What is the more important stone ???

Here is a thought I had as I satisfied my HAD last night and ordered 2 more stones....
What is the more important side of the honing spectrum???
Do you get more and more low end bevel setting stones, or do you get the high end finishers....

I mean think about this, every single experienced person with honing agrees on one thing whether they be a "Honemiester" and get paid, or just very experienced with honing, the one statement that every one agrees with is "A sharp edge begins with a sharp even bevel" ....

Now keep in mind that I probably do more restoration projects and repairs than most people so my low end is kind of important to me..

You see tons of people that have finishing stones from an 8k Norton on up to 30k-40k, everyone seems to be chasing the upper end all the way to .10 diamond pastes...
I was thinking that really it is the lower end that is actually more important...

But what do you guys think???

i think This is a little not fair question.

To me both ends are important .1 depends to another.similar to catch 22.you don't have 1 part your blade won't be in shape it suppose to be
My 2 cents.

Interesting point Glen and you've described my HAD odyssey spot on. I have a bunch of hones both synthetic and natural. Knowing what I know now if I could only have one it would be the Norton 4/8. I can set a bevel and get the razor sharp with the 4k and I can finish well enough to get a smooth shave with the 8k.

While the same thing may be said for the coticule with slurry there is enough variation between natural stones to make me stick with the Norton which is a known quantity. Having said that I sure do appreciate my DMT 1200 continuous diamond plate and my Shapton 1&2k and last but not least the Norton 1k. Which of the lower end stones I choose depends on the blade and how things are playing out with it as I hone. Nice to have alternatives.

For me, lower grit stones are about convenience and speed of honing. I can live with a basic low grit set because I only hone a few razors and I can afford spending more time on finer and slower stones. Higher grit stones, on the contrary, cannot be replaced or skipped if you want the smoothest edge possible even if you have one razor only...

I really don't know that I agree with the bevel part. I've had some razors that had bevels that looked like a chimpanzee had set the bevel yet they were wicked sharp razors that shaved with the best of them. I think an even bevel is more a cosmetic thing and is considered the mark of a honemeister when nice and even. Yes we all like a nice even bevel but I've found whether the bevel is so small you needed a magnifier to see it or is huge or even or or crooked makes to actual difference.

Whats important is that the bevel is there and is doing its job.

I also think people get carried away with this sharpness thing looking for the ultimate which of course is an endless quest for many.

Just remember our predessesors managed to get acceptably sharp or better razors without all these fancy hones and alternative honing methods we use.

As to the original question I think you need a balance between low and high stones. probably most get stones that do the job and as they get more razors they find certain razors seem to do better with certain hones and the collection increases. For me generally I seem to use the same few stones most of the time. But I don't think any one operation is more important than another. All phases of honing are equally important.

I hear ya. The lowest grit I have is 4k Norton, except for my no name Chinese kitchen hone which is probably too coarse. Sometimes, no number of strokes on the 8k will be enough because the bevel isn't there. However, if you haven't got a super fine hone, you can always use pastes or even newsprint. ... I'm inclined to support you viewpoint.

X

Glen, I agree with you that bevel-creation is the single most important part of the process. If you don't have a good bevel you'll never get a good edge. Whereas when it comes to finishing, you might prefer your escher to your coticule or your Shapton 16 or whatever but any of them will do.

Bigspendur, I think when it comes to those wavy bevels that nevertheless get sharp, it's less likely that a chimpanzee set the bevel than that a chimpanzee ground the blade in the first place. Subtle warps and other anomalies can make a wavy bevel unavoidable even for a honemeister. But as you say, it's usually purely cosmetic. This is because for all intents and purposes a bevel's a good bevel – wavy or not – so long as your two planes are meeting in a line. Putting a good bevel on a warped razor sometimes requires a narrow hone, sometimes a rolling stroke, etc. but if your honing strokes are making contact all the way down to the edge and all the way along it you've done a good job, whether it looks wavy to the eye or not.

