First attempt at freehand sharpening!

[Jacob]

But how did the do it in the old days before jigs.....

They probably travelled by Horse and Cart too but, these days most people would probably opt for something a little more modern.

What's so modern about flattening a stone on a paving slab flattened in turn by a brick flattened in turn by two more bricks? Ask Pedder for an explanation! Back to the stone age!

 

[studders]

What? :?

 

[Harbo]

Where do you get all these Rounded Under chisels Jacob (Japanese ones included) - do they all migrate your way?

Rod

 

[bugbear]

As many old tools are found with this feature inc jap chisels

Evidence for this repeated (and doubtful, to my knowledge) claim still awaited.

BugBear

 

[bugbear]

Nor in general is there any particular suggestion that a bevel should be flat.

I thing the recommendations to avoid a "rounded bevel" might reasonably be taken to strongly imply "the other kind of bevel", if we're using words in their normal English meaning.

BugBear

 

[Jacob]

Where do you get all these Rounded Under chisels Jacob (Japanese ones included) - do they all migrate your way?

Rod

Was reported to me that at a recent show the Japanese woodworker had rounded bevels on all his chisels. Also pictures posted by someone of ditto.
Many (not all) old tools are found with this feature in my experience, and I've made a point of asking others if they find this in old collections, and yes it is.
But why should it not be so? No one answers this question.

 

[Jacob]

Nor in general is there any particular suggestion that a bevel should be flat.

I thing the recommendations to avoid a "rounded bevel" might reasonably be taken to strongly imply "the other kind of bevel", if we're using words in their normal English meaning.

BugBear

Why? It doesn't do to be too literal or you could throw a baby out with the bath water.
Rounded over obviously bad, rounded under obviously another thing altogether. Just keep thinking about it - you'll get there sooner or later.
PS Actually you have put your finger on it - it's this simple misinterpretation of "rounded" which seems to have confused a lot of people. An odd detail is that "rounding under" seems to be accepted for mortice chisels but not for anything else, even though it can be shown to work perfectly well.

 

[andy king]

Where do you get all these Rounded Under chisels Jacob (Japanese ones included) - do they all migrate your way?

Rod

Was reported to me that at a recent show the Japanese woodworker had rounded bevels on all his chisels. Also pictures posted by someone of ditto.
Many (not all) old tools are found with this feature in my experience, and I've made a point of asking others if they find this in old collections, and yes it is.
But why should it not be so? No one answers this question.

I have commented on this in one of the many threads on this subject.
In my opinion, having been 'on the tools' since 1977, and seeing many examples of rounded bevels on chisels and planes, the examples I saw were pretty well all rounded over.
It's more to do with the lack of access to a bench grinder in those days rather than a technique that established itself as a way forward.
If I needed regrinds on my chisels I either had to send them off via a local tool shop, or hopefully find a friend who worked in a metalworking shop or maybe a joinery shop where they had a grinder.
The majority of out and about woodworkers didn't have access to them, or own a grinder (any powertool was prohibitivly expensive right up until the influx of chinese machines) and the upshot tended to be the lifting of the tool slightly to gain a wire edge as the honing bevel surface increased and took longer to raise the wire if that bevel was maintained.
I've seen plenty of trademen doing exactly that to try and get a bit more from the chisel before they had to bite the bullet.
I would doubt if a sliding bevel was placed against many (or any) of the rounded over chisels that are found at boot sales or elsewhere that they would be 'rounded under' to retain a honing angle of 30 degrees or so.
On mortice chisels, its often a rounded bevel that is seen on the pigsticker style, I've rarely seen it on a lighter weight style and having a rounded bevel here helps when levering out waste on deep mortices allowing the chisel to roll. Again, commented on before in other threads somewhere...
Just IMHO of course.

cheers,
Andy

 

[bugbear]

Nor in general is there any particular suggestion that a bevel should be flat.

I thing the recommendations to avoid a "rounded bevel" might reasonably be taken to strongly imply "the other kind of bevel", if we're using words in their normal English meaning.

BugBear

Why? It doesn't do to be too literal or you could throw a baby out with the bath water.

What shape bevel do you think you get if you keep your hands at a constant height when sharpening, as the classic books advise?

"Just keep thinking about it - you'll get there sooner or later." right back atcha'

You may well have come up with a "novel" approach to sharpening, but it ain't time honoured.

