Thread: ONE COTICULE HONING

Ok i think i am tired of this and we are not understand each other.What you have said means? please explain if my understanding is wrong?
by adding 1 layer of the tape you are getting sharper edge then without tape?

and
adding 3 layers of tape will make it more sharper? you will have better angle and blade will be sharper?
are you trying to say that?
thank you

People i am not fighting with Bart and you don't have to protect him.
This is thinking (idea) differences and we are trying to resolve it . i hope we are not children.


QUOTE=Bart;371368]What I'm trying to illustrate with my drawing, is this:


Right of the slurry, the edge it not at very high keenness. It shaves but not very well.
Keeness is defined by the width of the line where both bevel faces meet each other.

After the slurry this line (the very tip of the bevel) still needs further refinement for better shaving performance.
If the spine is taped at that point, the honing angle becomes a bit steeper, and the hone will only affect the very tip of the razor. While honing with this new angle, the secondary bevel will grow from the very tip down. That's one thing I wanted to illustrate with the drawing. At the same time, the maximum refinement will be achieved gradually. If 3 layers of tape were applied, it would go faster and the new, secondary bevel would hit its limit sooner, hence with a narrower secondary bevel. That's something I also tried to reflect in the explanation that came with the drawing. I chose for one layer of tape, because it is a generally accepted honing technique, and because I got better results allowing the secondary bevel growing a bit wider. I believe this way the Coticule with water can sneak slowly up to its maximum keenness level.


[drawing by hi_bud_gl, in a previous post]

Once the edge has reached its finest limit on the hone in use, it indeed would start to move backwards, making the entire blade microscopically narrower. If I read it correctly, this is what your drawing shows, and actually mine too, is you compare the height of the red peak with that of the green peak. This is normal for all honing, unless you could manage to stop at the exact stroke when the edge hits its maximum keenness level.

Best regards,
Bart.[/QUOTE]

Originally Posted by hi_bud_gl

Ok i think i am tired of this and we are not understand each other.What you have said means? please explain if my understanding is wrong?
by adding 1 layer of the tape you are getting sharper edge then without tape?

Yes and no. It's not the tape as such. Have you ever used sandpaper to round the sharp edge of a piece of wood? Noticed how the sanding goes very quickly in the beginning but gradually slows down as the surface to be sanded grows? You can chamfer a hard edge with 600 grit sandpaper rapidly, but it would take forever to sand down one 100 grit scratch in a larger surface.
I'm using this exact principle on razors. By adding the tape, I divert all abrasion to the very tip of the bevel. The Coticule with water, that is normally only able to very slowly polish already sharp edges, now is able to actually refine the tip and make the edge keener.

and
adding 3 layers of tape will make it more sharper? you will have better angle and blade will be sharper?
are you trying to say that?

No, adding 3 layers just diverts the abrasion to the very tip in a more "agressive" way. It would take even less work before the maximum keenness was reached with a narrower secondary bevel as result, but at the cost of an obtuser edge. I also think it's better to allow the Coticule to go slower. I like my method with only one additonal layer best. (I have tried with 3 and 2 also).

thank you

People i am not fighting with Bart and you don't have to protect him.
I should hope not.
This is thinking (idea) differences and we are trying to resolve it . i hope we are not children.

Like I said earlier, I respect your straight criticism. I have not the slightest problem discussing these things with an open mind.
Of course it's possible that we might have to agree to disagree on this one.

The sad thing on this whole SRP community is, that one can't join in the pub and grab a beer together, after ending a good discussion. I would gladly pay for that extra functionality. (eh, wrong thread, I guess...)

Best regards,
Bart.

i was hoping will get answer yes or no not both?
Now when you round sharp edge of the wood sandpaper does work faster and then slows but not because of the surface of the wood because sandpaper looses it is quality.
I will stop in here .
Again was a good discussion lets give people chance and let them try your method and come back leave feedback . I hope i am wrong .

respectfully
Sham

If i wanted to refresh would i do it with one layer of tape and coti with just water. If this did'nt work. would i drop back to no tape and light slurry honing then add tape and 50 laps plain water.

The only other thing is i have a thew razors i have to roll i would find this difficult with back and forth strokes

Bart i supose i could do your previous method starting on slurry untill shaving arm hair diluting it down for say another 40 laps then add tape and do 30 on light slurry /50 laps water. would that work? This way i can use my normal stroke ie rolling etc more pressure or less.