So why does everyone collects high-grit hones. Maybe because bevel-setters tend to be artificial, and finishers to be exotic naturals. Who wants 5 Norton 1Ks? Who even wants a Norton 1K if they've got a DMT 1200 and are happy with it? Whereas lots of guys can't keep themselves from collecting another coticule even though they've got ten of 'em already, or scouring the web for the elusive Water of Ayr stone, even though it's about the same grit as all their other finishers.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dylandog

Glen, I agree with you that bevel-creation is the single most important part of the process. If you don't have a good bevel you'll never get a good edge. Whereas when it comes to finishing, you might prefer your escher to your coticule or your Shapton 16 or whatever but any of them will do.

Bigspendur, I think when it comes to those wavy bevels that nevertheless get sharp, it's less likely that a chimpanzee set the bevel than that a chimpanzee ground the blade in the first place. Subtle warps and other anomalies can make a wavy bevel unavoidable even for a honemeister. But as you say, it's usually purely cosmetic. This is because for all intents and purposes a bevel's a good bevel – wavy or not – so long as your two planes are meeting in a line. Putting a good bevel on a warped razor sometimes requires a narrow hone, sometimes a rolling stroke, etc. but if your honing strokes are making contact all the way down to the edge and all the way along it you've done a good job, whether it looks wavy to the eye or not.

So why does everyone collects high-grit hones. Maybe because bevel-setters tend to be artificial, and finishers to be exotic naturals. Who wants 5 Norton 1Ks? Who even wants a Norton 1K if they've got a DMT 1200 and are happy with it? Whereas lots of guys can't keep themselves from collecting another coticule even though they've got ten of 'em already, or scouring the web for the elusive Water of Ayr stone, even though it's about the same grit as all their other finishers.

---

+1 to all of the above but especially the last bit.

AH!
The gender of angels. My favorite discussion...:D

I do 90% of my bevel correction work on a Coticule:
- because it leaves a bevel with a total absence of deep scratches.
- because it never overhones.
- because it leaves bevels without any teeth or other weaknesses at the very edge.
- because the hone is always ready to go: no frequent lapping, no soaking, no glazing.
- because it has such sweet feedback.
- because you can get one as narrow as 10mm real cheap, to deal with severely warped blades.
- because you can get one as wide as 40mm for a reasonable price, to deal with all other razors.
- because both stones will be great finishers as well. :rofl2:
- because you can buy more of them, and each one will be slightly different...:o

Yes, I think the bevel setting hone can influence the final results, or at least throw a monkey wrench into the rest of the progression. I always cringe when yet another newbie has a go on a piece of sandpaper, in absence of a dedicated bevel setting hone.

Bart.

While setting the bevel is probably the most important step in the process it's less critical what you use to do that (and I've seen everything from valve grinding compound to a very fine rasp) than what you use for the final polishing phase...and that's my postulation on why most of us concentrate on the upper end of the grit spectrum when HAD strikes.

Well, last week I filled a gap between 6k and CrOx with Chinese 12k... And I also honed a J.A. Henckels razor that I mentioned earlier in my posts...
I did something inconvenient in my progression...
And that is, I did 60 strokes on 1k, 30 strokes on 3k, 30 strokes on 6k, 80 strokes on 12k, 100 strokes on CrOx and 160 strokes on leather...
My point is that I spent the most time on lowest and highest grit stone without paying much attention to those grits in between...
And the whiskers were begging for mercy when I was cutting them of my face... :D

The thing is that I always liked to spend some more time on 1k stone in order to set the bevel correctly rather than to go up in my progression and polish the crappy set bevel...
It is just my point of view...:w

You referred to acquiring "more" stones. In that context the higher grit stones would be more important.

You can get a single (ok, maybe two) coarse stone for setting bevels. It's going to work just fine for setting bevels on any razor. How coarse would be a preference thing for time, how much of what kind of work you do, and possibly additional stones for reasonable steps up to the mid/high grits.

Let's say you do a decent amount of work with fixing chips, getting past swiss cheese edges, etc. You might pick a DMT8C (325 grit). It's a pretty good jump to a DMT8E (1200 grit) so you might want the DMT8F (600 grit) to go inbetween, but it's a time thing. Maybe you rarely deal with chipped blades and setting bevels on a DMT8E is just fine.

