Pricking Iron Or Saddle Stitch?

[Mart99]

Hello,

I have an issue with holes made by my pricking iron (or probably with my saddle stitching technique). Due to my almost non-existent experience of around 2 weeks, I can't understand what's at fault here.

Here is a problem:

I make holes with Joseph Dixon pricking iron #9. When stitching I put the second needle behind the first one and on exit of the second needle I throw the thread over it (towards me). I do this in an attempt to get slanted stitches on both sides (the technique may well be wrong). Stitches on both sides are slightly slanted, but the holes look too large for stitches used:

I will post some better quality pictures later on, but would you think this is to do with the iron producing holes that are too long, or my stitching is at a serious fault here, which results in the thread being pushed towards the top of the stitch? Any recommendations on how to fix that? Would Vergez Blanchard pricking iron #9 produce shorter holes?

Thanks in advance and sorry if the topic has been raised a 1000 times already, couldn't find any reports of similar issues here...

[Macca]

are you punching all the way through ? The dixons irons are best used to mark the stitching then use an awl to cut through the leather, although for a wallet its probably thin enough not to matter.

On a No.9 the teeth are quite wide so it looks about right

The holes will close up a bit over time

Its hard to say on your technique without seeing it

Have a look at Nige's videos on youtube, he uses dixons as well

Some great vids there

https://www.youtube.com/user/Nordicbadger/videos

[camano ridge]

A pricking iron is normally used to mark the stitch holes not to make them. After marking the holes you would use a diamond awl to actually make the holes. The holes will heal up some around the thread giving a tighter looking hole. The pricking iron tines are tapered so the further you push them into theleather the bigger the hole. Refer to the Al stohlman book on stitching or watch the video by Leodis Leather on saddle stitching. Looks like Macca and I were typing at the same time sorry about the duplication here is a link to Niegels video

Edited September 2, 2013 by camano ridge

[Ski]

If the holes seem too big, try a thicker thread? Although your picture lacks detail, stitching looks good to me

[silverwingit]

I'm with Ski. You have to match the thread to the width of the pricking iron slits.

I'll also underscore the point about only marking the holes with the iron. If you drive the iron all the way through the leather, especially thick leather, you'll end up with gargantuan holes compared to following the pricking iron slit marks with a good sharp awl.

You need to get your pricking iron technique down and then ensure that your thread is the proper size for that iron.

Good luck,

Michelle

[Mart99]

Ok, reached for a piece of leather that shows this issue better

Thanks Macca, camani ridge and Ski,

I am indeed punching all the way through, but judging by a few videos on youtube, some leatherworkers do punch the holes through all the way for smaller items:

Trying a thicker thread will add another piece of puzzle - I understand Hermes artisans mostly use Lin Cable 532 or 632 for small accessories, as well as Vergez Blanchard pricking irons, but I, for some reason, thought they use #9? I could also see on some pictures online, no matter how wide the hole, stitches seem to almost ideally run from one hole to the next, while in my case it either starts or ends in the middle. So, yes, feels like I'll have to start from scratch with my tools:)

[Macca]

thats a blanchard punch, smaller teeth than the dixons

Notice also he is pulling the threads at a significant angle, skip to 2:57 onwards, look at the angle of the piece relative to how he pulls to tighten the stitching, that will put the stitching in the corners I reckon

Give that a go ?

Definitely nothing wrong with the tools, Nigel manages the stitching you are looking for with dixons, could be thread thickness or something in your technique

Edited September 2, 2013 by Macca

[Matt S]

It may be a bit of a daunting task, but many users will thin a Dixons pricking iron. They are notorious for having very thick teeth.

[Jax]

I think Matt hit the nail on the head there, the newer Dixons pricking irons do seem to have larger teeth, the last time I bought a new one (many moons ago) I asked if they could make the teeth smaller, I used to be able to call into the factory & often took a piece of leather with marks punched to give them an idea of what I wanted, they were always happy to adjust the tool & it only took a few minutes, I've not bought from them in a long time so don't know what they are like now, but they were always very helpful & friendly when I was buying my tools. These days I tend to look out for old pricking irons, they do have much finer teeth.

[camano ridge]

Here is some great info on Dixon Pricking irons including how to use them sizing and a video on proper use. http://www.sharkdesigns.co.uk/bushcraft/Products%20Folder/leather_tools/dixons_pricking_irons_2_teeth.html

Edited September 2, 2013 by camano ridge

[Mart99]

thats a blanchard punch, smaller teeth than the dixons

Notice also he is pulling the threads at a significant angle, skip to 2:57 onwards, look at the angle of the piece relative to how he pulls to tighten the stitching, that will put the stitching in the corners I reckon

Give that a go ?

