Thread: Vintage Thuringian score--double whammy

My Barber's delight came with a rubber in the box. It is a Y/G.

Thank you for the additional info, Kees and Hatzicho. Do you have any opinions on the second hone? I like the rough hewn backside on it and the extra length. The pictures aren't as good, but I plan to bring them to a gathering this weekend so we can try honing on them. The light should be good outside and I will do the slurry pics at that time.

Not really sure from the pics. Could be a thuringian or not. Better pics with good light will show!

It looks like I was wrong.

Not sure what you mean, adrspach--I think you called it right! It is pretty clear we are talking about a combination Thuringian with rubber in the case of the first hone. As for the second one, my pics aren't so good. In a couple of days I will get better slurry pics of both.

I was wrong with sizing and the slurry stone too.

Originally Posted by adrspach

I was wrong with sizing and the slurry stone too.

Don't worry, sometime happen.

Thanks for the feedback--but the suspense has been killing me, so I got the hones out just now to give them a try with a blade. Here are the results!

First, I took measurements of the shorter hone with its rubber using calipers. The hone itself measures 151 mm X 53 mm. This is 5.95 inches by 2.09 inches. This is very close to the stated dimensions of the famous Barber's Delight. Here they are dry:



After raising a slurry using the rubber:




With blade:



While the shorter hone has a nice soft texture, I was surprised by the truly lovely feel of the longer hone--a silkiness that reminds me of one of my Jnats. Here is a better shot of its back side:



Hope the pics were helpful! I would still love to hear more thoughts from all of the great experts around...

I welcome further thoughts following the pictures. I am truly quite a novice when it comes to hones and am still really puzzled by post #16. Of course it is nearly impossible to prove, but I thought the shorter hone really did look like a Barber's Delight type. And just to clarify, I did not get these at a thrift/antique store. I bought them from an experienced straight razor guy and paid a fairly substantial sum for both--I guess we both felt like we got a good deal out of the bargain.

I would be curious if the slurry pictures might reveal anything useful. I was really surprised that the darker hone felt "nicer."

Anyway here is another picture with some of my favorite razors. I'm not brave enough to hone any of these yet...

Thanks again for the help thus far.

Sorry Rexcarolus,

it's really hard to give any qualified opinion on the second stone. Still the pictures are not good enough. You should take the pictures on a dark underlay (as you did in your last picture) with daylight, if possible outdoors.

Especially the back side of the stone would be interesting. If the natural stone (original mined condition) is still visible in fractions or breakouts of the stone are there, you can at least say with a reasonable certainty if it is a slate stone. Than there is a good chance this to be a thuringian if it performs somehow like or even better than the other combination stone. The pictures of the visible scratches on the stone and your honing descriptions would fit to a thuringian (but also to other hones).