Bottom liine is that you only need one bevel setter (maybe 2...)

On the other end the finishing/last stones effect shaveability. A much more subtle thing to tune. Certain blades/steels will yield different results on different finishers. So having different finishers will be more important to the end result.

So factoring in both the end result attainable and cost/effort getting there, the high grits would be more important to have a variety of.
Yes, it's critical to have a bevel setter; but once you have that, then having more finishers should be your focus.

OK, I understand the want/need to have many finishers, really trust me, I do :D

But in all actuality the exact same thought process would occur with the bevel setters...


You basically would have the same choices as you would at the finishing stages as in harder, softer, feeling stones for different razors even differing grits... different sizes too....

Or is this just another form of HAD ;) and the never ending search for just that much better shave?????

Hmmmmm maybe you could do the same in the middle sharpening grits too
Yep it's just HAD setting in...:roflmao:roflmao

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by gssixgun

OK, I understand the want/need to have many finishers, really trust me, I do :D

But in all actuality the exact same thought process would occur with the bevel setters...


You basically would have the same choices as you would at the finishing stages as in harder, softer, feeling stones for different razors even differing grits... different sizes too....

Or is this just another form of HAD ;) and the never ending search for just that much better shave?????

Hmmmmm maybe you could do the same in the middle sharpening grits too
Yep it's just HAD setting in...

---

Glen, If you want to get another bevel setter YOU HAVE MY PERMISSION. (there, that should be all the justification you need) :rofl2:

The bevel setter is a ROUGH cut. You can whack most ANY blade on your bevel setter and it's going to produce pretty much the same result in the same amount of time. Whacking it on a different stone in the same ball park grit will produce the same results in the same amount of time. You can't say that for the finishers can you?

Here, try this :roflmao

As a premier SRP honemeister, master razor restorer, SRP moderator, SRP newbie mentor and all around looked up to guy, you should see it as your OBLIGATION to have and use a full array of stones in every grit.

1) People are going to ask your opinion on what they should buy. You should have experienced them all.
2) People are going to ask your opinion on how their stone compares to some other. You should have experienced them all.
3) It's going to pay off in your business. "If you own any stones or are considering buying some, let me know. I will hone your razor on the same stones so you can see the results you can expect". You should have them all.
4) more?

Now go forth and purchase!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Quick

Glen, If you want to get another bevel setter YOU HAVE MY PERMISSION. (there, that should be all the justification you need) :rofl2: Thanks man hehehe

The bevel setter is a ROUGH cut. You can whack most ANY blade on your bevel setter and it's going to produce pretty much the same result in the same amount of time. Whacking it on a different stone in the same ball park grit will produce the same results in the same amount of time. You can't say that for the finishers can you?

---

Nooooooo That one I would not agree with, there are as many differences at the low end as the high maybe more even....

At the finishing stages all you are doing is polishing the edge that you already built... Keep the strokes light and even and pretty much the stone does the work for you, how far you take that is a personal preference..

At the bevel set is where you have to work with the stone to create the foundation of the entire edge.. Again keep in mind we are talking edges that need this here, otherwise you would not be down this low in grit...
That was sort of what I was getting at in the very beginning of this thread finishing is the easy part of honing setting the bevel is the hard part yet most people concentrate their money and effort on the easy part.....

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Quick

Here, try this :roflmao

As a premier SRP honemeister, master razor restorer, SRP moderator, SRP newbie mentor and all around looked up to guy, you should see it as your OBLIGATION to have and use a full array of stones in every grit.

1) People are going to ask your opinion on what they should buy. You should have experienced them all.
2) People are going to ask your opinion on how their stone compares to some other. You should have experienced them all.
3) It's going to pay off in your business. "If you own any stones or are considering buying some, let me know. I will hone your razor on the same stones so you can see the results you can expect". You should have them all.
4) more?

Now go forth and purchase!

---

I shall I shall LOL

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by gssixgun

That was sort of what I was getting at in the very beginning of this thread finishing is the easy part of honing setting the bevel is the hard part yet most people concentrate their money and effort on the easy part.....

