A Cry for an Escher Compendium

Eschers are certainly a highly talked about and coveted stone here at SRP. As a fascinate newbie, I have been able to glean some information about these stones, but they remain somewhat esoteric to me. Perhaps this already exists, but what we really need is a guide to Eschers. Something that would include their grit range, variations, what the colors mean, the label issue, possible sources, Thuringian/Escher clarification, and shave characteristics. I feel something of this nature would really help to clear up those ethereal Eschers.

-Hank

Being natural stones it will not be possible to write the ultimate guide on Eschers. They are fine hones, finer than most coticules.

Thus we have HAD. :D

I have been seeking that info for a long time. Seems like Alan Watts remark about Zen,"Those who say don't know. those who know don't say" applies. :) Kidding aside, my impression is that the Dark Blue is something like a 4K to 6K, the Yellow/Green 8 to 10K and the Blue/Gray 12K. I have been fooling with them honing razors and that seems to be an accurate baseline to me. But then maybe I am proving Alan Watt's point. :D

I have spoken to couple of forum members and stone collectors far more experienced then I am on this and they have said that the colors don't mean anything. That natural stones are all unique and you have to try the stone and see where it fits in to your sequence. I have found that true of my three coticules. OTOH, I can't believe that Escher didn't mark their rocks with color labels if it didn't mean something more then the obvious hue of the stone.

I used to think that some of these shaving forums withheld deep secrets that only the "in" members were a party to.

It isn't true. The truth is some of the reasonable questions that are asked just can not be answered. Sometimes we just don't have the information.

One thing I have learnt is that the membership on this forum will give whatever information they have openly and honestly if they have the information.

I have a coticule that is quite hard and a patchy salmon pink/yellow in color.
I have an Escher type stone which is usually described by Escher as "yellow/green". My Escher type stone puts a finer smoother edge on my razors than the coticule.

The Escher is a softer stone and feels more clay like. As to grit size, I haven't got a clue, I can guess that the coticule is 8000 grit and I can guess that the Escher is 12000 grit, but I honestly have not got a clue.

I have used many different types of finishing hone including a spyderco ultrafine, a Thuringien, a chinese 12K and my preference is for the yellow green Escher.

What I have learnt with natural stones is that grit size is just one small part of the equation and personal preferences will vary greatly. It's part of the fun of the hobby. If you don't like these answers and think that the answers are in some way trying to build a mystique about the hones, no problem, stick with the man made stuff which is all clearly graded and documented.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JimmyH-AD

... my impression is that the Dark Blue is something like a 4K to 6K, the Yellow/Green 8 to 10K and the Blue/Gray 12K.

---

Wow, I've never used a Thuringian that seemed to be any less than 10k.

To answer Hank's question; Escher is a brand of Thuringian stone, there are a few variations like J.G. Escher Sohn,J. G. Escher Sons, Escher & Co, E & Co, etc. Escher's are known for being some of the finest Thuringians out there, but that's not to say that all of the finest stones were branded "Escher", I have a couple plain Thuringians that are comparable in every way, and there are even other brands that may have been superior, "Hohenzollern" IIRC is a likely candidate and I can personally vouch for S.R. Droescher stones as being as fine as any Thuringian.

I have created a new thread here to address the Norton issue.

I do hope that someone will provide at least a basic explanation for Hank Williams about the scale of Escher color grades.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by English

What I have learnt with natural stones is that grit size is just one small part of the equation and personal preferences will vary greatly. It's part of the fun of the hobby. If you don't like these answers and think that the answers are in some way trying to build a mystique about the hones, no problem, stick with the man made stuff which is all clearly graded and documented.

