Printable View
The more I hear the more i'm inclined to feel that I have made an error. However both these are full hollow not wedges- but ddd has nothing like a wide bevel Seraphim showed. obviously though they would by nature of the beast behave differently from the get go.Quote:
Originally Posted by Jimbo
We were talking about bevel width, not about bevel angle, weren't we?Quote:
Originally Posted by kevint
Of course bevel angle does matter. But a wider bevel doesn't automatically mean a steeper angle. There's no immediate way to tell which one of your two shavers has the steepest angle, and even then, within the typical range on razor's cutting angles, all instances can be made to perform outstandingly. From what I read in your first post, I don't think your Double Duck shaves outstandingly.
Agreed. If you look at a bevel as a miniature version of a wedge, than a wide bevel is stiffer than an equally wide part of a razor with a narrower bevel. (unless we consider convex edges too) But it would only be a very small contributor to the total flexibility of a razor. That said, I don't really see how flexibility is related to sharpness.Quote:
Originally Posted by kevint
That is highly speculative. I think that overhoning happens when the ratio between edge width and honing particles allow for the honing particles to eat parts of the very edge, in such way that the edge starts to fall apart. Bending stresses are part of the process, but they are not related to the kind of flexibility English was talking about.Quote:
Originally Posted by kevint
To add another data point, I have often noticed that a lightweight razor is much less forgiving to a slight lack of keenness that a heavier blade. I think that is due to inertia. I also think that "the weight factor" outweighs "the flex factor", but that's something I can't back up.
yes I may have gotten off task there somewhat referring to angle rather than width. But instead of thinking about the full spectrum of possibilities of multiple razor types, what I am considering; changing the angle to steeper incline with multiple tape layers will narrow the bevel. the edge should the become somewhat less flexible as the supporting geometry will be thicker. which may not mean anything conclusive if there is some honing flaw that could be more easily corrected... ultimately though what could have been is less important to me than getting this duck to cut and it's never done that well with what i've done so far:shrug:
Kevint,
I think you have a 4/8" razor in its prime and a DD that when new was 6/8" and now is 5/8".
If you don't like the DD feel there is nothing you can do about it. It is what it is.
If you look at the blade from the front you will see a Y shape. Look at the two blades and see if you can tell which should be the more flexible blade.
also if you consider that the DD used to be a 6/8" blade and is now a 5/8" blade, you can imagine how much of the thinner part of the blade has been honed away.
Playing with tape will not effect the geometry in the way that the past honing has reduced the flexible part of the blade.
Some like this stiffer type of blade. If you don't, just move it on to a new home were it will be cherished and cared for another 50 years.
Quote:
Originally Posted by kevint
It doesn't affect the shave one bit at all, now for edge life I have found that slightly steeper angles (1 layer of tape) last longer, to just answer your questions, of course as with everything in this hobby,,, YMMV :tu
Good call, it's all about what suits your personal tastes.Quote:
Originally Posted by English
As for re-honing it, if the blade doesn't take an edge with the stock bevel angle, adding tape won't make it better all of a sudden. It might make the honing go faster if the angle is too steep but there's no reason you should have to use more than one layer of tape.
I do appreciate greatly your time gents. I believe I will listen to the advices as I re honed on a much finer stone last night and got a much better shave. At the moment I am growing more beard to see if the shumate is improved off the same stone.
English if you don't mind re-explaining the proper way to measure: "For me the true BLADE width is the measurement between the blades edge and the edge of the honing edge closest to the blade edge."
Just to be sure I follow, then I can measure it properly.
Its full width near the middle is 13/16 approximately
I think I can explain what English means, but if I get it wrong, by all means correct me.
If you look at Seraphim's razor, there is about 1/8 inch or so of material on the spine that does not touch the honing surface. The effective width of the blade stops at the polished surfaces on the spine because anything beyond that point is superfuous and does not effect the cutting angle.
It has more do do with accurately measuring the bevel angle than anything; the width of the spine at the polished areas and the distance from those areas to the edge of the blade define a triangle that has a specific bevel angle. If you were to include the portion of the spine beyond those polished spots in the length measurement, the calculation would give a different, and inaccurate, result.
So to be completely accurate, if that blade were an 8/8, the mathematically useful measurement would be more like 7/8. But for the sake of convention, you can label it 8/8 since some roundness of the spine is expected.
Correct this if needed. The overall width between the polished surfaces(thus in contact with the stone) outside to outside , equals razor size.
Quote:
Originally Posted by kevint
Hmmmmmm, in some people's and some (few) manufacturer's opinions, Most of the NOS razors that you find with actual sizes marked on them, were measured from the top of the spine, to the edge of the blade, thus the overall width of the blade.....