---

How so? You grind away until the edges of the bevel meet. You do it as fast as possible balanced by how long it takes to polish away the deep cut scratches. Is there more to it?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dylandog

Bigspendur, I think when it comes to those wavy bevels that nevertheless get sharp, it's less likely that a chimpanzee set the bevel than that a chimpanzee ground the blade in the first place. Subtle warps and other anomalies can make a wavy bevel unavoidable even for a honemeister. But as you say, it's usually purely cosmetic. This is because for all intents and purposes a bevel's a good bevel – wavy or not – so long as your two planes are meeting in a line. Putting a good bevel on a warped razor sometimes requires a narrow hone, sometimes a rolling stroke, etc. but if your honing strokes are making contact all the way down to the edge and all the way along it you've done a good job, whether it looks wavy to the eye or not.

---

The blade that Glenn honed for me was exactly what you are describing. The width of the bevel varied from narrow to wide to narrow again along the length of the blade, and only on one side. It was because of the way the blade was ground. Nevertheless, Glen put an edge on that bad boy like you can't believe.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bart

AH!
The gender of angels. My favorite discussion...:D

I do 90% of my bevel correction work on a Coticule:
- because it leaves a bevel with a total absence of deep scratches..

---

OK, that's what Bart has taught me for today. I have two razors in the honing line up for today that need new bevels. They'll be set with a coticule.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Quick

Here, try this :roflmao

As a premier SRP honemeister, master razor restorer, SRP moderator, SRP newbie mentor and all around looked up to guy, you should see it as your OBLIGATION to have and use a full array of stones in every grit.

1) People are going to ask your opinion on what they should buy. You should have experienced them all.
2) People are going to ask your opinion on how their stone compares to some other. You should have experienced them all.
3) It's going to pay off in your business. "If you own any stones or are considering buying some, let me know. I will hone your razor on the same stones so you can see the results you can expect". You should have them all.
4) more?

Now go forth and purchase!

---

Quick makes a very good argument here, Glen. You *owe* it to us to have every stone! :D

They are all important IMO. All the bits fit together to make the whole - if any link in the chain is weak, the whole thing is weak.

I think you see people obsessing over the higher grit stones for several reasons. One is the perception that the finishers affect the shaveability of a razor in a more direct way than the bevel-setters or intermediate stones. This is most likely because the finisher edge is the one that touches the face. This is of course true, but the relationship between the shave and the finished edge is a conditional one - given you have correctly established the bevel.

Another reason is that there seems to be a fairly broad range of finishers. Eschers, Shaptons, natural Japanese, coticules, etc. There is a natural tendancy to want to try them out to see which one or ones best suit your face or particular steels/razors. In terms of lower grit stones, there seems to me to be fewer options - synthetics mainly, regardless of brand.

Finally, we have all been responsible for building up a mystique surrounding finishers. Think about how we generally revere the Escher, how we speak in hushed tones about the natural Japanese stones, how we are prepared to pay fairly ridiculous prices (even though you could argue they are market value) for these bits of rock. Bevel setters, on the other hand, are generally thought of as mundane items - how many times have I read the word "workhorse" when describing people's lower grit hones? They are not considered exotic, they are generally fairly cheap in comparison to finishers, they are uniform and bland and grey.

I'm not saying I believe any of this personally, but I feel this is the prevailing atmosphere in which we operate here. I'm guilty of it myself - I paid an inordinate amount of money for my Asagi, posted pictures of it, raved about its performance etc. But what I forgot to mention is that it only works the way it does because my lower grit stones did their job properly in the first place.

Here's how I roughly visualise the relative importance of the honing phases (and therefore, I guess, types of and uses for the various hones):

Attachment 21681

James.

Eh... (first off, we're assuming everything is done properly)

it is the variation against the face. it is that you can get distinctly different effects with different finishing stones on different blades. true?

The fact is, the bevel setter is there to set the bevel. To get the edges from both sides of the bevel to meet. By the time you get done with the finisher all traces of the bevel setter and edge developer are GONE. The artifacts of the finisher remain.

