Thread: My razor is too sharp???? I like a duller edge??

Originally Posted by kevint

whoa. ten pages to discuss this. I cannot read all that before forgetting every point that deserves a response.

I have never seen a SEM micrograph of feather's edge or even shaved with one. Nevertheless I am 90% sure the edge is simply a bur. That explains to me why it works and feels the way it is described.


A bur explains to me why a straight razor when pushed goes from sharp/smooth to sharp/harsh.

I add to qualifiers to my definition of sharp. It must be smooth and it must be long lasting. Such a definition keeps me from referring to a bur as sharp.

Here's a pic I took of a Feather DE at 500x


Here's a razor I just honed yesterday to 1.0um at 500x

Sorry I am late to this thread. It has been a long 2 days. I have only read the first 2 pages of posts and decided to put my $.02 in.

"To sharp" is when I get a bunch of weepers. "To sharp" is when I have to be very careful when shaving or I will get cut. "To sharp" is when I simply lay the blade on my face and I get a cut. "To sharp" is when my skin is a bit raw after the shave. That is my definition of to sharp... FOR ME!

To avoid honing a razor to an unacceptable level of sharpness I practice incremental honing. I sneak up on an edge that suits me by honing, shave testing, honing shave testing etc.

If I do manage to get it "to sharp" I take it back to the Norton 4K and start over.

Just my $.02,

Originally Posted by Seraphim

I wouldn't say that I like a duller edge, I simply prefer one that is finished off at a lower grit...

I read your post several times, Seraphim, and I don't think you really spoke to what you think is happening when you "finished off at a lower grit". And, as we have probably demonstrated by this long exchange, everyone here might have difficulty knowing (without powerful micro imaging) what is happening. But, at the minimum some of us prefer a blade not finished to the nth degree of what is commonly referred to as sharpness.

What a great thread! I have learned a lot here in the last couple of days. Thanks! I know that I am a couple of days behind here but it has taken me that long to read and digest all the posts along the way.

I have one! I am willing to except the 0.50 (plus or minus) as the probable minimum edge thickness. The question that I have is this. I hone to 16K then I go to 0.50 and 0.25 micron diamond pastes. The way that I would understand it is that when I finish with the 0.25 diamond I am just polishing the edge a little more. I then go to the Chromium, which is 0.5 micron, and do about 15 laps on the paddle. The claim in the past is that this dulls the razor, but if I understand everything up to now it should not. It should just knock the rough edges off the top of the scratches that the 0.25 diamond left. This is what I have found to be true with my particular way of honing a razor. I did not start using Chromium till about 6 months ago and the degree of smoothness was vastly better.


Thanks,
Richard

Originally Posted by riooso

The claim in the past is that this dulls the razor, but if I understand everything up to now it should not. It should just knock the rough edges off the top of the scratches that the 0.25 diamond left. This is what I have found to be true with my particular way of honing a razor. I did not start using Chromium till about 6 months ago and the degree of smoothness was vastly better.
Thanks,
Richard

I agree with this. The diamond pastes leave the edge/bevel just to harsh for my skin. It feels like the 0.5 chrome ox smooths down the scratches left by the diamond pastes.

Several times I tried following 0.25 micron diamond spray with 0.5 micron Chromium Oxide also. It seemed to work well. But, I did wonder whether I was trading small sharp edged 0.25 micron scratches for larger but smoother 0.5 micron scratches, and whether I was gaining anything.

A month ago I ordered in some 0.3 micron Chromium Oxide powder from Kremer, and have been using that following the 0.25 micron diamond spray. I think 0.3 and 0.25 are essentially the same size.

At times, I wonder whether some of the finesses are significant.

Originally Posted by LarryAndro

Several times I tried following 0.25 micron diamond spray with 0.5 micron Chromium Oxide also. It seemed to work well. But, I did wonder whether I was trading small sharp edged 0.25 micron scratches for larger but smoother 0.5 micron scratches, and whether I was gaining anything.

A month ago I ordered in some 0.3 micron Chromium Oxide powder from Kremer, and have been using that following the 0.25 micron diamond spray. I think 0.3 and 0.25 are essentially the same size.

At times, I wonder whether some of the finesses are significant.

The problem with this is that you seem to be associating particle size with depth/size of cut. Just because something has larger particles does NOT mean that it cuts deeper than something with smaller particles. Particle hardness and particle shape play an important role. A (relatively larger) softer material with rounded edges has the potential to cut less than a smaller harder material with jagged edges.

Buying .3 micron Chromium Oxide sounds good, but what is more important is the tolerance to which the chromium oxide is held. If the tolerance is loose, then you can have (just theoretically speaking here) particles of over 1 micron in the mix, with about 80% of particles .3 micron or smaller. But if ~10% of the particles are in the 1 micron range, then that's what the end product is going to seem like.

Look at a strop loaded with chromium oxide. Now think about how many particles are on there. Imagine that 1 out of 10 particles are 1 micron and all the rest are .3 micron. When you drag a razor over that surface, the 1 micron particles are going to have a profound effect on the end result, much more so than the .3.

The short version: A .5 micron product held to tighter tolerances can be much better than a .3 micron product of loose tolerance.

I'm not saying that your .3 stuff is bad, it could be phenomenal. I'd just look at the purity and tolerance.


Another thing that we haven't even really gotten into is how different manufacturers measure and filter particles. We *think* we're comparing apples to apples but there's no guarantee.

Some companies use the JIS, but but others like Shapton use their own idiosyncratic sizing/grit relationships to come up with a number to stamp on their product.

but if you are going by micron rating, then there is no arbitrary grit assignment

Originally Posted by Ben325e

The problem with this is that you seem to be associating particle size with depth/size of cut. Just because something has larger particles does NOT mean that it cuts deeper than something with smaller particles. Particle hardness and particle shape play an important role. A (relatively larger) softer material with rounded edges has the potential to cut less than a smaller harder material with jagged edges.

Buying .3 micron Chromium Oxide sounds good, but what is more important is the tolerance to which the chromium oxide is held. If the tolerance is loose, then you can have (just theoretically speaking here) particles of over 1 micron in the mix, with about 80% of particles .3 micron or smaller. But if ~10% of the particles are in the 1 micron range, then that's what the end product is going to seem like.

Look at a strop loaded with chromium oxide. Now think about how many particles are on there. Imagine that 1 out of 10 particles are 1 micron and all the rest are .3 micron. When you drag a razor over that surface, the 1 micron particles are going to have a profound effect on the end result, much more so than the .3.

The short version: A .5 micron product held to tighter tolerances can be much better than a .3 micron product of loose tolerance.

I'm not saying that your .3 stuff is bad, it could be phenomenal. I'd just look at the purity and tolerance.


Another thing that we haven't even really gotten into is how different manufacturers measure and filter particles. We *think* we're comparing apples to apples but there's no guarantee.

Some companies use the JIS, but but others like Shapton use their own idiosyncratic sizing/grit relationships to come up with a number to stamp on their product.

Here is an edge I finished using that big green "crayon" brick chrome Oxide (before I had purchased ChrisL's real cromox...). That crayon is well known as having many different particle sizes. From 0.5 up to 3 or 6 micron. Sounds pretty rough, doesn't it?

Here's the result though:

500x




200x


That's a pretty smooth edge (Dovo Renaissance stainless). I used a hanging cavas strop.

Gentleman,

I knew you were dedicated to finding the 'ultimate edge', but would now have to call it obsessed. Me too, until two weeks ago. Using a new level of diamond (.050) on balsa, and the same on a special microfiber pad sent with it, I obtained an edge on two out of seven razors that was too sharp. I won't bore you with the progression, as it seems many here have been to this 'too sharp' place, using various methods. But these two razors wouldn't allow a perpendicular 'scraping' in the divot in my chin, but rather, started to sink in to the skin-repeatedly! I'm not new to this, but this was a first.
Call it what you will, sharp, keen, polished, but I have obtained a surgically sharp edge..... finally!, and discovered that I don't want it.
At the same time, the other razors(various grinds) performed beautifully.
Just throwing my two cents in, though I believe this discussion has no resolution. But isn't it fun to see how many are are similarly obsessed!
Ed
quicknicker