Originally Posted by gary haywood

Bart i supose i could do your previous method starting on slurry untill shaving arm hair diluting it down for say another 40 laps then add tape and do 30 on light slurry /50 laps water. would that work? This way i can use my normal stroke ie rolling etc more pressure or less.

Sure, I only introduced the b&f stroking to speed up the proces, after several people suggested that it would otherwise take them too long.
The important part is that you complete the inital bevel before applying the tape, how you get there, doesnt really matter.

Best regards,
Bart.

Originally Posted by hi_bud_gl

i was hoping will get answer yes or no not both?
Now when you round sharp edge of the wood sandpaper does work faster and then slows but not because of the surface of the wood because sandpaper looses it is quality.
I will stop in here .
Again was a good discussion lets give people chance and let them try your method and come back leave feedback . I hope i am wrong .

respectfully
Sham

I see now that you disagree with what I consider the cornerstone of this honing procedure.
In that case, this whole thing must indeed sound completely absurd to you.
But I have to disagree. Working a narrow strip of steel makes a big difference. In fact, the very concept of hollow ground razors relies on this principle. Tim, another Belgian member of SRP, became a friend after I met him here. He owns a Dubl'Duck Goldedge. Last time we met he told me how easily this razor takes a keen edge on just his Coticule with water, while he finds it much more challenging to achieve good keenness on his other razors. I don't doubt that the excellent steel and temper of the Dubl'Duck contributes to it taking such a great edge, but I also noticed that this razor is ground remarkably thin and carries a very narrow bevel. I have witnessed the same great responsiveness to the Coticule-with-water on other razors with a very narrow bevel. I can't regrind all my razors, but I can add a layer of tape, late in the honing progression, and cut a narrow secondary bevel for the creating of the final edge on the Coticule with water.
Thats is the basic idea about my procedure.
About my sandpaper analogy: I'm not talking about wearing out the sandpaper. With fresh 600 grit sandpaper, it's impossible to sand 1 mm deep into a wooden table top. If you use the same piece of sandpaper on the hard edges of the same table top, you can get that 1 mm of stock removal in no time. It all comes down on how much the pressure disperses over the surface to be abraded. On razors we can't rely on much pressure, because the edge will flex. Something we must cetainly avoid during the final stages of honing. Narrowing down the contact surface by introducing a slightly altered bevel angle, lends the Coticule-with-water the bite it lacks on wider bevels to achieve a meaningful edge refinement.
I am absolutely certain that this is a sound theory, and that it could at least pass as a worthy hypothesis for the experiments I ran, prior to posting this thread. This procedure works for me in practice, and I'm anxious to find out if it works for others as well. Many of us own Coticules and like honing on them. I can't really see no wrong in trying to get the best out of them. Maybe that someone else can translate the basic principles behind my ideas in a more understandable English. I really did my very best.

Kind regards,
Bart.

Originally Posted by Bart

I see now that you disagree with what I consider the cornerstone of this honing procedure.
In that case, this whole thing must indeed sound completely absurd to you.
But I have to disagree. Working a narrow strip of steel makes a big difference. In fact, the very concept of hollow ground razors relies on this principle. Tim, another Belgian member of SRP, became a friend after I met him here. He owns a Dubl'Duck Goldedge. Last time we met he told me how easily this razor takes a keen edge on just his Coticule with water, while he finds it much more challenging to achieve good keenness on his other razors. I don't doubt that the excellent steel and temper of the Dubl'Duck contributes to it taking such a great edge, but I also noticed that this razor is ground remarkably thin and carries a very narrow bevel. I have witnessed the same great responsiveness to the Coticule-with-water on other razors with a very narrow bevel. I can't regrind all my razors, but I can add a layer of tape, late in the honing progression, and cut a narrow secondary bevel for the creating of the final edge on the Coticule with water.
Thats is the basic idea about my procedure.
About my sandpaper analogy: I'm not talking about wearing out the sandpaper. With fresh 600 grit sandpaper, it's impossible to sand 1 mm deep into a wooden table top. If you use the same piece of sandpaper on the hard edges of the same table top, you can get that 1 mm of stock removal in no time. It all comes down on how much the pressure disperses over the surface to be abraded. On razors we can't rely on much pressure, because the edge will flex. Something we must cetainly avoid during the final stages of honing. Narrowing down the contact surface by introducing a slightly altered bevel angle, lends the Coticule-with-water the bite it lacks on wider bevels to achieve a meaningful edge refinement.
I am absolutely certain that this is a sound theory, and that it could at least pass as a worthy hypothesis for the experiments I ran, prior to posting this thread. This procedure works for me in practice, and I'm anxious to find out if it works for others as well. Many of us own Coticules and like honing on them. I can't really see no wrong in trying to get the best out of them. Maybe that someone else can translate the basic principles behind my ideas in a more understandable English. I really did my very best.