---

I thought you might wax philosophical on Natural Stones for a minute...:roflmao

Hank, Eschers are a legendary German razor honing stone. They were sold by several companies including some in the US. One other German company not already mentioned is Fox, the US stones were sold as Barber's Hone etc. by a variety of barber supply houses. Belgian stones were also sold by a number of companies, the most notable one in the US is Pike. The matrix of the Escher stone is chalk and the cutting material is very fine silica, SiO2, also known as quartz. Quartz has a Mohs hardness of 7. The matrix of the Belgian stones is a mixture of clay and volcanic ash and the cutting material is fine garnet, 5-10 microns for the Coticule and 10-15+ microns for the blue. Garnet has a Mohs hardness of 6.5-7.5 depending on which garnet it is. The Belgian stones are harder than the Escher stones. Escher stones work primarily as polishing stones and are usually used without a slurry to give the best result.The Belgian stones are generally used as a natural substitute to the 4K/8K Norton. Thus, they finish setting a bevel (Blue Belgian) and sharpen (Blue Belgian and Coticule) Many straight razor shavers shave off the Belgian stones followed by stropping the razor. But I believe that the consensus is that a few strokes on an Escher before stropping and shaving produces a smoother shave. It's like the difference between a Feather and a Gillette Swede in the DE world. These blades are about the same in sharpness but the Swede is much smoother. I hope that this helps. If I were you, I'd buy a good quality Belgian Blue and Coticule and an Escher, You'll hone some magnificent edges with these stones!

@ Blareau:

Escher recommend you use it with slurry on most labels. Many Eschers come without slurry stone as it was lost. If you have an Escher in its original box you'll notice there's a space for a slurry stone. I have got a Hohenzollern hone with a box that also has a space for a slurry stone but I when I bought it it did not have a slurry stone. As has this one that is on its way to me: http://cgi.ebay.de/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?...EOIBSA:DE:1123

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kees

Escher recommend you use it with slurry on most labels. the problem is many Eschers come without slurry stone as it was lost. If you have an Escher in its original box you'll notice there's a space for a slurry stone.

---

Hohenzollerns had spaces in their wooden boxes for slurry stones as well.;)

Chris L

Is anyone a dual member of a German straight razor community? I would think if anyone should have archival info related to Thuringian hones, they would. Old ads, etc.

Chris L

*Slightly OT*

Can anyone give an opinion for why Coticules cut so much faster than Thuringers? If the grit is a similar hardness and the Thuringers are softer, they should allow more cutting media to be exposed. But in my experience, very few of either stone produce their own slurry (without a rubbing stone) which would imply that they are similar in hardness overall. So is it the shape of the grit particles or...? :shrug:

So what about one of the Timbertools Thuringians? How much better is a good vintage escher? I am looking for something to follow up the coticule. Thanks for all the great information so far. I think I'm starting to get a better grasp of these stones

-Hank

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Russel Baldridge

*Slightly OT*

Can anyone give an opinion for why Coticules cut so much faster than Thuringers? If the grit is a similar hardness and the Thuringers are softer, they should allow more cutting media to be exposed. But in my experience, very few of either stone produce their own slurry (without a rubbing stone) which would imply that they are similar in hardness overall. So is it the shape of the grit particles or...? :shrug:

---

Less grit per cubic unit? If there are less cutting particle per cubic unit, it wouldn't matter if the escher is softer, because as the chalk desintegrates, the amount of cutting particles that gets released stays low.

Hank,

You could try one of the Chinese 12k stones from WoodCraft, Natural Polishing Water Stone - Woodcraft.com, they're very nice polishers, especially for their very low price.

Bruno,

Ah, grit concentration completely slipped my mind. I was also thinking that maybe the Quartz grit is a smaller size than Garnet, but more irregular shaped so that they end up leaving a similar finish.

@ Kees

It's true that Escher recommends that a slurry stone be used but many members here, myself included, have found that using these stones without a slurry produces a more polished, smoother edge.

As to why Belgian stones cut faster even though they are harder than Eschers, I think that both the grit of the silica is finer and the content of silica is lower when compared to the garnet in Belgian stones. It would be nice if someone could make some measurments.

Just surmising about the slurry stone issue. :hmmm: Going back the hundred years + that Eschers, Thuringans, and Coticules were THE stones. No Nortons, Shapton GlassStones or what have you. The barbers, rabbis, toolmakers had to set their bevels and get their tools sharp from scratch. Back in those years when conspicuous consumption was the exception rather then the rule most of these people probably had one stone.

I don't know historically what lower grit stones were available but I'm thinking that the slurry was probably the go to method for the earlier stages in the sharpening process followed by the water only for finishing. Hence the included slurry stone in the vintage and mostly with the current stones.

Now with most of the members that participate in this type of thread being HAD sufferers it is not surprising that some wouldn't find the slurry stone essential,having an arsenal of hones to choose from. My theory may be wrong but it is a possibility.