The old books recommend flat bevels as a goal to aim at, and the old tools we find are rounded ("over", in your coinage)

BugBear

 

[Jacob]

...
I would doubt if a sliding bevel was placed against many (or any) of the rounded over chisels that are found at boot sales or elsewhere that they would be 'rounded under' to retain a honing angle of 30 degrees or so....

Unless you check you don't know this, so you could be wrong. I think you probably would be in many cases.
What is lacking from this discussion is any explanation of why a rounded under bevel would not be acceptable. There is no doubt that it can have a sharp edge at whatever angle you chose and also cut just as well as any other. And it's easier to freehand. So what is the problem?
You could even hone a micro bevel with a jig and still have a rounded (now "primary") bevel. It's all the same if the edge is OK.

 

[Jacob]

.....
What shape bevel do you think you get if you keep your hands at a constant height when sharpening, as the classic books advise?.......
The old books recommend flat bevels as a goal to aim at, ....

Flat of course. And a good target to aim for, in order to avoid the dreaded rounding over. But once you have the upper hand you can cheat a bit by dipping etc. You don't have to if you don't want to but it makes the job a bit easier.
Of course it isn't a novel approach - we have been sharpening edges for millions of years. The insistence on a flat bevel is the novelty and has no particular logic behind it, except in certain circumstances where it's preferred (carving probably, I don't know) or unavoidable - with jigs or machine sharpening.

 

[andy king]

...
I would doubt if a sliding bevel was placed against many (or any) of the rounded over chisels that are found at boot sales or elsewhere that they would be 'rounded under' to retain a honing angle of 30 degrees or so....

Unless you check you don't know this, so you could be wrong. I think you probably would be in many cases.

I would think this would be a simple enough thing to check for anyone who buys old tools - there are plenty of threads on here regarding car boot finds.
I can only speak from what I see with my own eyes as a tradesman alongside other tradesmen who did exactly as I described, lifting the tool to gain a wire edge and extend the time between regrinds and I offered my opinion on that as stated.
I have a few old chisels of my own that I've bought over the years, and some have been rounded excessively, definitely not 'under' - you tend to be able to spot angles and suchlike after a while...
A couple of things I have found, relating to hollow stones and sometimes regrinds, is the backs of these older irons and chisels have taken on the profile of the hollow stone, so putting them on a flatter one (I use a diamond one now) ends up in a lot of work to remove a hump formed from a hollow stone before they can be honed properly.
I've also found the edge won't hold on a couple, probably from a poor regrind in the past where the blued edge has been simply polished out on a stone leaving softer steel.
'You pays yer money' as they say.

Andy

 

[bugbear]

And it's easier to freehand. So what is the problem?

I have no "problem" with your recently discovered approach to sharpening. I just don't think it's especially good. You're welcome to do what you want in the privacy of your own workshop, of course.

Personally, I use an Eclipse jig and a trivial projection gauge. Once the blade is in the jig, I can work the tiny secondary bevel of my edge tools across the 4 successive abrasives I normally use at around 10 5-10 strokes on the first, and 3-5 strokes on the rest.

This is effortless, easy and quick,since the secondary is, and remains, small due to the jig.

When the secondary gets a little bigger, I simply "hack off" some metal from the primary, using coarse abarsives, lots of pressure, and not much care.

BugBear

 

[Allylearm]

I go along with Andy King in relation to trademen we are off the same era having started my time in 1976. I was more in the shop than out for 5 years on the bench making purpose made and my tools were the better for it, I would hate to say the condition of some fellow Joiners tools after being on site and when I was out they always came along to borrow a chisel. A grinder was the key and the Bench hand tools were the better kept for it as you had time and were not getting chips on your edges.

I never used a jig as I learnt to hone by practice and get the edge I required. I had the india combination and later a Arkansas was added. I never stropped but used my hand which I was taught by my journeyman. No other reason, I did what I was shown ande have never had reason to change.

I never got anal about edge just differed from Bevel to Firm due to needing differing results. It served me well and if jigs fits your purpose go full steam ahead in my book, if things make work simpler and get the result you want what is wrong with it.

