Printable View
I would love to hear a moderators personal experience with the stone along with why he does not think it is well known as of yet.Granted it may have to do with the fact that they have only been avail for a couple months or so plus or minus but they way you said this I cant help but think your personal experience with it makes me think there may be other reasons.Quote:
Originally Posted by mainaman
After reading I can see where this may have come off wrong. My point is as an experienced honer is there something about the performance of this stone that you thinks contributes to its relative unknown status or is it simply due to its relative new availability.Quote:
Originally Posted by JimmyWetshaver
Since it is a natural hone, it has been around for a while, the fact we have not heard about it here means it is either not quite suitable for razor or it was known only to a very narrow circle of people. We'll know more when it is tested thoroughly.Quote:
Originally Posted by JimmyWetshaver
There are hones that pop up for a while become "trendy" people buy them then most all go back to Eschers, J-Nats, Naniwas, Shaptons the usual hones that have been used for many years and are proven to work. Very rarely a new kind of hone that pops up is actually what it is advertised to be and is accepted by the community.
I can see that. This setting is probably where a lot of that filtering often takes place and being new (in relative terms) to a Straight Razor Forum I probably never was exposed to the ones that "didnt make it". I certainly dont see this taking the place of an Escher or respective jnats for sure but it can have its place in a natural progression for some I think. Ive already stated it isnt my finisher of choice but it does have a nice slot for me at the moment. I am curious to hear more experiences with it as time goes on (thus the ?). Thanks for clarifying.Quote:
Originally Posted by mainaman
For the record on the paper test, I have seen electron microscope photos of a shave-ready straight razor edge that was pretty badly rolled by cutting a few cm of printer paper. Thinner paper will likely do exactly the same if one cuts more of it. Once the edge starts to roll - even on that small scale - the damage will just snowball from there. This is why I will never personally use it on a finished edge. Below is a photo of the edge rolled by paper at 5,000x magnification, as well as the photo's original caption.
Attachment 191739
https://scienceofsharp.wordpress.com...a-burr-part-2/Quote:
The straight razor edge from the previous image after cutting a few centimeters of bond paper. The foil is fully removed;however, the edge is rolled/folded and visibly damaged.
That was my reasoning for not using it beyond 1k. I don't like the idea of the TPT on finished or near finished edges for the same reason.Quote:
Originally Posted by eKretz
The simple fact is that a razor, especially a full hollow, does not have the geometry to support cutting paper & all the belief systems that knife sharpeners want to carry over to razors don't always apply, no matter how hard they want to argue the point.
No quote. General answer to the last several posts.
I will not attempt to argue the point of paper cutting. Obviously regular readers here will never accept the possibility of his being acceptable, long enough to learn to use it. It makes no difference to me if you only have a lot of different tests that only test at specific points. That said, You may want to consider what you are looking at in the previous post, and compare it to your own 200x pictures. These most recent pictures are 25X more magnified. Where are the striations? Even a strop would have left more than are in this picture. You are looking at a rolled edge approx. .0001 mm wide, across the roll .005 mm will comfortably shave your face. Check the 0's. It means nothing without the before picture and a picture from after just 1 shave. And as everyone here has already accepted, a magnified picture will not tell what will shave well, only the shave will do that. I saw a study done with numerous electron microscope pictures and explanations some time back, including actual measurements. The study showed pictures taken at different stages of finishing an edge. One outcome of the study was pronounced to indicate that stropping on leather has no benefit. You all believe that don't you? The proof is in the pudding. Anyone not willing to bake the pudding will never find the proof. Nothing I can say, or pictures I can show, will change that.
Cheers,
Yes, as simple as that.Quote:
Originally Posted by onimaru55
Paper has been tried numerous times and in numerous ways over the years.
It's not like this is something new, far from it.
It is not an ideal test on a razor, it's simply too abrasive and damaging to a fragile structure like a razors edge.
The whole obsessive testing of the edge is basically crutches to the less experienced imho.
The hones, once you know them and the steel put on them well enough, will tell you all you really need.
A few arm hairs at bevel set perhaps, a couple more when finishing, is ample.
The thumbpad test, once dialled in, can be useful too.
In addition to the shave test.
