A carver/writer in the October issue of Popular Woodworker says the steel in German carving tools (Two Cherries) is much better than Swiss carving tools (Pfeil).
Anyone know if this is opinion (Ford vs Chevy sort of thing) or is there more to it?
Alan – planesaw
Replies
I doubt the geographic origin of the steel is the issue, but there could be something to the grade or hardness of the steel that each company chooses to use. To say that all Swiss tool makers use inferior steel seems like it's probably an over-generalization. Unless TwoCherries actually owns and operates their own steel making business, Pfeil is certainly free to buy their steel from the same place that TwoCheries does. With the worldwide steel shortages over the last few years, it's entirely possible that the steel either company is using didn't even originate in Western Europe.
If you build it he will come.
The country of origin of the steel ore is significant, as the carbon, sulphur, vanadium, etc content of the iron ore is critical to the quality and hardness of the final steel product. This is one reason why Swedish ore has been prized over the years, versus ore from other locations. Of course, a Swiss carving knife maker is unliky to smelt their own steel, so they are buying it from the same source as many other knife makers, German or otherwise. But then again, maybe the Swiss steel people import special batches that differ from their neighbors to the north.
Another critical aspect of steel hardness/quality is how the steel has been tempered, whether by quenching, freezing, or annealing. The tempering process of heating and cooling can be tweaked with far less equipment than it takes to produce steel, so it is possible for there to be differences between steel coming from different shops, even if the steel stock used is the same by all shops.
In sum, it isn't just marketing, and country of origin can indeed have an impact on steel quality.
As an aside, I live in Central New Jersey where one of the prime reasons for settling the area (in the 1670s) was the ready availability of iron ore. But it's low quality, and today no one looks for "New Jersey steel," except perhaps to ensure that Tony Soprano isn't at the dull end of the steel...Recommending the use of "Hide Signatures" option under "My Preferences" since 2005
New Jersey Iron ore is of very high quality - I have some - it's just so hard an or (because of the very high iron content) that it's hard to mine and mine were abandoned when the mesabi ranges were discovered which were much cheaper to mine.
They were deep mining which is very costly.
Today there is some pit mining done in the panther valley but my chunck of or picked up in Chester has so much iron in it a magnet sticks to the rock.
Friends,
Great thread. I just re-read the whole thing.
Here is my summary of the facts:
1) Ray Pine concluded, based on a lot of real use of different chisels, that any of the quality brands will work just fine.
2) Willie found that a set of cheap Grizzly chisels worked just as well as his set of Pheil.
3) QCInspector did a hardness test on a variety of chisels, and concluded that the best thing to check for is that the chisels fit your hand well.My conclusion: Any of the quality brands will work just fine, and many of the cheaper brands are just as good.Put differently: lets all go carve something and worry more about our caving technique than about our chisels.I believe that this thread has been more valuable in getting at the "truth" than anything I have seen in any of the Mags, including FWW.Congratulations to all of the contributors.
Enjoy.
MelMeasure your output in smiles per board foot.
6919,What you said.Matt
Should I ever own a smelter, I may have the ability to control alloy content of the tool steel I use. At that point, though, I have no doubt I'll have more to worry about than making a few tools.There are a number of factors involved in selecting commercially available tool steel. There are good choices and what I think are some less ideal choices. Contrary to all the hype out there, there just isn't a magic bullet steel. In most cases the reality is that heat treating accuracy makes more difference than the actual steel chosen.The Rockwell hardness test tests only one of the tradeoffs in steel choice and heat treating. The other factors that affect steel performance as much as hardness include heat resistance (red hardness), wear resistance and toughness. An increase in one of the factors includes loss of performance in another. Like wood working, it's a world of tradeoffs. Judging by the Rockwell C scale results alone is so misleading I often wish woodworkers had never heard of it. We have chosen a steel we feel offers a very good range of properties and have invested a lot of time and money in being able to accurately heat treat to get the best from the steel. We have two different needs so we've worked on two different heat treating systems. One mostly revolves around a good computer controlled furnace and the other is completely by hand and eye. We've managed to learn enough that I feel the latter may even be more accurate than the computer controlled furnace, is relatively easy, and gives a lot more control of the process. Even so, what we do may not work as well for others who deal with a greater volume.
Larry,
Didn't think about asking your opinion on this matter. Although I haven't lived in Arkansas for almost 40 years, I am always partial to people like you who demonstrate that all Arkansans are not hillbillys. (My grandmother told us we were not hillbillys, that we were better than that. She said we were mountain williams. :-)
Thank you for responding to Mel (9619, a good woodworking friend and project manager at NASA) with information that 99.9 per cent of us out here would not have known about.
So, I want to be able to carve letters (names) on cherry and walnut (and other hardwoods) cradles I have made for my grandchildren, and things I make for friends, family and others. I readily realize that in the hands of a talented craftsman a poor tool can make wonderful things and in the hands of a novice, a great tool can make junk.
But, I also know that in some cases a quality tool can make the difference in how quickly a novice learns to control a tool and make it do what he wants. It is said in most sports that you can't buy a better score -- its up to you. But, in golf, the quality of the clubs can make a 3 to 5 point difference. Sometimes it can be that way with woodworking tools.
The big question -- do I buy Pfeil or Two Cherries carving chisels? :-) Is there anything concrete you can give us in addressing this question?
Thanks,
Alan - planesaw
Edited 11/6/2006 7:20 am ET by Planesaw
Alan,I have both Pfeil and Two Cherries carving tools. I prefer the Pheil but it has nothing to do with the steel. Pfeil chisels feel agile and have the same adequate but not bulky design as my favorite old chisels. The handles on the Pfeil chisels are reasonably well shaped and comfortable. My Two Cherries carving chisels have all been extensively ground to refine their thickness and I don't care for Two Cherries handles. I have also modified the thickness of the Marples carving chisels I've had for about 30 years and would end up doing the same with other carving chisels I've seen on the market.Lee Grindinger likes the heavy bodies of modern carving tools. He says he doesn't trust the "internal ferrule" system Pfeil uses and thinks the handles are subject to breaking. I don't pry with carving chisels after breaking one once. I tried some Flexicut but found them too thin for my taste and I didn't like the handles at all.I haven't noticed any problem with edge retention in the Pfeil chisels but Don McConnell, who has extensive carving experience, says his impression was they didn't hold up as well as his old chisels. I doubt you'll work your chisels as hard as Don or Calvo. What I'd like to have is a set of James Cam or Charles Buck carving chisels but they've been out of production for generations. If you don't have the time or inclination to build an old set, why not borrow a couple and work with them a little. I'd offer some of mine but most of the new ones have been modified which wouldn't help you decide. Other than that, just hold some in a store and see which feels best. If you buy reputable chisels I don't think you have to worry about the steel. Good work requires some confidence. If a tool's presence in your hands doesn't inspire confidence, it's going to be harder to do good work.