Look at it another way. If you end up with a properly honed/finished blade, is there any way to tell what was used for bevel setting or edge development?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by gssixgun

At the bevel set is where you have to work with the stone to create the foundation of the entire edge.. Again keep in mind we are talking edges that need this here, otherwise you would not be down this low in grit...
That was sort of what I was getting at in the very beginning of this thread finishing is the easy part of honing setting the bevel is the hard part yet most people concentrate their money and effort on the easy part.....

---

I couldn't agree more. I have seen my share of razors that didn't perform very well, send to me for evaluation and honing. Sometimes the bevel is set with sandpaper, that has a tendency to bounce up in front of the edge. The resulting bevel is convex. I've seen razors with that non-cutting part of the bevel nice and shiny, and the very edge still carrying sandpaper scratches. The owner thought he'd overhoned.
I've also seen edges with very deep scratches running underneath 2 or 3 other scratch patterns, each deep scratch running all the way to the very edge, dividing that edge into separate parts. The owner complained that the razor lost his edge before the end of the shave.
People understand that, while polishing up a razor, a scratch pattern needs complete removal during the next the next level, because further down the road removal has zero chance of success.
And yet they often seem to forget that same principle while setting a bevel. (It may not be that important during the final stages of honing).

Another thing that hasn't been covered yet, is that some hones apparently have a fondness for eachother. Take my Chosera 10K. If it's allowed to elaborate on the Chosera 5K edge, you have to stop at the very stroke it removes the 5K scratches. BAM! (1) You end up with an incredibly keen edge. Hone a bit longer on the 10K and you'll start to loose something again (there's Lynn's "less is morre" adage) Nothing dramatic, the edge will still be more than sharp enough (2), but there's definitely a difference. Now. Use the same Chosera 10K after a Coticule with slurry. Works great. You'll end at the the same sharpness level as (2). There simply is no sweet spot as with the 5K. (That's why I always include 10 laps at the 5K, ever since I found that out). I'm sure similar relationships are to be found between other hones. Tell me again that the previous hone doesn't matter. We're not just polishing bevel sides, we're creating the best shaving edge.

Bart.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Quick

Eh... (first off, we're assuming everything is done properly)

it is the variation against the face. it is that you can get distinctly different effects with different finishing stones on different blades. true?

The fact is, the bevel setter is there to set the bevel. To get the edges from both sides of the bevel to meet. By the time you get done with the finisher all traces of the bevel setter and edge developer are GONE. The artifacts of the finisher remain.

Look at it another way. If you end up with a properly honed/finished blade, is there any way to tell what was used for bevel setting or edge development?

---

Absolutely correct there should be no way of telling.....

This is why I think a larger repertoire of bevel setters would benefit the edge...
Like thinner ones for smiling and warped blades, softer ones for harder steels etc: etc:

Lets look at a list:

Norton 220
DMT 325
Shapton 500
DMT 600
Norton 1k
Shapton 1k
Naniwa 1k
King 1k
Wet r Dry 1k sandpaper (argh !!!!)
DMT 1200
Shapton 2k

Which did I forget???? let's keep it under 2k, even though we know that with slurry many others can be pressed into service also....

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bart

Another thing that hasn't been covered yet, is that some hones apparently have a fondness for eachother.

---

I could not agree more.... I have been saying for awhile now that the Shapton's seem to like other Shapton's, except the 16k is pretty sociable, it gets along with others :D

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by gssixgun

A
Which did I forget???? lets keep it under 2k, even though we know that with slurry many others can be pressed into service also....

---

:gaah: four more hones in the list that I don't have and didn't know that I need . :rofl2:

Seem pretty rare in these parts but there are the Arkansas stones.

I think they can be equally important and I try to base my hone purchases (and usage) on efficiency. My idea of efficiency is a variation on the formula: "speed-of-cut/finish" vs. cost vs. maintenance requirements. It's more like a guess than a math exercise. My purchases for razors was also heavily influenced by what I already own for other tools.

My "polisher" can usually remove lower grit scratches in under 20-30 laps from anything 325 grit and up. Of course, if you really remove all of the "bevel-setting" scratches with your polisher; then the scratches from the bevel-setter are no longer a factor. The bevel-setter can determine how long it takes your polisher to do it's work. It's all a balancing act IMO.