I've been feeling the need for such a compendium for quite awhile. I put a "Hone Museum" button on my site and I've gotten lots of folks sending me pix of their stones as well as boxes that came with them. Next step is to get the stuff onto the site! I've been a little pressed lately.

I've got 8 or 10 eschers/thuringians of various colors and they're great stones. Their basis is silica which is the hexagonal system in crystallography. The coticule base is garnet and they're a rhombic dodecahedra. I say this because I believe that what goes on at the micro level affects what shows up on the macro level. The Eschers and the coticules are great hones but fundamentally different in the way they hone. Whoever said that grit is only part of the equation is dead on. The garnet has a natural tendency to cleave off the corners of the dodecahedron which is ball shaped. The cleaved surfaces are sharp and very tiny. This is why the "abrasive milk" works so well. The hexagonal crystals of silica don't cleave as readily and the steel is really being abraded against the embedded crystals. It's different. Not better or worse. Rather than engaging in something we have no way to measure such as wether a coticule is 8k or 10k and an escher is 8k or 10k, I look to see what is happening at the micro level on the bevel of the razors. The final test is on my face and that's what really counts to me as the result is what I'm looking for with my edges.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Hank Williams

Eschers are certainly a highly talked about and coveted stone here at SRP. As a fascinate newbie, I have been able to glean some information about these stones, but they remain somewhat esoteric to me. Perhaps this already exists, but what we really need is a guide to Eschers. Something that would include their grit range, variations, what the colors mean, the label issue, possible sources, Thuringian/Escher clarification, and shave characteristics. I feel something of this nature would really help to clear up those ethereal Eschers.

-Hank

---

The crystal structure of garnet is much simpler than that of silica which has about 10 crystal forms! Anyone interested in silica is welcome to peruse this link: Silicon dioxide - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia, it is very interesting, BTW there is a meta-stable orthorhombic form as well! As if I wasn't already craxy enough! It turns out that the dodecahedron structure is a lowest energy geometrical structure that even things like lather and all types of foams like to assume. Not that it matters but having made a living studying polyurethanes this has always fascinated me. And Howard, here is my public permision to use the pics of my big B/G Escher and my Y/G Escher that you can find in this sub-forum for your museum. Thanks for all your work and help to this community! BTW, we all have an idea as to the abrasive content in Belgian stones, about 30-45% garnet but do you or anyone know the abrasive content, that is, the range of silica % in Eschers? And if I might be so bold as to ask, does anyone know the aproximate % of silica of the major Escher classifications, i.e. Dark Blue, Blue Green and Yellow Green? OK, know everyone can say that I'm truly crazy!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Howard

The garnet has a natural tendency to cleave off the corners of the dodecahedron which is ball shaped. The cleaved surfaces are sharp and very tiny. This is why the "abrasive milk" works so well.

---

I've always found it odd that so many descriptions of coticules imply that the entire garnet is released at once and is floating around in the slurry. I was surprised the first time that I looked at the slurry under a microscope. The slurry is actually comprised of many tiny pieces of crescent shaped fragments.

Interesting, have you looked at the slurry of an Escher?

After reading this I think I'm in the market for a Thuringian/Escher. Does anyone know how much difference I will see between one of the new Thuringians being sold at Timbertools and a nice, high quality, vintage Escher. While the Timbertools website states their stone are 12000 grit they also say there is no benefit from following a coticule with one of their Thuringians. Of course, many SRPers claim a big difference in shave quality in jumping from a coticule to an Escher. What I'm asking is how much difference will plopping down $500 for an Escher give me as compared to $139 for a Thuringian from timbertools.

-Hank

Wow, Hank, you've got EAD (Escher Acquisition Disorder) as bad as Blaireau. $500 for a finishing stone. If I was thinking about dropping that kind of cash on a finishing stone, I'd be looking for an amazing Japanese Natural which for that price range would spank any Escher until its paper labeled tail was tucked between its legs. For real.

Your question about the difference between a Timber Tools Thuringian and a $500 Escher is not one that I think anyone can answer definitively. Natural stones have variance even within the same ratings (BG, YG, DB, etc).

Example: I've got about 6 vintage coticules of varying hardnesses. I'm to the point where I see unique high priced coticules that interest me, but I've experienced them enough now to know that I would not spend $200 on up for a coticule unless I actually tried it out. I prefer a certain type of coticule and another type I don't care for.

I feel the same way about high priced Thuringians.

Chris L