Edited 11/6/2006 1:14 am by lwilliams
Alan, and all,
Cheesy Crackers! Just buy a couple of some kinda carving tools, for cryin out loud! Then make some shavings. If ya don't like the tools, then get a different brand next time. I've got 24 bench chisels, some 35 carving tools. Probably a dozen or more different brands. Not once did I ever buy a tool just because of the name stamped on the back of the blade, but rather, the shape/size of the business end. I have 3 chisels that are really duds. A Lindner shallow sweep gouge, a Douglas Mfg 5/8" bench chisel, and a blacksmith made incannel gouge. I have to sharpen them more often than I like (I suspect the Douglas went through a fire), but ya know what? They work just fine, when I need that specific size/ shape, which isn't often, I touch 'em up and get going.
Now if one of my daily users, say a 1" butt chisel, or a 1/2" skew, was that soft, I'd get another one. I've done that with plane irons. Not a big deal. Don't like the handle? Cut it down, or make another one! Are we not woodworkers?!?
I know some swear by Addis, Ashley Isles, LV L-N or insert your favorite brand here. That's all well and good. Me, I'm a Wm Butcher man, myself. But not exclusively. Guess that makes me a tool slut--I...slice around.
Whew, glad I got that off my chest. Feel much better now. You all carry on.
Regards,
Ray
Ray,
I agree with your sentiments, BUT a few days of discussion on Knots can save me money and a lot more time.
If I buy the "wrong" tool (aka, too soft for carving HARDwood) then I have wasted money and time -- and, more importantly, I still don't know which brand I should buy.
If I were carving basswood, then my choices are greater as it will take longer for even a soft steel chisel to need sharpening or honing.
But, hardwood changes the equation.
I, too, have more bench and firming chisels than I need now. And, it is because I used the trial and error method. Thankfully, Knots can save me all that trial and error time in many cases.
By the way, I understand you met Mel in VA recently. He and I have gotten together or a couple of occasions that I was in the DC area. Once for lunch and once when we took a class together. He had many kind things to say about you. If you are ever up in Central PA, let me know you are going to be in the area and we'll get together.
Alan - planesaw
Alan,
I would be happy to let you use my set of Two Cherries carving gauges for a week, and see if you like them. I'll bet you could learn more from cutting hardwood and softwood with these 12 gauges than you could get from reading what other people thought of different brands. I found an interesting comparison of Two Cherries and Ashley Iles carving tools. While I have no experience with the latter, the comments on what to expect from Two Cherries was right on. You can find it at:http://www.toolsforworkingwood.com/Merchant/merchant.mvc?Screen=NEXT&StoreCode=toolstore&nextpage=/extra/carvecompare.htmlI have read of Chris Pye's regard for AI tools, and of Nora Hall's love of Dastra tools. I noted that each has a "collaboration" with their recommended brand. You and I have talked about the field of applied psychology. My approach to the testing of different brands of carving tools would be to see if real carvers could find a JND (Just Noticable Difference) between different brands which had their handles replaced, and the metal "painted" (except for the edge). My guess is that there is no JND there in a double-blind experiment. This argument about the differences between chisel manufacturers is much the same as the argument that five string banjo players have about banjo manufacturers and about Pre-war versus modern instruments. My experience is that the good banjo players sound great on anything, and that buying a more expensive banjo won't make a mediocre player any better. Banjos and carving tools share decades of discussion. I do have experience having players switch instruments in the dark and try to figure out if one banjo is "better" than another. VERY DIFFICULT. However, most players get used to the feel of their instrument, and can tell differences between it and others. I believe same is true for carving tools. Both with Banjos and Carving tools, I doubt that that the particular brand they use will affect the quality of their output (assuming that no-one is using junk). The problem of evaluating tools and banjos is that valid conclusions would require the multi-variate analysis tools of applied psychology, applied by an experienced psychologist. Most talk in chat rooms about banjos and chisels focus on univariate analysis, eg Rockwell hardness (with many of the discussants using different single variables). The great thing about such discussions is that while they are useless for developing a valid solution to a multivariate problem, they are one heck of a lot of fun, they can go on forever, and no one gets hurt. The Italian word for hobby is passatempo (pass time). Tool discussions fit the Italian definition of a hobby. To misinterpret Marshall McLuhan, "the medium is the message". Glen Huey has been promoted at Popular Woodworking Mag. He asked if I had any recommendations for editorial changes. I suggested that they focus on the use of more valid evaluation criteria for all judgements concerning tools and techniques. I recommended that every evaluation begin with a discussion of the evaluation criteria. One example is: why use 10,000 lbs of pressure on a door to test joints that will never see 100 lbs of pressure? USE USEFUL CRITERIA! If Consumer Reports used similar methods to test cars, the only car they would recommend is the Hummer H-1 (or maybe something heavier).I also suggested that rather than "complexify" woodworking topics, that Pop Woodworking focus on taking the advice of Einstein who said "an explanation should be as simple as possible, but no simpler". There is amazing truth and utility in that statement. I would like to see Pop Wood do articles which debunk myths such as those of the differences between the better carving tool manufacturers. I understand the problem with that thought. The magazines need to have advertisers, and valid evaluations can scare away this necessary source of revenue. There were a few people who tried to bring useful criteria to play on carving tools. QCInspector dropped the Rockwell hardness criteria and said that since they are all so similar, the best thing to check for is which handles fit your hand best. Also there was Ray Pine, who concluded after decades of experience with most of the major brands of today and yesterday, that there ain't that much real difference ("no JNDs, in psych parlance). There was another person who had ample experience with a cheap set of Grizzlies and an expensive set of a name brand, and couldn't see any real difference. I remember a master chef giving a talk on preparing large meals, who mentioned that if you are too worried about which brand of knife to use to cut the meat, you will not have a chance of getting the meal prepared and served on time. He said that to become a real chef, you have to be able to focus on those things that achieve the desired goal. Sorry this was so wordy. There is an old saying, "with all of the ..... around here, there must be a horse nearby." Hope you can find a horse somewhere in my message. :-)
Enjoy.
MelPS _ I figured out how to shorten my response. Here it is:
"Buy any of the serious brands of carving tools and get to work." PPS - Also remember that the advice provided here is worth every penny that you are paying for it. We need to do a thread on how to sift through a Knots thread and figure out what advice is worth taking. This thread could provide the grist for that mill.Measure your output in smiles per board foot.
Mel,
I had basically decided how I was going to proceed. Now you have added new information and I am back -- well not back to square 1. :-)
But -- as a side note -- Lee Valley comes through again. Reminds me of my dad, an architect who owned a hardware and building supply store. If a customer came in and we didn't have what they needed Dad's instructions were always to suggest to the customer another store in town who might have what they wanted. That service meant people came back, because they knew T. R. would help them solve their problem.