OK now that's just insulting. Because someone regularly reads this message board it makes them a closed-minded pinhead?Quote:
Originally Posted by bigeasy1
As far as your other points, first, there are striations visible on that razor, they are just very shallow. If you had followed the link and read a moment you'd have seen that the razor in question was honed on a 16k Shapton, then a pasted hanging leather strop was used with .5 micron diamond abrasive. 1 micron is .001mm, so we're talking diamond particles that are .0005mm in diameter. On hanging leather which lets the particles push away rather than cut deeply. How on earth are you expecting to see deep striations?
Second, there is no way in hell you are going to shave comfortably with a .005mm (5 micron!) apex width on a razor. Average comfortable shaving width for a razor apex that I've seen bandied about is under .5 micron, or .0005mm.
Third, of course bare leather stropping does something. It aligns and straightens the edge/apex and removes burrs. Enough laps can start to burnish slightly, but isn't going to make large structural changes to an edge. If you are seeing something like that when stropping then you likely have contamination on your strop.
The general point here is that cutting paper with a finished edge (shave-ready) razor will damage the edge. Will it damage the edge more than a shave? Maybe, maybe not. But why would you want to start your first shave with a fresh honed razor with an edge that has been damaged enough to where it might as well be your second shave or more? Personally I'd prefer to let that damage occur during the shaves, not prior to them.
Cutting paper with a straight is an absolute no-go.
Paper does not only have clay but also sometimes metals (paint has included heavy metals i.e.) and fibres (glas and plastic fibres you will find in recycled paper, newspaper, etc.) included that can easily destroy an edge, even if it occurs only in very small particles.
I remember one of my first sharpening course with an old german grinding and honing master several years ago. We normally used paper to test the sharpeness of our kitchen and pocket knifes and that works fine. One day somebody brougth a straight into the course, sharpened it and began to test with paper. We only heard a loud scream from the master that he should never do this again, otherwise he will be expulsed from the course immediately. And the old masters knew exactly what they were doing.
No insult was intended toward anyone. Seems to me that if someone posted that he had successfully honed a good number razors, finishing with 0000 steel wool, and I knew he was being serious, I would want to ask some questions and try to learn his method, before I simply remarked "No Way". I'm a little insulted that some here seem to want to make me out to be an idiot, or a liar, since it is my professed method they are saying cannot work, or is certain to damage the edge. But then, as mentioned in an earlier post, I was expecting flames. I was on another forum where someone remarked that he had just come from a "razor meet" where they proved in mere seconds that cutting paper would damage the razor. Hmm, I wonder if that is how long he took to learn HHT? Yes, anyone can cut a piece of paper with a razor, that doesn't mean he has learned the method, any more than a newbie being able to cut a few whiskers has learned to shave.Quote:
Originally Posted by eKretz
I work a 10 hour a day job and stay busy with razors once I get home, and often fall asleep at the computer, as some of you may notice the times of the posts. But you guys are going to force me to post 500X pictures of edges before and after cutting paper, aren't you. I'm afraid once I do, there will still be droves of nay sayers.
You'll want the pics?
Dude, nobody is saying you can't do whatever you like. Or calling you a liar. If your method works for you, use it, by all means. At the same time, don't rag on people who don't want to use it. You are facing an uphill battle here because many of us have already tried cutting paper and found it damaging. Your analogy with steel wool is a little off-base IMO, there is only one way to cut paper with a blade. A 500x picture will not show the damage clearer than a 5000x image, but if you would like to post your images go right ahead. I hope you will at least use several types of varying lighting so it will be an objective view. There is no arguing that cutting paper will not damage a fine edge on a razor in my opinion. Every time I have ever done it for more than a very short distance it has made my edge go backward, judged from hanging hair testing. Let me ask you this... Do you strop after cutting the paper? If so, why do you do it if there's no edge damage?Quote:
Originally Posted by bigeasy1
Interesting observation; It looks to me that if the rolled edge in the picture was stropped and the edge broke off where there is an obvious crack, the resulting edge width would be around .5 microns.Quote:
Originally Posted by eKretz
My take on the whole paper cutting thing is that it is a probing test that causes some damage, similar to the TNT and may be useful around the 1k level, like the TNT. Personally I would not recommend either of those tests above the 1k level and I would always follow the test with more laps at 1k to correct the damage.