Definitely nothing wrong with the tools, Nigel manages the stitching you are looking for with dixons, could be thread thickness or something in your technique

Thanks Macca,

I actually tried the same angle in pics above, but didn't look like it helped. I mean, if I do not put the knot in, the angle of stitches on the front does get quite steep, while the stitches on the back straighten-up. But as soon as I throw the thread over the right-hand needle, the angle gets shallower (although visible on both sides) and the thread gets pushed to the upper side of the holes.

Tried to follow Nigel's videos word by word, but never managed to get steep angles of stitches on both sides, no matter what thickness of the thread I used (This is something I will ask in the forum thread about his videos)

As for the punch, yes, looks like he uses Vergez Blanchard irons throughout his process, but which number would you think the one in the video is? I can't figure out, is it #9 or #10?

It may be a bit of a daunting task, but many users will thin a Dixons pricking iron. They are notorious for having very thick teeth.

That's what I thought of doing, but then decided not to, as I'm now planning to sell both irons I've got (8 & 9) and buy a Vergez Blanchard. So if someone buys them off me, the irons will be in the original condition.

I think Matt hit the nail on the head there, the newer Dixons pricking irons do seem to have larger teeth...

Thanks Jax,

Quite frustrated though as was hoping the #9 would be the one I would be able to use in the majority of projects, very keen on starting to design and stitch, there are effectively no irons I can use for that. Ordering each one and waiting for a month before they arrive takes a bit of a patience as well.

Here is some great info on Dixon Pricking irons including how to use them sizing and a video on proper use. http://www.sharkdesigns.co.uk/bushcraft/Products%20Folder/leather_tools/dixons_pricking_irons_2_teeth.html

Thanks Camano ridge, I found that link a while back, but it doesn't say what length (or rather, width) each tooth is. The article also mentions the pricking iron can be used to punch all the way through, if the awl is not used.

Edited September 3, 2013 by Mart99

[Jax]

Whereabouts are you Mart?

[Mart99]

based in London

[Macca]

I think your thread it too thin for the holes, it wont fill them if thats what you are after

I dont have a 9 pricking iron, but heres a pic I just did with a 10 (10SPI, 11 teeth, Dixons iron)

black thread is 0.6mm tiger thread

white thread is lin cable 832 (probably the thinnest hand stitching thread there is)

everything else is the same, marked with the iron, holes opened with an awl, same needles, angles etc

white thread does not fill the holes, a bit like your pic

thread is too thin for the iron (assuming you want it to look full, your stitching looks fine in the second pics you posted in all honesty)

[oltoot]

Your stitching technique looks A+. To finish more satisfactorily try pounding over the line with a smooth faced hammer. This will usually close the holes back up a little and make everything look more uniform and finished. Osborne's little # 6 hammer is just about right. With the wallet on your marble slab, just a little tap, tap and voila!

[Macca]

thats a very good tip

Ive stopped doing grooves for stitching and now finish with a hammer or bone to flatten out the stitching

heres one thats 8SPI

Edited September 3, 2013 by Macca

[Mart99]

I think your thread it too thin for the holes, it wont fill them if thats what you are after

I dont have a 9 pricking iron, but heres a pic I just did with a 10 (10SPI, 11 teeth, Dixons iron)

black thread is 0.6mm tiger thread

white thread is lin cable 832 (probably the thinnest hand stitching thread there is)

Thanks for the very visual post Macca, it does clearly show the issue - thread to hole ratio. The thread I used on the images was lin cable 632, but judging by the image, am I correct in assuming that even number 10 iron won't do the trick with that thread thickness?

Your stitching technique looks A+. To finish more satisfactorily try pounding over the line with a smooth faced hammer. This will usually close the holes back up a little and make everything look more uniform and finished. Osborne's little # 6 hammer is just about right. With the wallet on your marble slab, just a little tap, tap and voila!