Anyway, back to Lee Valley. I thought I would buy a couple of Hirsch carving chisels and give them a try, since they appear to be the same as Two Cherries. I emailed Lee Valley last night. Caroline emailed back from Lee Valley and said they did not list all the Hirsch chisels so they pointed me to another woodworking supplier who did.
Wow! Kudos to Lee Valley. A lot of business people should take lessons from them.
Now, Mel, Larry Williams post and your link to toolsforworkingwood added new information and I am having to adjust my plans. But, that is what I love about Knots. Keep stirring the pot and the cream comes to the top.
JND, although I did not use those words, was part of one of my posts. When ranking Two Cherries above Pfeil, were we talking 98 percent versus 97 percent or 98 percent versus 65 percent.
But, I think (could be wrong) that I have identified another factor. Carving in softer woods, such as basswood, versus hardwoods like cherry or maple. I would guess a lot of brand name carving tools would do fine in softer woods. And, we would see the differences once all the tools were used in hardwoods. We can suggest such a comparison test to both Popular Woodworking and Fine Woodworking.
Oh well, I'll figure out something.
I loved your quote: "an explanation should be as simple as possible, but no simpler".
To ALL: Thanks for going along on this ride. I have received a good education, learned some new questions, and am still looking for a black and white answer, but have found a better shade of gray.
Thanks everyone!
Alan - planesaw
Edited 11/6/2006 8:22 pm ET by Planesaw
Edited 11/6/2006 8:29 pm ET by Planesaw
Alan,
At NASA, we still use a phrase that comes from the early days of the space program. Back at that time, Disney used to sell tickets for the rides at their Theme Park. There were A, B, C, D and E tickets. The wildest rides cost the most -- two E tickets. The phrase still often heard at NASA after an exciting and fun encounter is:
"That was a two E-ticket ride!" Well, this thread has been a two E-ticket ride. Congratulations.
MelMeasure your output in smiles per board foot.
Mel,
Good one -- a two E-ticket ride. As you see in the above post of mine I had to edit it as I addressed it to Ray instead of you. Sorry.
Alan - planesaw
I'm glad to hear that you are interested in letter carving, a special interest of mine. I looked over my gradually acquired collection and found at least six different makers, some modern and some antique. I haven't noticed big differences in use, sharpening, or edge holding. Aside from tools, I suggest collecting books of alphabet styles, and having access to a copier that can enlarge and reduce. Of course one can design his own letters.
One tool that I haven't seen mentioned in letter carving is the round nose chisel. I have made several from old carpenter's chisels, and find them very useful in round letters, as an alternative to gouges.
Tom
Tom,
What sort of carving do you do?
I was thinking of printing out large letters (words) on my computer and using those.
My primary interest isn't carving itself, but rather being able to put names or initials on things I make. But, if I am going to carve it, I want it to look great.
Thanks,
Alan - planesaw
Hi,
Last letter carving I did, my kids stopped by a calligaphy demonstration at the local show and had name cards written. I copied the one made for my Daughter and built the border around it (this was a couple of years ago). Line thickness etc was pretty well spot on for chip carving.
Dave
added to my last,
Attached some pictures. I think this was about the first 'formal' chip carving I did and it is fun to look at progress. The timber is Queensland Hoop Pine (Araucaria cunninghamii - http://www.intad.asn.au/materials/wd_hoop.asp) which I think is a really excellent timber if you want tight grain and a light colour that really mellows over time with an oil finish.
The girl is 11 this month and has just competed in her first Australian National Irish Dance Competition (teams events)
I am mainly self-taught, but looking over my books just now the one by Chris Pye, "Letter Carving in Wood" is a good one. I've been at it for over forty years, mostly gift items for family members: blanket chests, jewelry boxes, cutting boards. All of my earlier carving was done with carpenter's chisels and knives, since that is what I had at the time. Dover publishes a number of books of alphabet styles that are helpful. I also recommend the books by Wayne Barton on chip carving. He shows several letter styles that work well for carving.
This is an art that requires practice, like doing surgery, which I have some experience with. Learn to sharpen very well. Use good clear wood without prominent grain. Lay out the letters with care.
The end result willl. with care and luck, look vastly better than anything done with a router!
Tom
Tom,
Thanks for your encouragement. Is the Pye book still available? If I find one, should I get it?
When it comes to bench or mortise (flat) chisels and planes I can sharpen and hone fairly well. I have less experience on gouges and other curved surfaces although I think I can pick it up relatively quickly.
I have a few Pfeil gouges and a V tool and have ordered a Hirsch intermediate size set of 4 from Lee Valley (great service).
So, I off to learn how to carve some letters and maybe some simple designs.
Thanks,
Alan - planesaw
I have some questions, after reading all of this.
1) How much carving will be done in one session with each chisel? Is it enough that having two of the most used chisels makes sense in order to not lose time by resharpening/honing?
2) What did they do 75-100 years ago (or more)? I suspect they bought what was available to them at a price they could afford- maybe based on reputation, maybe not. Is this whole discussion due to the number of options?
3) Considering the high quality of some carvings from 500-1000 years ago, how much time did they spend picking out thier tools?
I have seen comments about handles not being to the user's liking, sizes being metric/English when the other was wanted, polished/unpolished, etc. Handles can be changed to fit but I haven't seen anyone say that they did this. More has been said about changing the cutting edges, backs and side edges, which has more of an effect on quality of the cut than making them comfortable and probably takes a lot more time. Big handles won't fit small hands and vise-versa.
Having too many options causes "option anxiety" and nothing gets done. It's nice to be able to compare and it's true that we can't just go out and try them all but we're not making any chips.
"I cut this piece four times and it's still too short."
Highfigh --
1. For the carver who uses a couple of specific tools 80 percent of the time -- I agree with you. Have two of each so you can keep carving.
2. I imagine the answer to this question is determined in part by where they lived. If in a city, they could probably find either several brands or several local tool makers. But, if in the rural areas with no local Woodcraft, they had a few basic tools and/or they made their own.
3. Probably had more choices than we might realize and fewer than we do today.
Option anxiety can be equal to paralysis by analysis. And, some have suggested I am in that position as a result of this thread. Generally speaking, pending further analysis and research, I can assure you I don't think I am. :-)
Seriously, I am readily aware of option anxiety, but mine is a relatively simple process. Spend a few days trying to discover who has and where the most accurate information is, make a decision, and go for it. It can save me weeks, even months, and hundreds of dollars of less than desirable purchases.
As had been said in other venues, we live in a time when the world's problem are solved in 30 minutes including many commercials. It begins to affect how quickly we want results. Reality doesn't generally work that way.
Ask me to make a decision on saws, chisels, planes, and I can make decisions very quickly. But I have spent several years, many hours, and a chunk of money to be able to make those decisions fast. Just not there yet on carving chisels.
Alan - planesaw
I would like to see the reviewer's method of determining that the TC were "much better" than the Pfeil. Did they go completely blunt after one cut in balsa wood? If so, I would definitely call it inferior. Was he carving white oak, hickory or hornbeam? I have a set of three Fuller bench chisels that actually work pretty well. On soft wood. No too bad on hard maple but I bought Two Cherries and they slice it much better. I know small diameter handles are painful for carving and dullness will be obvious immediately. For paring, my TC work better and are still not very comfortable because of the end of the handles. If I needed carving chisels, I would probably look at the pear handles.
"I cut this piece four times and it's still too short."
Alan, This may be relevant to the debate of the relative importance of tool steel but Pfeil has some shortcomings with the shape of their v tools. I think there is a downloadable v-tool article on Chris Pye's website that does a good job of explaining the problem and solution. Sometimes 'ready to use' tools need some work (inside bevels, reshaping, etc).Matt Gumaer
m---
Thank you!! Your info is the sort of gems and nuggets I routinely look for. Where are those nuggets of knowledge hidden that answer questions one didn't even know to ask.
Thanks again,
Alan - planesaw
The Pye book on letter carving is in the Lee Valley catalog.
Good luck!
Tom
"The country of origin of the steel ore is significant, as the carbon, sulphur, vanadium, etc content of the iron ore is critical to the quality and hardness of the final steel product."The country of origin is irrelevant to the final product. No steel is made directly from the iron ore that's been dug out of the earth. At least hasn't been for a very long time. The ore is refined to remove all the impurities and then the alloying elements (Chrome, Molybdenum, Carbon etc.,) are added in specific quantities to make the various steels and that can and is done everywhere. The batches are tested (chemical and mechanical) to make sure they conform to the specification standard that they will be certified to. Any further refining, modification, forming, heat treating etc., is also tested and confirmed were necessary. The quality of the steel is more result of the effort and skill put into it's manufacture, and the intended end use that the steel is destined for. Iron destined to be the heavy counterweight casting on the back of a crane doesn't have the same level of refinement as the steel to be forged into the crankshaft of your car or the blade in a chip carving knife.
Refinement is of course important. But I hadn't seen or heard that low grade ore was as valued as higher grade ores. My chemistry background doesn't extend to metallurgy, but I would think that like other refinement processes, the final content is carefully watched, but the quality of the raw material is also important. I'd be surprised if the raw material didn't have some impact on the final product, but as you say perhaps things have changed from the (not too distant) past.Thanks for the heads up, I'll update my information. Steel making is an old interest of mine, especially since I worked with one of the Krupp family.
Recommending the use of "Hide Signatures" option under "My Preferences" since 2005
Pondfish, I'm no steel expert but maybe high grade steel is more expensive not because it creates a better final product but rather because its cheaper to take the contaminates out of the higher grade ore (same end product, just less work to get there). Just a thought.Matt
You are absolutely wrong about origin. The origin of the steel makes by far the biggest impact. This is why:
Germany: The Germans consume beer at lunch, means they the lose accuracy over the analysis and further addition of alloying quantities. Steel made in the morning is good, but in the afternoon properties are all over the place.
America: This country has a tremendous skill shortage and they work very hard at a rapid pace. Means calibration of equipment suffers and the steel properties vary all over the place.
Russia: Depending on the brand of Vodka and the factory, sometimes you may purchase Martensitic Stainless with a proper Certificate of Analysis, but actually end up with mild steel.
Switzerland and Japan: The Swiss are very precise and the Japanese really stick to the rules, so their alloys, percentage of ingredients and calibration is almost always perfect.
So, in conclusion, no one can compete with the quality of steel Pfeil uses.
Thank you for enlightening me about the origins of steel. I happily sit corrected. He who talk with tongue in cheek.....eventually bite tongue.;-)
Saw, from a totally personal observation from an ex- industrial engineer who has spent time with the Suisse, they are famous for selling the sizzle but not the steak. My tools are German or Henry"s from GB. Pat
I can't imagine that there is that big a difference. I remember when people would rave about how much better the "old tool steel" was. My understanding of the old steel was that the standards varied greatly because it was'nt as an exacting a science as it is today.I use the swiss made tools and they seem to hold an edge very well. My friend makes knives out of old car springs that hold an unbelievable edge after he hardens them. I guess this will be the battle of swiss versus german.
Did you see the letter in this month's PWW where a woodcraft exec defends Pfeil stuff to the hilt with all this detail about how they temper and manafacturer etc. and then PWW responds to the effect: "the author stands by his statements"? I laughed out loud; it reminded me of that scene in Indiana Jones where the guy with the swords does all this impressive threatening stuff twirling them everywhere and then Indy sighs pulls out a gun and shoots him.
While I'm no expert, my meager experience tells me in no uncertain terms that there are differences in the properies of various steels. I was looking at a OneWay catlog today that showed microscopic pics of typical steel versus the steel they use in their turning tools that as I understood it is made in a process of atomization and recompression to yield a very heterogeneous steel without impurities, microvoids, and other defects. Japanese White steel and blue steel are other examples, not to mention the steel forged into katana (samarai sword) blades and the like.
There are also differences in the quality of forgings, grindings, design, etc. of the tools themselves. If you've ever uses a starter set version of a gouge and then the same size gouge from a professional grade set, you know what I mean.
I have no Swiss carving tools (well maybe a vintage E.A. Berg or two; that's Swiss IIRC?) to speak of, but I can certainly imagine valid metrics upon which Mr. Calvo (the PWW author) was finding the current Swiss tools wanting.
I'd be very interested to here from some serious carvers with first hand experience with Swiss v. German (or other nationality) tools.
Edited 10/31/2006 9:11 pm ET by Samson
Samson,
Yes I saw the article and the letter you are referring to. That, along with the author of the articles, I stand by my opinion, is what got me started.
I laughed, too. You can't argue with I stand by my opinion. That is why I am wondering if there is something to it or not.
One can know there are differences between grades and types of steel. But, what are the differences between German and Swiss? Are all German steels good and Swiss bad? Or is the focus on Two Cherries and Pfeil? I believe the author says he learned on German made tools, so generally he would be inclined to be loyal to them. I don't know if that is the explanation, but it could be, even if he doesn't realize it. Generally speaking, the first thing we are taught on a matter is what we will always believe. It takes an act of God to get us to change.
I have also read that Two Cherries has two grades of steel. If the Two Cherries set is called "special," then it is cheaper in price and quality.
The price of Two Cherries and Pfeil are similar. Before I spend money it would be nice to know what the truth is.