The edge width after breaking off that roll might be shaveable but I think it would take a LOT of stropping to get there. Possibly requiring some form of paste stropping. .5 micron would be the upper threshold for a shave I believe... Maybe even a little too wide. As I recall something like .3 or .4 microns was the practical limit. Can't remember where I read that though.Quote:
Originally Posted by bluesman7
Agreed on the paper cutting. At bevel set I'm sure it could be useful, with your caveats.
No one is trying to insult you but to some of us who have been honing razors for decades, your method looks like taking 1 step forward & 2 steps back.Quote:
Originally Posted by bigeasy1
Sharpness is achieved at bevel set. There is no need to test a razor after the bevel set & at that point cutting paper is just as useable as any other destructive test. Beyond that you are spinning your wheels & I for one find it hard to take that seriously..
This is intended for more than just the quoted post. Mr. Onimaru55, you have an uncanny knack for calming a conversation. Guess that is why you are a moderator. You have my full respect sir. I debated a while about posting tonight, and I'm going to bed after this one. To Slurryer and several others that were here to discus a stone, I apologize that was overshadowed. I did warn it was likely to happen. To anyone else who feels that I have tried to belittle their methods, that was never my intent and I believe I have shown a significant restraint to avoid that. I have no problem with anyone's methods.Quote:
Originally Posted by onimaru55
In answer to a question in an earlier post today, Yes, I do strop after testing, after the final honing, I also test after stropping, and am likely to go to the test shave without further stropping. Early in my straight razor honing, I was never able to get a satisfactory shave directly from any hone I tired, and soon found there were easier and quicker methods to that end, and stopped trying to shave from the hone. A couple of months back, honing a C-Mon Blackie, the razor was doing as expected every step of the way, sooner than I expect. When I tested, at what I thought should be the end, the razor floated thru the cut so smoothly, it convinced me it was time to try again from the stone. It was a respectable shave. The next night I did about 20 laps on a cloth strop before shaving, and it was a great shave. I have a method of stropping on cloth that reaches a point I am looking for. That point is best determined by a microscope, or I can tell with a paper cut. the microscope is in the other room, at the computer, and is a cheapy, awkward to use. The pad of paper is right there. Guess I should mention here, I have strops at my honing bench and more in the bathroom.
In agreement here, cutting paper is a destructive test. It can roll an edge, but it doesn't have to. The lone cut does not have to dull the edge enough to make it noticeably less shave worth, but can be. I started my comments very early with saying there can be potholes learning my method. Rolled edge is only one. I understand that there are many honers with decades of experience that do not test beyond the bevel, and agree that there is normally little need. There are some that have no need to test then, unless using a bevel setter that is new to them. Many of you have ways that are telling you, realizing them or not, when enough is enough.
Many here do not have that level of experience. They are looking for something to test with to help ensure them that they are moving in the right direction. I do not have decades of honing experience. I do have decades of cutting paper to test any number of edged instruments, including very fine edged chef's knives. Granted not as fine or delicate as a straight razor. When I started honing razors, I was not aware of places such as SRP. I had a method to test. It was not an easy transition into razors, but it worked, along with finding some potholes. Maybe my experience with paper cutting lead me to believe it was easy for anyone to learn. Evident that was not the case, by the number of people here who say they tried it a lot without success. But anyone's lack of success doesn't prove that something can't be done, it only proves that this person cannot do it, at this point in time. One picture of failure, does not prove it can't be done. 1,000 pictures of failure do not prove it can't be done.
There are other people here that cut paper. They rarely say so because they know the results, as I mentioned at the beginning when I brought it up. I would not expect anyone, including myself, to go to a lot of effort to learn something they have no need for, and have learned, and have been taught, doesn't work. Not my loss or yours on any count.
If anyone feels a need for the pictures, I will provide them. They will not be at several different light levels from different angles, as my scope is not that easy to maneuver, and I expect that would be a lot of pictures, as my intention was to do a shot of an edge ready to shave, a shot after 1 slice, after 3 slices, after 5 slices, after a shave, and then??? I am not going to do it unless there is some indication they will be received openly, and they will have to be done over the week-end. Regardless of pics or not, I will keep an eye on the thread to see if it returns to the original conversation, although I doubt that is going to happen.
All due respects,
I'm sure it will return to the original conversation, this was just a sidebar. And I for one would love to see your pictures.