Thanks oltoot, glad the technique looks good:) I've just tried hammering the stitches, albeit with a chunky steel hammer that works better with nails, and they do indeed look better. But the holes are too big still, and even though the thread is flattened, it doesn't fill the holes. So will try the hammering tip once I get an iron much better suited for the thread (and get to invest in a proper hammer for leatherwork)

[Macca]

No.10 with 632 might be ok, its almost 20% thicker than 832, might still be a bit thin, 532 is probably better

I hate these sizes !

so in mm

832=0.43mm

632=0.51mm

532=0.57mm

432=0.63mm

332=0.77mm

for a No.9 I'd probably go with 332, although its a big jump from 432, so not sure (yeah, 0.14mm is a big jump apparently )

could be worth ordering a sample card, will let you try, bit cheaper than spending 35 Euro a time to try a new size

http://www.sajou.fr/en/colour-charts-all-ranges-fil-au-chinois/4776-fil-au-chinois-waxed-cable-linen-thread-thickness-sample-card.html

a nice smooth faced cobblers hammer will sort out flattening the stitching without doing any damage

[Mart99]

Thanks for another detailed response, Macca! Just placed an order for Vergez Blanchard 10/10 and 10/2, let's see how they work:)

Thanks again to everyone who helped clarify this!

[Macca]

New thread would have been cheaper, no ?

[Mart99]

It probably would, but my target is currently to produce small leather items, so I would like the thread thinner, hence want to stick with 632 and 532 for the time being. To my taste, 332 would look too bulky on a small wallet (or any wallet for that matter). At the end of the day, if I don't like the new pricking irons, I can always sell them - with good care, they shouldn't lose too much of their price.

[Dangerous Beans]

Thanks for another detailed response, Macca! Just placed an order for Vergez Blanchard 10/10 and 10/2, let's see how they work:)

Thanks again to everyone who helped clarify this!

I feel this is a little late but maybe useful for future buyers. A lot of good advice on here and mostly saying the same thing. It is very important to get the relationship of the hole and thread right.

Mart, your stitching looks good, but your holes do look quite large.

Dixon's do the slimline irons as Jax mentioned, they are 1.2mm thick as opposed to the 3.5mm monsters they show on the web, but you need to ask for them. They don't advertise this, they also do the 2 prong irons good for tight bends again, upon request.

They are the same price and made to order.

A bit late now you've put an order in with Blanchard, I've never used them, but I don't think you'll be disappointed with them. They are supposed to be the best available.

Nige

[Tannin]

Interesting thread. It sounds like 3.5mm is Dixon's standard size (but why so big?) - perhaps, the thinner 1.2mm requires custom grinding and is only done upon special request? However, when I ordered my pricking iron from Joseph Dixon Ltd., I was very careful to specify "slim" at several points (including in email & on the phone) but the one they sent produces holes which seem way too long (yes, I would estimate 3.5mm - but I will check) and they said it had to be made to order. If you mark your stitching line ~6mm from the edge (per several of Nigel's excellent videos), the pricking iron cuts scarely close to the edge. Thinking of contacting them, rather than continuing to grumble.

Meantime, I purchased a cheap but good set of 3 Estone pricking irons from Amazon and they work very well, just as I would hope & expect - they are 8 spi & would likely suit small work like mart99's original post.

Macca, good tip about using thicker thread - although I am already using 0.8mm Tiger thread & thicker threads - & nice examples of applying oltoot's suggestions. Thanks for sharing.

It may be a bit of a daunting task, but many users will thin a Dixons pricking iron. They are notorious for having very thick teeth.

I think Matt hit the nail on the head there, the newer Dixons pricking irons do seem to have larger teeth, the last time I bought a new one (many moons ago) I asked if they could make the teeth smaller, I used to be able to call into the factory & often took a piece of leather with marks punched to give them an idea of what I wanted, they were always happy to adjust the tool & it only took a few minutes, I've not bought from them in a long time so don't know what they are like now, but they were always very helpful & friendly when I was buying my tools. These days I tend to look out for old pricking irons, they do have much finer teeth.

Interesting. Did you see how they did it - using a bench-grinder perhaps? Not really what you'd expect after paying so much for a tool and postage (their shipping charge is by far the highest I have come across - & why both to rush it when they take more than a week to process the order - the pricking iron was made to order - & I was in no hurry).

Edited August 18, 2014 by Tannin

[Tannin]

BTW Does the width of the awl play any part in this? (e.g. Even if the pricking iron cuts overly long slots - woud using a narrow awl help keep the holes small?). I thought awl blades only varied in length but another thread on this forum had some discussion on awl blade widths.

[Jax]

I like my awl to pretty well match the prickmark if it is too small it will be easy to make your hole in either the top or bottom of the mark if you are not carefull, making your stitching look untidy.

My preference is a small mark & small stitches but that's just me its a personal thing everyone is different. I would give Dixons a call & see if they will make things right for you, as I said earlier in this post it's been a good few years since I dealt with them & things may have changed. I never saw how the tools were modified, they used to just take a stock item off into the workshop, a few minutes later they would return with a hot, modified tool which was then wrapped carefully in oiled brown paper, the guys there in those days were lovely.

I really hope they make things right for you.