get overlooked - people recognise Shaker stuff for what it is (having been told) but don't see it in their own environment when the same sort of simplicity and beauty is found.

Although I can see your point, Jacob, I believe you are leaving out the human element. People tend to treat good looking objects with more care. If it looks well made and expensive, most folks will ensure it gets used, cleaned, sharpened, and put away more often than if it's an old beater. If it looks good on the outside, people will assume the quality is better in the absence of other information. This second point shouldn't apply after you know your own tools, of course, but the first point will kick in at least subconsciously for most folks.

Kirk
who needs to make some handles, particularly file handles...

 

[woodbloke]

Hey Rob...I tried the lilac on a LPOH...and it came out pretty good...

I have a nice little Sorby bevel edge chisel that has been in need of a new handle for simply ages...thanks for forcing me to get my act together!

Jim

Nice Jim, but I threw all my lilac away 'cos it was rubbish...full of splits and gnarly bits - Rob