I feel dumber for having read this thread just now. I've learned less than nothing. I've never bothered to try such paper cutting with straights. Since I have several razors to test things with, I could do that but I still have no idea how this highly defended method is done.
I have another d@mn useless phone book on my porch waiting to go in the trash but supposedly this is not good for testing. A notepad was described as being better but it was not named.
Please, if you are going to promote a method, then make it available for testing. That is, tell me exactly how you do it. What specific paper? What angle of approach to the paper? What depth of cut? What else?
I haven't read beyond a couple of pages in this thread. I just don't have the patience. If it works for you cool. Why do people insist on having the last word in a debate ? There are people that insist that HHT is NOT a reliable method to judge shave readiness. IME it is, and that is what I use as a measure.
Cutting paper. While it is true that not all hair is the same, all of my hair is the same, and I am not testing anyone else's edges. We go on and on about whether coticules, eschers, phigs, &c, are superior to synthetics ...... or not.
If you have found the hones and the tests that work for you ....... solid. Stick with them, and if you are so inclined experiment with further methods/materials. Letting folks know what you're doing and what you've found is laudable. Making it a crusade to spread the gospel of your discoveries, becoming an evangelist of cutting paper is sort of tiresome IMHO. Save a tree, razors are intended to cut hair. OTOH, whatever works for you.
I really don’t see what the problem is.
We all agree it is a destructive test, so is the TNT. Some have calibrated their TNT and use it to good effect.
I do not recommend TNT or Paper test, but if it works for you… go for it.
A lot of us do some crazy, non-conventional stuff, as I know Glenn and Lynn and many other do. It is how we push the edges of the envelope… and we all learn from it.
I've been around here for quite a few years and I've seen them come and go. Folks coming on the scene with this new method and that new method and 90% of them fade into the sunset never to be seen or heard from again. The old tried and true methods are still with us and I guess they are because they work for everybody.
Having said that, there are always people who break all the rules yet they get perfect results. That's fine for that person however for the masses it's usually something to stay away from. Sometimes some new method does catch on but that's the exception.
In many ways we're like the scientific community and this is the place for peer review to decide of something new will fly or not.
Whether it becomes mainstream or not depends on what we all think of it after evaluation.
This is something that occurs on every forum, it's the "other people are dumb and they came to their method because they heard it from someone else, and nobody has ever thought about it like we have" rule.
And that is, to me, the notion that you can just mentally engineer something that is better than a method that has come about as a result of incremental improvement over time. Usually someone who sticks in a hobby or profession long enough realizes sooner or later that the experts in a specific area tend to know more than the people who are experts in another area attempting to hammer square pegs in round holes.
It's especially prevalent in woodworking hand tools, too. I call it the "engineering" solution, and that offends engineers (I am in a related field, though, so it should offend me, too, if it offends them). That is, that engineers or notorious for getting into a hobby and before they learn why things are the way they are, they say "I could easily engineer something better than this from scratch". Exposure to the hobby brings the realization that millions of hours of incremental improvements built into something makes it fairly hard to actually just "improve" on such things off the cuff.
+1 for the before and after paper test 500x pics.
Also in public writing (or speaking), if you use an outside reference, aren't you supposed to "cite" the specifics of the reference so that all may search the validity and value of the reference. I for one would enjoy reading that study and reviewing the 5000x photos.
I'm sure my $.02 is wothless here, but I am enjoying the show.:D
Other than basic courtesy, I don't think there is much that we are "supposed" to do here.Quote:
Originally Posted by ChopperDave
Yes, citing an outside reference or source certainly is helpful but I don't think everyone is aware of even the need.
Im NO expert here, I work in the filter industry, and the company buy's in special paper for making the filters (DAM expensive) made to much higher tolerances than a phone book or a cheap set of note pad paper, and yet there are imperfections and quality issues.
My point being, with all the things added to the paper you are cutting, you will be cutting a different composition each time you cut, even in the same piece of paper, there is just no consistency.
(I am NOT saying it wont work) just saying I dont feel its a consistent method
"Cutting paper is not harder to learn than the HHT. Like the HHT results improve with experience, and interpretation. I buy cheap 5x8 notepads, available in a 10 pk, that will last most well over a year. Much more consistent than random hairs. Much more consistent from user to user, than random hairs."