Alan - planesaw
Planesaw, Just so I can have a string of posts, why don't you buy a couple of each and see what you prefer? It took me a little while to get over the 'matched set' disease but now I kind of enjoy trying out a tool or two of different makers and different styles.Matt
Planesaw,
Although I'm far from an expert, I think it's a ford versus Chevy thing (although I don't have any Two Cherry carving tools although I have a few different brands). Manufacturers may trade off between harder and softer steels for a balance of hard and brittle versus softer with shorter edge holding but that's a preference, not one being better than the other. Are Japanese chisels 'better' than western style chisels?
To be sure, there are cheap tools with bad steel but, by the time you hit Two Cherrys versus Pfeils, I think it's a matter of simple preference and I would think you might want to consider shape and other factors before worrying about the microscopic properties of the steel. I've never felt like my Pfeils needed excessive touch-up.
Matt
Oh, I also thought I heard somewhere that the author sells Two Cherries. Not that precludes a reasoned opinion but, it does suggest at least a potential for some bias.
Matt
You are correct, his website does show that he sells a nice set of carving chisels and tools.
I will give him the benefit of the doubt that he likes Two Cherries and so that is what he sells. If I believed one brand was better than the other, I would sell it.
But, that still doesn't prove that one is better than the other.
Oh well. Probably for the amount of carving I will do in my life time it won't make much difference. If I was spending a huge amount of time carving I would want to know for certain. As most of the readers here would know, the quality of a tool can make a critical difference.
Thanks for weighing in,
Alan - planesaw
Alan,How about looking up the US importer (not one of the sales agents) for each, calling them up and letting them make their case. You have always seemed to have a pretty good bullshid detector between your ears..................********************************************************
"It is what we learn after we think we know it all, that counts."
John Wooden 1910-
Well, I was hoping someone would jump in and say, Hey, I have done a thorough scientific investigation and here is the scoop.....
Thanks for the comment about the detector, but sometimes I can be guilty of not using it.
Alan - planesaw
nikkiwood,
I meant to ask, how/where would I learn who the importers are?
Alan - planesaw
I would start with Google, and if that fails, call one of the sellers and ask them for the importer's number. I suggested this becasue I once had occasion to talk with Tom Lie-Nielsen for a magazine piece, and he led me to a metalurgist they use. The latter gave me all the information I needed, and did so in the simple terms I needed. If you do go this route, tell them you are involved with a discussion on the issue in one of FWW's wwing forums. Most of them are hypersensitive to what's said on these forums, and that will be their motivation to talk with you.********************************************************
"It is what we learn after we think we know it all, that counts."
John Wooden 1910-
I think I read in the Woodcraft catalog that they are "the exclusive importer of Pfeil tools in the US". This would probably account for why they so vehamently denied the PWW article....
Rod
I wouldn't be surprised to hear that the person who claimed the German tools are superior, is German. Nice to be proud of his heritage but I doubt that the Swiss steel is vastly inferior, just by virtue of being from over the border. Apparently, he forgot that the Swiss have been known for precision and craftsmanship for centuries.
He sells Two Cherries chisels, maybe there's already someone in his territory who sells Pfiel and he can't get them, or maybe the profit margin is better than Pfiel (it's a sound business decision, but dumping on the competition is a bad way to sell, especially when the dumpee has a good reputation). Pfiel have a good reputation, so do Two Cherries. I see more people complaining about the handles on Two Cherries chisels than just about any other brand.
In case anyone wants to climb all over me for this, my grandmother was 100% German so no, I'm not just picking on him.
"I cut this piece four times and it's still too short."
Edited 10/31/2006 10:42 pm by highfigh
Few carvers will be able to detect a significant difference in the steels from these two brands. I have found that the Henry Taylor carving tools have steel that will take a superior edge (they're English) but I don't care much for their workmanship in the grinding and final shaping of their tools. So I own mostly Pfeil and I like them. I have a couple of Henry Taylors that I have refined the shaping of and they are my favorites. I'd hate to have to put in as much time, as I did on them, on all of my tools though. I wouldn't say English steel is better though... I've bought English planes which had irons that required sharpening after every other stroke. I also wouldn't say that that means English steel is bad. I rehardened that plane iron and it works fine now. The best cutting edge that I own is a carving knife that I made from a piece of a cheap 7 1/4 inch hollow ground planer blade. I theorize that the hardening-tempering (done with an oil quench and a small propane torch) is the major difference. Nearly all modern tools are kiln tempered to a very uniform hardness. By careful hand work I was able to temper this knife so as to keep it very hard at the edge and yet temper the back edge of the blade to a softer (more flexible) hardness.
In the November/December issue of The Home Shop Machinist magazine there is an article by Otto Bacon who gives a receipe for hardening steel in a home shop. Basically you put a quarter cup of Cascade liquid dishwashing detergent in two gallons of water.... and stir till it swirls. You heat the steel to bright red and hold it at that temperature for at least 30 seconds. Plunge the steel into the solution that is swirling... stir the steel in the opposite direction of the water. This process can raise the Rockwell C Scale hardness of the steel 5 to 10 points over normal quenching. The dishwashing liquid contains a surfactant or wetting agent which allows for more water to get to the surface of the steel, while the vigorous agitation helps to move the steam bubbles off the surface of the steel and allow the water to get in contact. The combination provides a greater thermal shock to the steel; which is what makes it harder. My experience with this method has provided me with some very high quality cutting edges. Moksha
Thanks for the info, I find that very interesting! Though I must point out that excess thermal shock can be a bad thing too. Small blades like most carving knives are pretty forgiving but larger knives and certainly swords and such like are sensitive to such treatments and may easily warp or crack . Even with my linseed oil quench I had steel way too hard (even at the edge) for knife usage. I tempered the edge too (just not as much as the back of the blade).
I do some blacksmithing now and use a lot of cut nails for small tools . Because the steel in the cut nails is of marginal carbon content for tools I often just harden them at their tips or edges and use them untempered. Your solution may be useful with these projects and I will try it. Old railroad spikes are of similar steel and I think it would be good for tools made of those too, Though I have personally had minimal success with them owing to the amazing amount of pounding that seems to be required to transform a spike into a (different) useful shape.
Folks, no body should give a fig about where the steel comes from or its nationality.
One should give a fig or two on a) the type of steel and b) the heat treatment that has been done.
There are international standards relating to the many different types of steel and there grades.
The most critical thing is that heat treatment: no matter how "good" or sophistcated or specialised the steel is it will not perform if the heat treatment has been botched.