As for College I read someone remarked about school tools. Well my experience was that my lecturer waited for me to go in and provided me with different sets of tools each time, cause I always seemed to spend time getting edges/grinding on chisels and planes, not a tech in sight. It even went for my fellow apprentices, some were Shuttering Joiners and good edge was not required for there work along with working on woodwork machinery even then different strokes for different blokes. And some just had poor journeyman who never showed them. It was the luck of the draw who learnt you and if they were interested or skilled to pass on their knowledge. Of late I see this trend more than more on sites visited, bonus and self employment has killed this. As I get often stated if we get an apprentice what is in it for us in lost time showing them. So we started paying to take on lads, some old ways were effective and training the skills was one of them. I would not agree all old ways were right and I could mention more that have vanished for the good. I hope there is some still taking on apprentices for the correct reasons not political humbug targets or susidised labour or general muling timber around. But in my case I have not seen it for years in my local area, the trade in general must be the poorer for it. But this opens up another subject on what is being taught in colleges/work places and quality. We live in a consumer led culture that wants it quick and cheap. Skills or old ways are first to go in components coming preprepared from all over the world and all you do is screw it on.

Ally

My point regarding honing and edges is there more than one way to skin a cat.

 

[Alf]

As a freehand sharpener myself, I absolute hate to see it swamped by one extreme view vs. everyone else. It is perfectly doable, honestly it is; and it doesn't mean rounded bevels either. And trying it also doesn't mean you have to turn in your honing guides and never touch them again. But the bottom line is whatever gets you a useable edge for the job is the "right way". Everything else is a by-product of male cattle.

 

[andy king]

As a freehand sharpener myself, I absolute hate to see it swamped by one extreme view vs. everyone else. It is perfectly doable, honestly it is; and it doesn't mean rounded bevels either. And trying it also doesn't mean you have to turn in your honing guides and never touch them again. But the bottom line is whatever gets you a useable edge for the job is the "right way". Everything else is a by-product of male cattle.

Yes, definitely. The ultimate goal is consistent honed edges and how you get there is really pretty irrelevant.
Being able to freehand hone is a great thing to have, but its not shameful or wrong to reach for something that offers the same consistency and repeatability that a good freehand honer can get.
As someone pointed out earlier, the tradesmen tend to have the upperhand in the freehand method as its a case of 'do it often, do it quickly, get back to work' mentality as they have to earn money and it becomes second nature, but others who woodwork for a hobby don't get the chance, or simply want to woodwork rather than get bogged down in a technique or method that can be achieved in another way.
Even so, 'at the coal face' of woodworking - out on site, there are still plenty of examples of the rounded bevel out there in an effort to get over the need to regrind or try and remove a chip or two from an edge.
cheers,
Andy

 

[Jacob]

Well yes do it how you like. But some of the old methods do work. Obvious really, you only have to look at the work they did.
Is that "being swamped by an extreme view"?
"shameful or wrong" doesn't come into it, though I keep being told I'm wrong. In the end people make their own minds up.
Anyway our OP stubtoe is boldly going against the grain. He's probably wondering what all the fuss is about. It's a mystery to me too!* And a source of entertainment, I have to admit.
*not really a mystery. :roll:

 

[Rob Platt]

I`ve tried not to get involved in right or wrong ways of doing things but to add as I haven`t seen it mentioned. (sorry if I`ve missed it) to avoid getting a rounded edge I always lift the stone at the far end onto a block of wood maybe an inch thick this reduces the probability of the blade rising as I push forward away from my body. I wonder also if thats the reason for back saws being tapered towards the handle?
all the best
rob

 

[bugbear]

Just to nail Jacob's repeated claim that his idea is time honoured, I've trawled through the more well known of my pile of tutorial and reference texts.

I can find none that speak of rounding in positive terms, and many that either decry it, or explicitly describe techniques that generate flat bevels.

Perhaps the clearest language is Planecraft, 1934:

Whatever you do, do not allow the iron to "rock", as this must inevitably result in a curved edge that cannot cut well, and will necessitate re-grinding straoght away. Keep the wrists rigid, and the angle of iron to stone constant.

We can have a lovely discussion on wether the Grim technique has merit, but it certainly didn't form part of any curriculum.

BugBear

 

[dunbarhamlin]

...as this must inevitably result in a curved edge that cannot cut well...

To my eye, this looks like the author had rounding over in mind, since the only (sharp) edge which cannot cut well would be one which was too obtuse for the application.