I think the newspaper is my most interesting hone because of it's dual nature:

• If I want a sharper edge after the barber hone, I strop on newspaper.
• If I have an edge that I feel is too sharp after the barber hone, I strop on newspaper to get it much smoother (and sharper).

I have some 0.3 micron honing film, but I like the edges I get well enough that the package hasn't been opened yet...

If we actually remove all the bevel-setting scratches with the higher grits, then I think the higher grits can be more important, finish-wise.

If the particular razor actually needs a complete bevel reset; then, time-wise, I think the bevel-setter's speed/finish ratio makes it more important.

I personally have far more finishers than bevel-setters and polishers combined.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sticky

If we actually remove all the bevel-setting scratches with the higher grits, then I think the higher grits can be more important, finish-wise.

If the particular razor actually needs a complete bevel reset; then, time-wise, I think the bevel-setter's speed/finish ratio makes it more important.

---

The question (as I understood it) was not "is THE bevel setter more important than THE finisher". The question was: is it more important to have MORE bevel setters than it's important to have MORE finishers.

So my argument is that if you've settleled on a bevel setter than meets your requirements (speed, material removal, coarseness relative to what you've got to move up to after, etc) then it's much less important to have MORE or alternative bevel setters. I think it's more important to have MORE finishers because it's less easy (if at all possible) to achieve particular results with a particular blade using only one finisher.

I really like the finish off my 16K shapton glassstone. 16K then strop on latigo... perfect (for me). I think many would feel this to be too agressive an edge. I tried the 16K then CrOx on a balsa paddle then strop on latigo. It was way "smoother". I didn't like the feel at all (no feedback). I much preferred it straight off the 16K. I tried it with 7 different razors. Same results.

I don't consider the CrOx to be a "finishing stone" but I assume similar differences from the 16K shapton could be achieved by using an Escher, coticule, etc, etc. instead of the 16K?

I believe I can set a bevel on any razor with my D8C (after which I go to my D8E). Maybe if the blade already has some sort of bevel I might start with my D8E. That would apply to ANY blade and ANY end result I might want to achieve. So is it important to have MORE bevel setters? I don't think so. Is it more important to have MORE finishers. Yes. Because I cannot achieve different results without different finishers.

Are some stones more compatible with the next step stone? maybe. But going from a bevel setter to edge development it doesn't really matter does it? Maybe it takes a couple of more or less laps. But when you get to the finisher it may just not be possible to achieve a particular end result without one specific stone or another. That's why I think it more "important" to have more finishers than have more bevel setters.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by gssixgun

Absolutely correct there should be no way of telling.....

This is why I think a larger repertoire of bevel setters would benefit the edge...
Like thinner ones for smiling and warped blades, softer ones for harder steels etc: etc:

Lets look at a list:

Norton 220
DMT 325
Shapton 500
DMT 600
Norton 1k
Shapton 1k
Naniwa 1k
King 1k
Wet r Dry 1k sandpaper (argh !!!!)
DMT 1200
Shapton 2k

Which did I forget???? let's keep it under 2k, even though we know that with slurry many others can be pressed into service also....

---

Fore some strange reason I've wanted to try the Sigma Power 1K and 2K as I've read favorable things about it's performance on carbon steel over at knifeforums.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by gssixgun

....
What is the more important side of the honing spectrum???
Do you get more and more low end bevel setting stones, or do you get the high end finishers....
...
I was thinking that really it is the lower end that is actually more important...

But what do you guys think???

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Quick

The question (as I understood it) was not "is THE bevel setter more important than THE finisher". The question was: is it more important to have MORE bevel setters than it's important to have MORE finishers.
...
But when you get to the finisher it may just not be possible to achieve a particular end result without one specific stone or another. That's why I think it more "important" to have more finishers than have more bevel setters.

---

I understood the 2 main questions to be:

1. What is the more important side of the honing spectrum???
2. Do you get more and more low end bevel setting stones, or do you get the high end finishers...