I think I'd agree with that. Where a tool comes from is absolutely no indication of where the steel originated. In the 1970s I worked for a Swedish steel maker who was supplying 80 to 90% of the HSS and carbon steel rod going into a world famous "Sheffield" tool product. And today I know of one Sheffield tool maker (in another field, not woodworking) who has been manufacturing his tooling from predominently Indonesian HSS and carbon tool steel for at least 15 years (he won't touch the Indian or Chinese stuff, though, as it'still way too inconsistent for him). His customers don't ask, or even care, where his steel comes from - all they are concerned with is the price/performance of his wares, and because he controls the machining and heat treatment and examines and hardness tests all his batches he doesn't seem to produce bad stuff at all. What's probably not realised is that Sheffield hasn't been a steel making city (at least not in any appreciable quantities) since the early 1980s (when Hadfields finally closed down), at least not HSS or tool steels, and the same goes for much of the German and even the Swiss industry. Since the 1970s there have been massive closures of steel plants across the EU and so a large amount of what we use here is now imported.
Scrit
Philip and Scrit,
I understand and agree with what you are saying that steel, as most other products, doesn't have a nationality; and that the quality is in how it is processed to be made into tools or springs or gears or whatever.
Two things struck me in Calvo's article and in PWW reporting his reply to the reader's question.
One, that a blanket statement was made about Swiss vs German carving tools without challenge by the editors. I am certainly not experienced nor informed about what editors of woodworking magazines allow and don't allow, but I took note of the statement as I had thought the Pfeil was considered a high quality tool.
Two, that again, the editors of PWW would simply report to the reader's inquiry that the author stands by his statement. Nothing was given from the author, nor the editors, to either explain, substantiate, or agree or disagree with the statement.
Now, let me hasten to add that I think Popular Woodworking is right up there with Fine Woodworking as two great woodworking magazines, so I have nothing to gripe about there. And I understand freedom of speech, etc. I do think however, that the woodworking magazine's purpose is to educate its readers. Okay, maybe it's mission -- its' purpose is to make money for someone. And that is not a bad thing.
Had the author said something like, "I was trained by German carvers using German carving tools and I believe they are the best .... " As someone who is apparently a great carver, I am going to seriously consider what he says. But, he tells me that it is his opinion.
Like most woodworkers I want the best performing, longest lasting tool I can afford when I purchase something. (I am not a commercial shop, but somewhat serious home-shop.) Generally, if I am going to buy a tool and I learn that the tool can range anywhere from $10 to $100, and I think the $50 tool will do what I need, then I buy it. If I were using it everyday I might get the $100 tool. But, at least I know the price and quality range and buy according to my needs and money.
Attached is a photo of a cradle I made for my newest granddaughter. Not fancy or carved, but decent quality and totally functional.
Well, way too much time and energy on this. Just hoping someone had some technical information that would weigh in on Two Cherries vs Pfeil. I assumed (I know that can be dangerous) that there was really not a German vs Swiss issue, but rather a brand vs brand issue.
Thanks, everyone, for your comments. Maybe someone else will jump in with all the right answers.
Alan - planesaw
A while ago FWW wrote an article on bench chisels (december1999) and in it they explored some of the factors involved in the strength of steel, its ability to take an edge and hold it. I would assume that similar considerations would apply to the steel in carving toools. Their test series was logical to me and the two cherries steel had a rockwell hardness rating of 59c while the pfeil came in at 61c. The test involved repeated impacts into white oak, and then a measurement of the edge of the blade to gauge how much rougher it had become. The two cherries chisel got a ranking of 6 while the pfeil came in at 17. According to their tests the pfeil simply didn't hold its edge as well. Of course these chisels are at the top end anyways, and the difference in quality might not be signifcant enough to warrant a change in brands. And perhaps as it was on bench chisels it doesn't apply to carving tools. It's a pretty good article, and worth the read.
Quietude,
Thanks for the heads up. If I am reading correctly, you were about 18 when that article was written. Either you have been reading back a good ways, or .....
Nonetheless, I had not seen the article. I will look it up.
However, you raise an important perspective. Although there is a significant difference between a ranking of 6 and 17, if they are both at the top end and have the difference, for example, of 98 points good and 94 points good -- well then there is not a huge difference. In that example, they both may be excellent, but one tests out better than the other. I don't know if that is an accurate comparison or not, but the perspective is one to consider.
Thanks for jumping in.
Alan - planesaw
If I understood it correctly, the only thing being tested in that FWW 1999 article was durability of the sharpened edge. Many other factors might come to bear in assessing the overall quality of a tool.
And judging by the little seismograph images of the bevel edge, the difference between 6 and 17 was significant. There were only like 18 chisels in teh test.
I was indeed not reading FWW much in 1999, however back issues are a wonderful thing. As much as I enjoy the current issues, I have found that my preference is for older issues laden with trig jigs and commen sense. Rather than complain about the new style - they have their reasons and it is still quite useful- I have been moving bacckwards in my reading. There are other factors that determine the overall usefulness of a tool, and though there was a large difference between the 6 and the 17 in terms of the roughness, the author commented that only the top 3 escaped the need for resharpening after the test. Since they both needed resharpening I'm not sure how big of a difference it would make in everyday use. I've used pfeil tools before and enjoyed them quite a bit. The Japanese blue and white steel tools that didn't require sharpening hold a certain appeal too. Anyone have any feedback on those?
All,
I've assembled a motley crowd of carving (and other) chisels over the years. The first carving tools I bought were Buck Bros, back in 1971. Then several of the "Swiss Made" from Woodcraft. I have a couple dozen old English, Sheffield carving and bench chisels, Butcher, Addis, Cam, Taylor, Barton. The German chisels I have, Hirsch, Heinkel, Stubai, are all pretty good. The softest of the lot are an old handforged in-cannel gouge, and another old gouge marked G Lindner. The German and Swiss tools I wouldn't turn my hand over for the difference between them. They all hold an edge well. Although I don't carve all day every day, when I do carving, it occasionally takes a while, as in :
http://www.davidraypine.com/portfolio.php?spgmGal=Chairs&spgmPic=10&spgmFilters=#pic
or:
http://www.davidraypine.com/portfolio.php?spgmGal=Other&spgmPic=3&spgmFilters=#pic
I doubt that any of the "quality" carving tools offered by the catalogs will wear out in our lifetimes, regardless of how hard the average worker uses them. I have gone through several plane irons in my day; block plane and smoothing planes. Those I do use (and sharpen) a lot more regularly than any of my chisels.
Though I don't have any technical info as to Rockwell hardness etc, my experience is that any of the good quality tools offered today will give good service. Personally, I like the old tools a little better than the modern. For the most part, they are a little harder, and hold an edge longer than the newer ones. Likely due to the imperfect metalurgy available back then. ;-)
Regards,
Ray Pine
Alan, I love my henry taylors but Cate the beautiful in that (I am sure not store bought) lovely cradle made my evening , what a joy, thanks. Pat
I am going to take 3 of my carving tools to work tomorrow and test them on the Hardness Tester and I'll post the numbers. You guys have got me curious. I have a Swiss Made spoon gouge (that will be the hard one to hold), a Henry Taylor skew, and a Japanese laminated gouge that I bought from Tashiro's in Seattle a couple dozen years ago. Sorry I don't have anything from Germany....unless someone wants to send me some.;-) It won't be very scientific (not enough samples) but enough to see what the range might be.
