Not a piece of wood

This is how it was advertised:
Attachment 23684
Attachment 23685
Attachment 23686
Attachment 23687
Attachment 23688
Attachment 23689

Two layers, thin fine lighter one, thicker coarse dark one, woodgrain pattern, wood box, 'soap stone' - naturally my mind wandered to the possibility of a vintage Belgian. Just the strange deep hollow in the would-be BBW side was a bit odd. Then again, people maltreat their hones in every possible way. At less than 5 Euro well worth a try.

Then it arrived, looking like two red bricks glued together. But look what appeared after initial cleaning:
Attachment 23690
Attachment 23691
Attachment 23692
Attachment 23693

And now after sweating out some oil in a hot oven, soaking and scrubbing with BioTex, and lapping I have this beautifully grained Yellow Dalmore:
Attachment 23694
Attachment 23695
Attachment 23696
Attachment 23697
It doesn't show on the pictures, but in real life it has a nice crystalline sparkling too, and a wonderful silky touch.

Wow, I've never seen a hone quite like
that. Nice job on bringing it back to life!

How well does this work on razors?

- Scott

From the caterpillar to the butterfly ! Beautiful job of cleaning that up. Thanks for the great photo progression. :tu

That is an amazing progression with a beautiful stone in the end. The grain is very striking.

Can I have it?:D

Wonderful! :tu

Great looking hone and well done in bringing it back from the dead.Very skillful.

Nope. I'm not having it! I still think it's a lump of wood. ;)

Connor

Wow, that REALLY does look like a hunk of wood. Have you tried a razor out on it yet? I'd really be interested to see how it performs.
It was advertised as a 2-sided hone, and it looked artificial at first, but it turned out to be a natural. My question is: do both sides feel different? Is the 2-sided/layered appearance just due to the natural grain and both sides perform the same regardless? Just curious!

Thanks for posting the pictures.

Very interesting stone. It's also interesting since you categorize the surface as having a silky quality. The Dalmore Yellow I have is not silky, it's on the coarse side and has a characteristic sandstone nature to it.

Would you rate the stone here as falling into a broad category of coarse, medium, fine or polishing (super fine) grit?

Thanks for posting the pics.

Chris L

Thanks guys! It is very nice to be able to share things like this with people other than my dear 'o-it's-him-again-with-some-rock-let-him-rant-for-a-bit-he'll-be-fine-soon' friends & family... :tu


@sebell:
There is another picture somewhere on this forum of a nicely patterned DY, can't find it though - sorry! :shrug: I think Dylandog (who just sold a gorgeous DBlue to 0livia has some too.
Although very silky to the touch, it's actually quite coarse a hone. Could be used for razors as, or just after, a bevel setter.

@Utopian:
Not inclined to break the habit of trying to forestall discomfiture, I couldn't possibly provide further comment. :w

@0livia:
Felicitations are in order for you too! I envy you no little for the DBlue you just acquired! But's in good hands; judging from your site you know how to care for it and put it to good use. Don't forget to share your pictures and results!

@Rosco:
It isn't, it isn't! Please don't make me torch it to substantiate!

That is one fantastic looking stone. Congrats on recovering that jewel to the glory that it is.

@StraightRazorDave:
Haven't honed a razor on it yet. My razor honing skills are limited; it rather differs from honing knives and tools. I can manage, but would hesitate to give definate descriptions of hone behaviour - that's best left to the likes of JimmyHAD, Hi_bud_gl, Bart, ... .
The two sides feel the same. I presume the differences in colouring due to having been set in a box, combined with a scratch all around (from scraping grime from the box?) gave that impression. O, and the bottom had a more even and smooth layer of grime, whereas this was scratched and not as thick on the top.

@ChrisL:
It is definitely sandstone-like. Silky maybe wasn't well chosen; velvety might be more like it. I didn't mean to convey the idea of smooth 'with a very even and dense surface, frictionless', but more 'kind of soft to the touch, with a bit of draw'. I can't quite describe it - hour glass sand glued together with candle wax maybe? :hmmm:
If I'm not mistaken, there's a thread somewhere about DY, discussing their differences in make-up; all rather coarse in effect, but some apparently shedding marked quantities of sand-like particles, and others not displaying this behaviour at all. This one doesn't - could tactile characteristics vary likewise? :shrug:

Mind however that my denomination of a DY is a guess only - an educated guess maybe, but a guess no less. I've seen DY's before (pictures and real life) and read about them, but never used one. I might very well be mistaken! :o

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Oldengaerde

Thanks guys! It is very nice to be able to share things like this with people other than my dear 'o-it's-him-again-with-some-rock-let-him-rant-for-a-bit-he'll-be-fine-soon' friends & family... :tu

---

I understand completely. :roflmao

Beautiful stone, thanks for sharing the pics. I haven't ever seen one before.

I would agree with your description as "hourglass sand bound together with candle wax". I would say that's an accurate description of my DY as well.

Chris L

How's it working today?

I'm not sure that this is the stone I was remembering. I am replying because it has the features of the Hindostan// Orange stones. Seems like there was another I have seen here.

One is the thick and thin lamina on the side. It is described as sandstone.

As I was reading the descriptions of how they were cut it was said they scratched it with an awl and snapped it.

I'm not saying it is or isnt. But does DY show lamina as well?