Kind regards,
Bart.

I think you are explaining it very clearly. Your sandpaper to wood analogy makes sense to me, and it does seem that it's the amount of pressure being dispersed over what surface area that is the key. Sure, you can't lay the sandpaper flat on a wooden tabletop and sand down 1mm, but you could easily take 1mm off the hard edges (beveling). Additionally, it would seem that if you were to wrap it around a thin object (say, a metal ruler), you could sand a 1mm deep groove or ditch into the same wooden table top pretty easily (I haven't tested this, but I think it should be easier than flat sanding 1mm from the table top, for the same reason that sanding the corners of the table is easy). It seems it's all about the pressure and surface area, as you say.

So, if you apply this theory to razors and bevels, with the pressure being equal (since we are supposed to be using light pressure (weight of the blade) no matter the size of the bevel), it would seem that you will remove more steel more quickly with a narrower bevel, because the same amount of pressure is distributed to less total surface area with the narrower bevel.

It would also seem, though, that with enough strokes, it shouldn't matter how narrow or wide the bevel is. It may not hone up as quickly, but if you spend enough time at it, either way should work, right? Similar to taking off the 1mm from a wooden table top. It would take forever, but you COULD do it. So, in the end, isn't it more a matter of which particular bevel angle you like better for your face?

Originally Posted by pjrage

It would also seem, though, that with enough strokes, it shouldn't matter how narrow or wide the bevel is. It may not hone up as quickly, but if you spend enough time at it, either way should work, right? Similar to taking off the 1mm from a wooden table top. It would take forever, but you COULD do it.

I have been convinced of that for a long time, and in general I still believe that to be true for the most part. But there's one important other consideration that plays a part, imho. Every time you push the razor over the hone, there is a slight detrimental effect on the very tip of the edge. On slurry that effect is very noticeable, but also on any other surface, it is present. At the same time, there is metal removed from the bevel faces and this should overrule the tip deterioration. The razor is sharpened more than it is dulled, at least if you use a surface worthy of the name hone. Try honing on a piece of glass or marble, there is so little sharpening that you'll notice that a keen fragile edge slowly looses instead of gains sharpness. Now, you may ask yourself, what has this theory to do with the width of the bevel. Remember that on a narrow bevel the hone removes (on a submicron scale) a much thicker layer of steel with each stroke than when it has to work a wide bevel. The tip deterioration factor remains pretty much the same. So there is a different ratio between those two.
Take the BBW. I once expected that it would be a great polisher, when used with water, just like its big sister Coticule. I did some experiment. As much as I like the BBW with slurry, with only water it seems to slowly dull the edge instead of only polishing it. And yet, add a couple of layers of tape to the spine and it will cut a secondary bevel. That secondary bevel won't become very wide, since the Blue-with-water looses it's power very soon.

It is a hypothetical theory, and I might be wrong, but for the time being, it explains what I get, and it helps me devising new honing experiments. That's good enough for now, till some deviating experience force me to adjust my thinking.

To reiterate, by altering the bevel width, we not only (exponentially) change the time it takes to achieve our desired goals, but at very narrow bevels we also change the hones sharpening/deteriorating ratio.

I have literally tried thousands of strokes on a Coticule with water, thinking that it would only take enough time to get edge refinement off it. It did not. It seemed just to polish, without taking nor gaining sharpness. With the procedure presented in this thread, I got consederably keener results. Otherwise I wouldn't have posted. I hope others can confirm it. If not, I'll still be a happy honer. And shaver.

Originally Posted by pjrage

So, in the end, isn't it more a matter of which particular bevel angle you like better for your face?

I don't really care that much about bevel angle. They differ, roughly between 15 and 20 degrees on razors, and I could never quite determine a personal preference. I have noticed that some edges tend to be less brittle with an additional layer of tape. Yet I can't feel that during the shave. Only see it with the stereomicroscope and notice better edge longevity. But that's completely beyond the scope of this thread.

Best regards,
Bart.