Ashley Iles Gouge No 6 from NPU

[nemethmik]

I received this gouge a couple of days ago and my reedmaking process efficiency improved a hell lot. Forget about the Gouges no 3 and 4. No 3 is too shallow, No 4 is OK, but No 6 is the real tool. I received it razor sharp, immediately ready for use. With this gouge I can make the desired "dip" as tought and explained by Benedict Kohler during a reedmaking workshop in Dublin (Tionol 2008). He used a special (Japanese) gouge and a cabinet scraper, and he was able to make the slip deap enough. With this No 6 gouge it is possible to gouge the proper deepness.
The shape of the edge is cut in a way that it is easy to sharpen and perfect for reed gouging.
Miki

[mike spencer]

I have an A.I. #4 but I dont use it much.I use a #6 dastra instead with the end cut at an angle for ease of sharpening.

[billh]

One important and frustrating point about gouges is that the sweep number means little without specifying the width; two gouges with the same sweep, but different widths do not have the same radius of curvature. In general the narrower the gouge, the tighter the radius of curvature for the same notional "sweep number".

The NPU gouges are, IIRC, about 20mm wide. My Ashley Iles, which I personally find the best reedmaking gouge I've come across, is marked "CS1" - which I take to mean "custom sweep 1", totally unhelpful... it used to be the standard NPU gouge but lately they seem to stock only standard Ashley Iles in-cannel sweeps.

I agree that the #3 sweep in 20mm seems to be too shallow for reedmaking. That came as a nasty surprise when I examined one of the #3 NPU gouges recently, as I had previously recommended them (thinking that they were the same as what I was using). I think the #4 is about right - a 20mm #6 gouge, judging from the Ashley Iles graphics anyway, would have too much curvature for my taste, but of course it can be used especially if you rely on sanding cylinders or scrapers to obtain the final inner curve.

With the CS1 (and, I believe, the A.I. #4/20mm - though I haven't got one on hand at the moment), you can form the inner curvature of the slip with the gouge pretty much directly, without sanding. I believe Cillian demonstrates something very like this on the NPU reedmaking DVD. Using such a shallow gouge takes practice, more so than the #6, but I think it pays off once you get the hang of it. With a tighter curve like #6, you have to form the inner curve of the slip with multiple concave 'nibbles'.

If you decide to get an out-cannel gouge and regrind it to in-cannel, make sure it has enough extra length so that the section past the handle is still longer than your slips. Some carving gouges are less than 125 mm long and once you re-grind them they become too short...

regards

Bill

[nemethmik]

With the CS1 (and, I believe, the A.I. #4/20mm - though I haven't got one on hand at the moment), you can form the inner curvature of the slip with the gouge pretty much directly, without sanding. I believe Cillian demonstrates something very like this on the NPU reedmaking DVD. Using such a shallow gouge takes practice, more so than the #6, but I think it pays off once you get the hang of it.

Very important point. I'll reconsider using #4. Unfortunately, unlike #3 and #6, the #4 gouge (from NPU) did not come with the flat in-cannel cutting face that could be easily sharpened. I have to regrind the head a bit to flatten the face.

With a tighter curve like #6, you have to form the inner curve of the slip with multiple concave 'nibbles'.

Absolutely true, but this is exactly what Benedict Kohler and Andreas Rodde does. After gouging Benedict Kohler uses a cabinet scraper to finish the desired curvature, Andreas Rogge uses sanding block, if I am not mistaken. I was not able to form the deepness required by the Kohler or the Rogge method with the #4 without ruining the edge of the slip.
So far I wanted to reproduce the reedmaking methods of Benedick Kohler, Andreas Rogge, Evertjan t'Hart and Dave Hegarty. Dave Hegarty told us that he prefers the bridle to close the lips not to open them. For this reason I tend to make (I am in my learning phase) the slip with a dip.

BTW: The reason I write these here is that the forum messages are archived and I'll be able to search for the comments later in two or three years. I appreciate technical comments. Thank You Mike, Thank You, Bill.
PS: If anyone wants to write a book about piping and pipe making, just review Bill's and Sam's posts here on the forum.

[Uilliam]

I agree wi Bill. Ashley#4 works for me.If ye want to get the perfect curvature for the final scrape( wi out the cabinet scraper aka Benedict) I find the Stanley curved blade No 5193 is the ticket as it just happens to have the exact curve .I discovered this quite by intentional accident when I saw the blades in my local ironmongers and wondered if it would do the job
Slán Go Foill
Uilliam

[Brazenkane]

Bill,

can you confirm your CS1 gouge measurement for me please?

thanks

[nemethmik]

These are the "faces" of the Ashley Iles Gouges No 3, 4 and 6.
No 3 and 6 have flattened face for easy sharpening, No 4 has a curved face. I rewatched the reedmaking video of Cilian O'Brian, thank you Bill for the hint, and he explained that this curved face provides an constant cutting curve that does not change by the angle the gouge is held. The only problem is how to sharpen this edge

[billh]

These are the "faces" of the Ashley Iles Gouges No 3, 4 and 6.
No 3 and 6 have flattened face for easy sharpening, No 4 has a curved face. I rewatched the reedmaking video of Cilian O'Brian, thank you Bill for the hint, and he explained that this curved face provides an constant cutting curve that does not change by the angle the gouge is held. The only problem is how to sharpen this edge

Miki, are you sure that photo shows 3,4,6 in that order? Looks to me like 4,3,6... since the middle one looks flattest.

The gouges that were formerly supplied by NPU (CS1) did not have such a curved edge, and I believe Cillian was the person who spec'd the CS1 gouges. The statement about the "cutting curve not changing with angle" doesn't make sense, it's geometrically impossible...

I would still go with the simpler, flat-faced sharpening approach.

K, width of my CS1 is 19mm (well actually ~18.85, not 20 as I guesstimated earlier). Dip is ~1.03 mm (i.e. total 'depth' across gouge minus metal thickness).

Bill

[nemethmik]

are you sure that photo shows 3,4,6 in that order? Looks to me like 4,3,6... since the middle one looks flattest.

Yes, the photo does not really show the faces of 3, and 4.
I measured my #3 and #4 gouges and both are 19mm wide,
the dip for #3 is 0.8 mm and 1.1 mm for the #4.

The statement about the "cutting curve not changing with angle" doesn't make sense, it's geometrically impossible...
I would still go with the simpler, flat-faced sharpening approach.

How stupid I was! you are right. I'll grind my #4 gouge flat-faced, if I cannot sharpen them with my new Japanese waterstones.

[dean]

A.I. does "special orders". If you want a #X gouge that is M-wide then contact the company. Before I knew that you could contact them directly I went through a specialty tool seller who charged me for the honor of letting him place the order for me.

cheers