Thread: The differences among finishing stone.

I am confused. The angle of the bevel is determined by the length from where the spine contacts the stone and the tip of the edge and the thickness of the spine.

Take Care,
Richard

Originally Posted by hi_bud_gl

this is what exactly what i am thinking except last part. Steel was same
4 same kind the blade.
(I PLAYED AROUND A LOT now with different steels but 4 was same brand).
Do you think could be the stones will leave different angle edges on the straight razor?
This is may be the reason price differences among Japanese stones?
more angle but same sharpness leaving stone is more expensive then less angle but with same sharpness?

Sham you would obviously know if all 4 were a similar hardness so that is not a variable in this case but possibly cutting speed is a factor.
I don't think awasedo are priced on the angles they can create more on cosmetics & fineness etc.

Originally Posted by pinklather

I'm still wrapping my head around how the trailing edge of the bevel would get polished before the leading edge. Something has to allow slurry to invade underneath the leading edge and keep it lifted until the trailing edge is hone away, lowering to leading edge into contact w/ the stone.

Originally Posted by riooso

I am confused. The angle of the bevel is determined by the length from where the spine contacts the stone and the tip of the edge and the thickness of the spine.

I think the key factor may be that a slow cutting stone may not be equally abrasive for its full length & the slurry could create a cushion isolating parts of the bevel. I don't know that this accounts 100% for Sham's experience but on something like a plane blade with a large bevel the effect was obvious.

A faster cutting stone mixed with the variable of a razor with deeper hollows, and more flex, might account for some of these variables. If the razor flexes the back of the bevel gets cut more.

I think the key factor may be that a slow cutting stone may not be equally abrasive for its full length & the slurry could create a cushion isolating parts of the bevel. I don't know that this accounts 100% for Sham's experience but on something like a plane blade with a large bevel the effect was obvious. [/QUOTE]

So if one part of the blade was being cut more quickly, the rear of the bevel would be ground down, allowing the leading edge to be cut and laying flat on the stone. The part that was more slow would have the trailing edge not yet fully ground - holding the leading edge up and letting slurry flow underneath until it had finally ground down the trailing edge sufficiently.

It seems this would produce one end of the bevel being fully polished, while the other end would only have reflective polish at the trailing edge of the bevel. If this is the case, reversing the direction/orientation of the stone - now placing the faster cutting section on the part of the blade not yet fully polished - should quickly cut the unground trailing edge until it lays flat, lowering the leading edge into contact w/ the stone. Not all stones can be reversed for direction, due to unfinished side edges getting in the way. If the stone permits stroking from either side - this test might confirm the hypothesis.

Originally Posted by riooso

I am confused. The angle of the bevel is determined by the length from where the spine contacts the stone and the tip of the edge and the thickness of the spine.

Take Care,
Richard

Richard
i am sorry not being clear enough. what you see in the pictures 3 stones edge result. think about only bevel.
lets say assume none of the blade has spine.
lets say i made 1000x times magnification of the edge and took the picture.
i am telling all this as a example. trying to be clear.
I always thought
sharpness of the edge depends o sharp we get the "v".
this is why we get 'v' shape that is it. we will not be able to push edge to get more sharper.
this is always been my thinking.
that is why i used Term a lot PROPERLY HONED BLADE.
What i mean by that honer gets maximum out of the blade and that is it.
he cannot push more because edge gets overhoned and becomes fragile.
Now i am getting a little different idea.
lets say this example.
i finish the edge an Escher. i see this is maximum sharpness i can get from the blade.
if i continue a little more honing edge an Escher edge start to over hone.
Now i take second blade and bring the edge same level using an Escher again. As i call it usually properly edge then i dont use Escher any more instead i switch different hone and continue honing.
Edge doesn't get overhoned but gets more sharper and smoother?
My question why? it should overhone but it wont?
(name of the stones was just example)
This is makes me confuse.

Originally Posted by hi_bud_gl

Edge doesn't get overhoned but gets more sharper and smoother?
My question why? it should overhone but it wont?
(name of the stones was just example)
This is makes me confuse.

the way I see it the second stone is finer than the Escher.

Maybe I missed it, but has it been specified that each of the 4 razors has identical geometry?

Originally Posted by mainaman

the way I see it the second stone is finer than the Escher.

Interesting concept. I've never heard of anyone 'overhoning' on an Escher. Moler in The Barber Manual (circa 1928) says you can on a coticule but the Escher is ideal for a beginner because you cannot overhone. Anything is possible though I guess.

Originally Posted by JimmyHAD

Interesting concept. I've never heard of anyone 'overhoning' on an Escher. Moler in The Barber Manual (circa 1928) says you can on a coticule but the Escher is ideal for a beginner because you cannot overhone. Anything is possible though I guess.

Jimmy you can over hone in any stone .it will just take more or less time.
of course honer should know what he is doing too.
Lets say to overhone blade on escher you will need to make perfect strokes without pressure for at least an hour very slowly.
You can get there eventually. is this a good idea? of course not just crazy people same as me will do it for test purposes.
4 razors don't have exact same angles-- bevel and edge angle i mean. some has been used more or less.

Originally Posted by mainaman

the way I see it the second stone is finer than the Escher.

i would be agree with you Stefen but why 1 st stone overhones then?(escher was example i mention that in op). it shouldn't be overhone if hone is course right?
We are talking on finishing stage .
we are not talking using tremendous pressure and getting similar edge on 1k level. i hope you understand what i mean.