I considered the first question to mean "lower spectrum = lower grit bevel hones"; and "higher spectrum = finishing hones".

My "short version" answer is the same as my long version answers in my first reply:
To question #1:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sticky

...
If we actually remove all the bevel-setting scratches with the higher grits, then I think the higher grits can be more important, finish-wise.

If the particular razor actually needs a complete bevel reset; then, time-wise, I think the bevel-setter's speed/finish ratio makes it more important.
...

---

To summarize my first question answer: it kinda' depends on what you need to do to the particular razor.
To question #2:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sticky

...
I personally have far more finishers than bevel-setters and polishers combined.

---

I've seen a couple of threads recently on bevel setting and Glen linked this thread somewhere else so I think its time we resurrected this conversation! :D

What do you guys think is the more important stone? The bevel setter or the high end finisher?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Stubear

What do you guys think is the more important stone? The bevel setter or the high end finisher?

---

I think it varies depending on the job to be done :thinking:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Stubear

I've seen a couple of threads recently on bevel setting and Glen linked this thread somewhere else so I think its time we resurrected this conversation! :D

What do you guys think is the more important stone? The bevel setter or the high end finisher?

---

Stubear,

I am not sure that I am qualified to respond, but it would seem to me to be important to divide this into process vs. actual stone.

So, I would ask what are the key characteristics that make a good bevel setter and can that operation be done on most any decent low grit stone?
If the answer is yes it can be, then I would say that it is an important process, but not an important stone.

Asking the same question about a finisher, what are the key characteristics of a good finisher and can that operation be done on any decent high grit stone? If the answer is yes it can be, then, again, I would say it is an important process, but not an important stone.

I think what might come out is that:

Bevel Setting Process is VERY important and can be done on a variety of just good low grit stones. So the process itself is very important.

Finishing Process is important and should be done on a very good stone. So the stone itself is very important.

Anyway - that is the way I'm thinking about it.

David

Since I started this thread I have been to 3 Meets and sat down with about 6 people one-on-one to help them hone...

If anything I now think even more that the low grit stones are the more important part of the process...

Lynn and I both at the 2009 Asheville Meet, and then myself at the Denver Meet, and the Spokane Meet, sat and honed razors one after another...
As each razor was presented they were accessed, then brought to a clean, even sharp, bevel... From that point on it really made no difference... At all three meets we were working Naniwa, Shapton, and Norton sets along with a plethora of Natural's...

Once the bevels are set you can take the razor up any ladder you want...
Most of the time on the hones was spent setting the bevel...

We all still might "Discuss" what finish is the best, but the one thing there is no argument about, is that the bevel has to be right before you can move forward...

Bevel, Bevel, Bevel..... :D

The most important part of sharpening a razor is the skill of the person using the hones/tools not the tool itself. While I do enjoy the honing journey my motto has always been "Get 'er done and get 'er done right!" In the hands of a honemister the quality of tool effects the time involved to get the end results. The end result of the bevel setter is to get the razor sharp. The end result of the finisher is to get the edge smooth. I want a razor that is both sharp and smooth. In terms of earned value, matching the bevel setter to the razor would save me the most time. Matching the finisher to the razor would get me a smoother shave and may tweak the sharpness. The rubber meets the road after the last hone used. The time it took to get there is determined by the first hone used. If you don't start with a good edge off the bevel setter the finisher isn't gonna get you there unless time, and lots of it, is not an issue.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by gssixgun

Since I started this thread I have been to 3 Meets and sat down with about 6 people one-on-one to help them hone...

If anything I now think even more that the low grit stones are the more important part of the process...

Lynn and I both at the 2009 Asheville Meet, and then myself at the Denver Meet, and the Spokane Meet, sat and honed razors one after another...
As each razor was presented they were accessed, then brought to a clean, even sharp, bevel... From that point on it really made no difference... At all three meets we were working Naniwa, Shapton, and Norton sets along with a plethora of Natural's...

Once the bevels are set you can take the razor up any ladder you want...
Most of the time on the hones was spent setting the bevel...

We all still might "Discuss" what finish is the best, but the one thing there is no argument about, is that the bevel has to be right before you can move forward...