(The above paragraph was quoted from Bigeasy1 from page 4)
I dont understand how it can be more consistent (Please note Im also not saying it will be any less consistent either)
I doubt that paper cutting will ever be a standard method of testing. As I said, I tried it at the bevel setting stage and found that it correlated well with my TNT. I may never use it again, but I'm certainly glad I gave it a brief try. Nothing ventured.
I'm finding the thread very interesting though. I think different tests work better for different people. I can't tell anything with a thumb pad test for example.
One of my two earthy fathers taught me to hone a pocket knife when I was 14 or so. He was a carpenter, had been raised on a farm, and was very knowledgeable as far as pocket knives and other tools went. I remember him taking a brand new Case XX HC folder and cutting a notch between the edge and the tang with a triangular file. That was so you could hone the edge all the way to the tang.
Then he told me, "Some people say, don't never put a file to a pocket knife, but I can get a bevel a lot quicker with a file so I do." He then would use a flat file, on that brand new knife, and set a bevel. Then came the oilstone. He would get it to where it would easily shave the hair on his leg. It was a good serviceable edge, and I've been doing them that way for 40 years +.
I've tested many an edge on a freshly honed pocket knife cutting paper. It tells me if it is smooth end to end, and if it is sharp enough for 'government work.' I've long since got my pocket knife sharp enough, but not as sharp as it could be, and called it good. So I haven't tried cutting paper with a razor, and I probably won't because it brings to mind fingernails on a chalkboard.
There have been threads suggesting that slightly dulling a Feather DE blade by running the edge through a cork a time or two, will give a better shave than just going for it without that treatment. I never tried that. Figuring it will dull soon enough if I just shave with the thing. OTOH, as my father said, many say don't touch a file to a pocket knife, yet it worked for him, and still does for me. So different strokes and all that. We'd still be living in caves, and carrying clubs, if people didn't try things ...... but back then shaving wasn't a problem either . ;)
And so sayeth Jimmy the peacemaker!
:angel:
Now see, I’ve seen old knives with that notch in them and always wondered what that was for…
Thanks Jim.
Having read the entire thread, I have to agree with Ron, " I learned less than nothing."
I do believe that this thread could be put to good use though,,,:shrug:
Instead of being listed in the "Advanced Honing Topics" section,, it could start off another section titled,,
"Honing Techniques That Are Not Quite There"
A.J Russell sells knives with a notch like that and that means it's a second.Quote:
Originally Posted by Euclid440
If there is no notch at the plunge line, after some time of sharpening the knife will develop a recurve. That means it will be harder to sharpen.Quote:
Originally Posted by Euclid440
The notch is referred to as choil also as sharpening notch (when put after market I think), and helps sharpen the blade even along the whole bevel.
Would someone show a photo of a blade with this notch please? I think I know what is described but I'd appreciate seeing it to be sure.
Tiny one on this swiss army knife
No offense intended to anyone, but since I was a tike and got my first pocket knife I've been told that paper or cardboard will dull a knife faster than anything other than intentionally grinding the edge on a stone. That may have been adults that wanted to reign in an overly "sharp-interested" child, or more likely it was close to the truth.
Cold Steel does that and sisal rope to prove how sharp their blades are, BUT, they have 1000s of them to play around on.
I say, if you have a razor with a paper thin edge (like most do), don't cut anything with it except your beard. Having said that, you can do whatever tests you want with your razors, just don't encourage others to do the same.
Here are a couple. The mint old stock Rogers bone on top is as it came from the factory. The XX green bone, used, has the little notch filed where the blade meets the tang. That way you can hone the whole length of the edge. With the one on top, if you didn't make the notch, you'd run into the tang and as the blade wore, it would be kinda funky ;Quote:
Originally Posted by Utopian
Attachment 191917Attachment 191919
Beautiful knives there and that's a GREAT idea. Good thing your father didn't listen to all the nay Sayers. I have seen many blades honed into the tang. Not pretty. Sometimes you never know until you try.Quote:
Originally Posted by JimmyHAD
are those Texas toothpicks?
my every day carry,belonged to my grandfather,someday i may restore it.
Attachment 191922
Send her to me Pixel, I'll clean her up,,,,,,:beer2:
