Thread: Help with choosing a finishing stone

[quote=hoglahoo;268321]Bart, would you mind directing me to those results?/quote]
They're in a thread called "Scratch Pattern Pictures", in which I ended up posting about my experiments. http://straightrazorpalace.com/246781-post12.html and another post in the same thread: http://straightrazorpalace.com/258733-post15.html
All suggestions for further testing are more than welcome.

Originally Posted by hoglahoo

And are you and Chris proficient at shave quality consistency? I have the ability to seemingly go through the same shaving prep and process each morning with the same equipment and yet get different results each time!

No, we are not. I like to think sometimes about us, straight razor shavers, as athletes: within certain limits, we have good days, better days and super days.
We do try to keep all things as constant as possible, though: for testing neither Chris or I change our stropping sequence, lathering brand and method, or other shaving variables. And we always compare 2 razors against each other, left side of face against right side of face. When test shaving, I only do two passes (one N/S and one S/N) and skip my usual 3th pass doing touch-ups and additional strokes where needed. I also do most of my test shaves on a 2 day beard, at night when I have plenty of time. If the circumstances are different, I enjoy shaving with one of my other straights.

Best regards,
Bart.

That's great Bart! I'm looking forward to the results as well.

But it really surprises me to hear that you couldn't discern much difference in the edges from your various coticules. Granted that most of mine are very comparable as well, there are still two that define the boundaries; one is just slightly improving on the Belgian Blue and the other is up there with the Thuringers.

Originally Posted by Russel Baldridge

It really surprises me to hear that you couldn't discern much difference in the edges from your various coticules. Granted that most of mine are very comparable as well, there are still two that define the boundaries; one is just slightly improving on the Belgian Blue and the other is up there with the Thuringers.

It surprised me too. Allow me to emphasize again that we're talking only about the use of coticules as a finisher without slurry. But even so, I can clearly see differences in the scratch patterns under 40 X magnification. But, when it came to actual shaving, neither Chris or I found any real difference in performance of the razors. Maybe someone else could (there goes the audiophiles analogy again) On the other hand, we were perferctly able to identify the razor that was only honed till the DMT1200 level in the first experiment, and the one that was only honed till the blue with slurry level in the second experiment.
With our third experiment (still going on, so it's really too early to tell much) it seems like minor differences are showing up in the feel of that secondary microbevel, but it is unconfirmed whether Chris notices the same differences (which might add some significance to that observation). Even then, the differnce seems only in the perceived keeness of the blade. I called my wife in the bathroom, for close inspection of both face halves after shaving one half with razor A and the other with razor B. She could not see, feel, smell or hear any difference.
Please note also, that so far, we've only compared three coticules, the same in each experiment.
I deliberately chose them out of my collection leaving out the most stray of the dogs.
Something I like about the secondary microbevel method, for the sake of experimenting is that,it really reveals the potential of the final hone. I would like to do another series with the same method, using 4 other stones. Maybe bigger differences will emerge from that.

There's even a more controversial thought that has entered my mind. Belgian hones cut with round particles. This leaves a rather gentle, wavy scratch pattern. Theoretically, if the blue has larger particles, it's possible that it produces a wider but also more shallow scratch pattern. If I understand correctly, the Belgians do the actual cutting with the segments of those rhomboid particles. A larger sphere also means less acute segments. This all leaves me wondering about the capablities of a microbevel from a blue with water only. Something I'm planning to try in the nearby future. If it turns out promising, I'll add one of those edges to the next "double blind" experiment. That's part of the fun of doing this: I can fumble a bit around with the hones, and if I think I'm on to something, it can be fully tested in the experiment.

Thanks for discussing this with me,

Bart.

I totally agree with the secondary bevel thing. There's no use in polishing the entire bevel with a finishing stone if the microbevel is all that matters.

I could see that happening with the Blue, but there are other factors involved like wieght distribution over the abrasives etc., my guess is that since it doesn't really do well with a traditional bevel, it may not make a difference on a microbevel, but then again, you never know till you try.

Just for the record and I don't own one .............. but ........


The people who sell the Belgian coticule who should (?) know what they are talking about say that the size of the cutting particles on both the blue and the yellow are the same. There are more of the particles released for cutting on the yellow than the blue.

Also a slurry will release even more cutting garnets on both types of hone.

Originally Posted by English

Just for the record and I don't own one .............. but ........


The people who sell the Belgian coticule who should (?) know what they are talking about say that the size of the cutting particles on both the blue and the yellow are the same. There are more of the particles released for cutting on the yellow than the blue.
Also a slurry will release even more cutting garnets on both types of hone.

As a matter of fact, I have asked this directly to Maurice Celis, mine engineer and proprietor of Ardennes Coticule. He said garnet size of the Coticule is within a range of 5 to 15 micron and the Blue Whetstone within 10 to 20 micron. Let's assume that the largest particles define the hone's fineness. That still leaves us with a 33% particle size increment from the blue to the yellow. One also needs to bring into account that there most likely are differences in agressiveness between the garnets.

At the same time, the speed difference between any blue with slurry and most coticules with slurry is so obviously big that they really are to be considered two different hones. A coticule can be put to use as a bevel setter, while that same task would take eons on a blue.

Bart.