Bevel, Bevel, Bevel..... :D

---

Glen,

So would you say that you would invest more in your bevel setting hones than your finishers, or does it not matter that much which bevel setting hones you acquire as long as the bevel setting process is performed correctly and completely?

David

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Stubear

What do you guys think is the more important stone? The bevel setter or the high end finisher?

---

Well i dont have a really high end finisher just a naniwa 12k, and they're relativley cheep, so i'd have to say the bevel setter. For that i have a cheep 1k, i forget the name of it, and that does most of the work on the few razors i've done :)

ian

So for me as an apprentice/journeyman honist, I'm wondering a couple things.

First, what are all the marks or features of a good bevel? Here I mean it's physical characteristics, perhaps that could be observed in a 'scope (given all the cautions and conditions affecting legitimate use of optics, of course!)

Second, what are the tests that show you the bevel is well set?

Third, if I'm shaving with a razor, how might I detect from using it that the bevel is the problem and not the finishing?

I already know some answers to these questions, but it would be great to have a kind of master-list because sometimes a given blade might, for mysterious reasons, work with some tests better than others.

For me, if I'm concerned about the edge, I use either the Norton 220 or DMT 325 to get to decent metal. Then, or if the edge doesn't seem damaged or compromised, I usually go straight to the DMT 1200 with circles and X strokes. I haven't tried the Norton 1K with slurry, but I"m thinking that might be worth a try.

Early on I use the TNT to make sure the edge bites all down its length. I use the TPT to see if the edge is getting better quickly or slowly (I call it the "tickle test"). But as my "next stone" flag, I go for shaving leg hair at skin level. I want one WTG swipe and a slick bald spot left behind.

As a beginner, I'd be interested in knowing if that process would ever lead me astray or if I'm barking up the wrong tree in some way here.

Love this thread!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Alembic

Glen,

So would you say that you would invest more in your bevel setting hones than your finishers, or does it not matter that much which bevel setting hones you acquire as long as the bevel setting process is performed correctly and completely?

David

---

I'm not Glen, but this brings up something I have always found interesting about this topic. A person with HAD could buy one of each: Naniwa 220, 400,1000,2000 and Shapton 220,500,1000, 2000 or one Shapton 30K. The cash expenditure would be roughly the same.

Looking at it that way there's no reason not to have a pretty deep bench of low grit hones if the ratio of dollars spent to edge quality received means anything. I'm not suggesting that you need a whole pile of bevel setters (or do you Glen ?:)), just that its not very productive to ignore them in favor of the high dollar finishing stones. This assumes that you are doing more than just touching up formerly shave ready razors.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bill S

I'm not Glen, but this brings up something I have always found interesting about this topic. A person with HAD could buy one of each: Naniwa 220, 400,1000,2000 and Shapton 220,500,1000, 2000 or one Shapton 30K. The cash expenditure would be roughly the same.

Looking at it that way there's no reason not to have a pretty deep bench of low grit hones if the ratio of dollars spent to edge quality received means anything. I'm not suggesting that you need a whole pile of bevel setters (or do you Glen ?:)), just that its not very productive to ignore them in favor of the high dollar finishing stones. This assumes that you are doing more than just touching up formerly shave ready razors.

---

I like the way you put that Bill...

Keep in mind this whole thread started as an observation that we all waste tons on money and time typing about our finest finshers... When really most of the time, and skill, and effort, is spent below 2k (Obviously not on New/NOS razors)

But we don't find these workhorses sexy, and fun to talk about, about the only thing that really gets discussed is "How fast it cuts metal"

Most of us barely ever do more than 2 minutes work on a finisher, yet we devote pages of love poems to our Japanese Naturals, Coticules, Eschers
Charnley Forest & Shapton 30k's and ... and.. and...

Yet the hours of fixing that bevel to get it there are barely a footnote, that is what I wrote this thread about originally.. Not whether you should go buy more stones...

Yes I own quite a few bevel setters and I use them all, but I don't NEED them all, just like I don't NEED anything other than a Norton 8k to get a comfortable shaving edge...