QC --
Be interesting to see what you learn.
Alan - planesaw
Q, I hope you are not going to conclude that the chisel with the highest reading is superior.....Philip Marcou
I was going to do this in the morning after I got up, but I don't want anyone to draw any conclusions before I get this posted.;-) (philip will be relieved....maybe.) ;-)I took the 3 carving tools and 2 hand plane blades (last minute decision) and checked them on a Mitutoyo Hardness Tester and verified the calibration with a NIST Traceable Standard of 65.3 +/- 1.0 HRC (Hardness Rockwell "C" scale) One thing that needs to be mentioned is that hardness should taken on material that is parallel to get the best and most consistent readings, and that anyone that does the test needs to have the qualifications and experience to recognize when a reading may or may not be suspect.[1] I tested a Record low angle block plane blade that is less than 10 years old. I took 3 readings about 1/8" back from the back of the bevel (5/16" from the edge) 59.0, 60.0, and 59.0 HRC. That was about what I would have expected from all the reading about tools I done over the years.[2] The second plane blade was from a Stanley #6, I don't know the exact age but it has a low profile rosewood front knob),so made in the good old days. Also 3 readings as on the Record of 62.0, 61.5, and 62.0 HRC. This suggests to me that replacing these old blades with an aftermarket one won't improve edge holding, only stiffness.[3] OK now a carving chisel. A Henry Taylor Tools Skew beveled on both sides. Three readings taken 3/8"+ back from the edge to get close to parallel material,62.0, 61.5, and 61.5 HRC. Those are what most would consider to be good for a tool, and it bears out what an earlier poster said about the quality of the steel, (and I agree with what he said about the rough finish).[4] The Japanese laminated steel carving gouge gave readings of 61.5, 62.0, and 62.5 HRC. This is also what I expected to see. There were several readings that were approximately 55.0 HRC that I discarded because of the difficulty in getting the tool to sit properly on the anvil (the pad/base that the sample being tested sits on) during the test.[5] The Swiss Made Spoon Gouge came next. This was even harder to get to sit on the anvil. Even with extra outboard support it wasn't stable . I tried anyway and got 59.0 HRC on the first attempt. 3 more that followed were 50.0 to 55.0 HRC Then the final 2 read 58.5 HRC. I feel that none of those readings were to be trusted, and even if one were to take the 3 highest it would indicate that the tool was at the bottom of the generally accepted range for carving. That would be the wrong conclusion to draw.
Before giving up I decided to try on the shank/shaft just behind the spoon. It's flatter and closer to parallel. Two readings gave 60.0 HRC, a third dropped to 42.0 HRC, the reason being I went into the part of the tool that's unhardened. I took one more closer to the first two and got 59.5 HRC. These are closer to the other two tools tested, but still may be lower than the actual edge if I could have gotten better readings there. I believe that if I had a straight bladed tool or even a flat wide gouge, The readings would be more consistent and in step with the first two carving tools. The differences are not that great and anyone looking to buy carving tools should give more consideration to the fit of the tool to their hand and the size / suitability to the work it's intended to do. Any of the quality tools are all going to be close and any differences, minor. It might be worthwhile buying one of each in a similar size and shape from the 3 or 4 brands that may be in the running and use them to see which best meets the needs. A #3 gouge, chisel and a skew, all about 1/2' wide are close enough to compare and are useful for most carving.[6] Since I was at the tester anyway and I had one in my pocket, I decided to test the blade in an OLFA box cutter. 60.0, 60.0, and 60.5 HRC. Let's all write OLFA and get them to make carving tools!!! ;-)And finally. To do comparison tests like this all the tools should be as close to the same type/size as possible for consistency and there should be several from each maker to get good averages. Thanks for watching and don't take this stuff as absolute.
Q, thanks for that interesting bit of research.
Would you be able to post a picture of the hardness tester you used, as a matter of interest. I am considering getting one , and see that there are many types , digital etc, with a huge price range.Philip Marcou
"Would you be able to post a picture of the hardness tester you used, as a matter of interest. I am considering getting one , and see that there are many types , digital etc, with a huge price range."The one we have was there when I started in 1989 and it had been around a while then and isn't even listed anymore. The modern ones are expensive and some of the digital ones are faster and are best suited for high volume applications. The one thing they all have in common is that they work on the same principal, therefore the results are the same. If the tool is properly calibrated the results from a 30 year old machine will be the same as a brand new one, with the exception of the digital reading being in tenths rather than rounding up or down to the nearest half on the dial type. So a used machine shouldn't be ruled out if it's in good condition.Here is a link to an American company selling a Chinese made machine that is more modern in features than the one I use. I can't vouch for it as I have never seen one although it shouldn't be ruled out based on its origins. There may be similar offered in your hemisphere if the shipping was too much. http://www.shars.com/The tester is in the Online Catalogue. Page 19 of the Measuring Tools Section.
QCI, hey thanks for taking the time to test for us, I am very sure that your limited but meaningfull tests pointed many in a direction that will satisfy them. Kudos, Pat
Glad to help. If anyone in my area has some of the 2 Cherries tools, that are in part responsible for this thread, I'd be happy to test them to balance that side of the equation.
Unhardened shaft of the tool
You may be looking at this the wrong way around ?
If I worked for Pfeil I would temper from the tang towards the tip. And therefore the shaft woud be a low bluer temper and the blade would be a light-straw. Peif publish the use of electrical tempering and not ovens or molten salt-baths which are capable of uniformity, I feel thats the clue to the likley method.
Thanks Pat, and yes, I made the cradle. I have a few dozen more photos of Cate that I could post!!!!
Grandparents can be dangerous with photo albums. Slows down the woodworking.
Alan - planesaw
Alan: Very nice work and a beautiful young lady. I think a blind test of, lets say, bench chisels where all identifying marks were obscured and aftermarket handles were fitted would settle the question once and for all (maybe). I'd bet that no one could tell the difference between two chisels of comparable quality, say a Two Cherries vs. a Pifel or L.N. Maybe something for one of the magazines to do. KDM"... if people did not die so untidily, most men, and all women, would commit at least one murder in their lives." R. Kipling
Dukeone,
You may be right. I would love to see it on carving chisels. I have a couple sets of bench chisels and they seemed to be more capable than my skills -- so that's enough.
So is Pfeil not as good as Two Cherries? Is Two Cherries and Hirsch the exact same tool of the exact same quality?
Alan - plansaw
Alan
My bench chisels are Two Cherries, and they are excellent. Their edge last longer than any other I've used, and it's not even close. They're very hard, (Rockwell scale R64 I believe, not POSITIVE though), so they take a little more elbow grease to sharpen, but they're well worth it.
My carving chisels are all Swiss Made/Pfeil. I like them, but I must sharpen them very frequently, as they lose their edge quickly when working hardwoods. I sometimes wish I would have invested in Two Cherries carving tools, also, instead of buying the Pfeils.
On a different note, both handles, (hornbeam for Two Cherries, and Plum for my Pfeils) are very comfortable in my hand. I like their shape and feel better than my Nishiki Dovetail Chisels.
Jeff
Edit: I think it's important to note that I'm not comparing German vs. Swiss here. I'm simply giving my opinion of both brands, as I use them both quite freqently.
Edited 11/2/2006 5:58 pm ET by JeffHeath
Jeff,
Thanks. First hand report is good to hear. Always appreciate hearing from someone who has used the tools.
Alan - planesaw
Alan
Hey! No problem. It's why we're here. Also, I want you to know that either brand would be excellent for you. You'll just have to sharpen the Pfeil's more frequently. They do sharpen very easily, though, so it may not matter much. The Pfeil's do get very, very sharp, too. I don't think you'd be dissappointed in either brand.
Nice cradle, and congrats! One of my 3 sister's just had her first baby, and I've got one of those under construction, as we speak, for a christmas gift.
Jeff
Planesaw,
I am a carver and have tried several tools from different companies including German, British, USA and others.
The best steel I have experienced so far is white steel from Japan. It cuts smooth and clean and holds an edge better than the others in my opinion. It costs too.
Keep in mind that each tool, even from the same company, will have different qualities. Each tool is worked seperately if it is hand forged and it is impossible to have two tools exactly the same but they can be real close.
Everybody should try at least three White steel tools in their lifetime.
Blue steel is good too. but, I do not like it for carving. It's probably better for general woodworking.
Aren`t tools fun.
bergermeister
Berg, when you say "white steel", are you talking about steel with a high chrome content?Philip Marcou
check out japanwoodworker.com
Bergermeister
The only information available is that Pfeil uses Chrome Vanadium steel hardened to between Rc 55 to Rc 61.
Two Cherries use a high carbon steel hardened to Rc 61.
Not having used Two Cherries, (I have a lot of Pfeil carving tools), I would expect Two Cherries to corrode easier and they would probably sharpen with more difficulty. I would also guess that abuse on a grinding wheel generating too much heat will do more damage to the carbon steel.
While cutting my teeth as a beginner carver, I used an el cheapo set of Grizzly chisels, think I paid $60 for a box if twelve. Besides the fact that I had to re-sharpen them all out of the box, they actually hold their edge well and I don't think the wood has noticed the difference between them and my Pfeil.
Willie
Having read most of the letters in this category, it seems to me that the respondents should sharpen up what they have and start making shavings. If the object of owning carving tools is to carve, then much time is being wasted. Any carefully sharpened steel tool will cut wood. Fine differences in steel quality will only be noticed by the full time production carver.
It's like the old question: "How many angels can dance on the head of a pin?"
Tom
Two Cherries vs. pfeil - super-sharp edge retention.
Today we at http://www.gubia.pe/ compared four different carving chisels:
..... From top left and Narex, Pfeil, Bassoli-Barrie and Two Cherries. Our goal was to find out which of the gouges best retains it's edge.
How we did the test?
Trigonometry
To ensure that the angle of the bevel is the same for each tool, we measured the bevel using trigonometry method where measured the thickness of bevel first and then measured length of the bevel resulting sinus α (alpha) of the angle of the bevel. Once we had a sinus alpha than we were sure what angle each of the bevel has....refering to Angle.jpg picture.
The test procedure (was on all of the four carving chisels same and as follows: )
# 1
We super-sharpened the carving chisels using KOCH sharpening system, here is the link for the video demonstration ( Afilar gubias en segundos | #10/10mm | KOCH 4/4 ) once all carving chisels were super-sharp we tested them on a pine wood (why pine ? because here in Peru pine always tells the truth ... if the tool isn't sharp enough the pine will show it) --- >>> for a clean cut I am referring to the RESULT.JPG picture, the area second from the left:
# 2
Than, with each gouge, in a very hard wood we made ​​10 x 1 - 1.5 cm deep cross-cut. Reference Hard_wood.jpg picture.
Not sure of the tree specie of this Peruvian Hardwood, but the wood was hard as a bone.... Imagine what happened to the tool's super-edge, trying to cut through the grain for 1.0 - 1.5 cm?
# 3
After 10 cross-cuts were made in hardwood, the verdict of a truth telling jury, the pine wood as to edge retention was.....verdict is in the RESULT.JPG picture
Conclusion - As far as the edge retention, today and to me, and to my eye, there is only one clear winner Two Cherries (Kirshen - Made in Germany)
Is there a Woodcarving Metallurgist in the room = yup me !
Steel for carving-tools is a trade-off between hardness and brittleness (opposite is ductility). A hard tool will hold an edge but is prone to chipping so requires some ductility hence every wood-carving tool is the comprimise chosen by each mannufacturer. We have a raft of tests to determinine if a steel grade is meeting the spec ad hardenability (response to quenching) is determined by The Jominy End Quench Test. The hardness of the tool is finally chosen by the parameters used in the tempering-process (time at temperature, quenching rate degress/second). The Quenching diagram is a CCC-curve or continuious cooling curve specific to the alloy.
I am a Pfiel fan and cannot find-out what grade they use but suspect it's a rather closer to complex Surgical-stainless-steel than a high-carbon chrome-grade. I'm thinking this wayb because that would combine hardness and enough ductility to avoid the tool snapping or chipping of the edge.
If someone can tell me what Two Cherries are ade from I can pass comment. However the hardening and tempering process may differ vastly. A slow quench is used to avoid cracking and the medium is usually oil but it could be almost anything from a compressed air-blast to water.
For the end-user, it is a Ford vs Chevy thing.
(And the maufacturer wants it that way, this creates a brand-loyalty)
Old fashioned 'Cast' Steel (forged Crucible-steel) is good . . .
An overlooked factor
Before diamond stones were in common use "Sharpenability" was a a major concern. Not being able to get an edge on a "glass hard" tool would be a problem. A slightly softer tool is easier to touch-up on an oil-stone. However I guess Peif are reliying in a fine dispersion of hard carbides in a softer-matrix, which would optimize this issue. I'm assuming they are using a Surgical Stainless grade but cannot be certain . . .
This forum post is now archived. Commenting has been disabled