Printable View
It has the colour of one, it is as hard, but it has a mixed sort of structure I haven't seen before, with inclusions more like certain Arkansas stones - your expertise gentlemen, if you please!
Overall size: 126 x 55mm
Dry:
Attachment 21589
Wet:
Attachment 21590
Full size scans here and here.
I've seen Charnleys that loo0ked white in photos but in actuality they are a light olive green. Some have magenta streaking in them. If ther stone is an olive green it might be a Charnley. :shrug:
It certainly looks like one, but it also looks a lot like some vintage coticules, especially with those black spots that manganese produces in coticules. Some Charnley Forest hones are said to have hard deposits in them that make them unsuitable for honing, which is why the Whittle Hill quarry produced the best stone in the region - inclusion free.
Regards,
Neil
I'm certain it isn't a coticule. It's too hard, there are no layers visible on the flanks as there are on hard green coticules, and I can find no trace of spessartine.
It does have the particular Charnley Forest mossy green complexion. There are patches with diffuse purplish hints, and there is a purple vein too (difficult to see in the pictures, but the leftmost queer one).
I read about non-Whittle Hill stones having (hard) inclusions and being stingy, but I don't know what form the inclusions take. It's the first time I see inclusions of this kind in a CF-like stone: as if crevices have been filled with fine hour-glass sand of matching colours and an occasional small black pebble.
In want of alternatives, my best guess would still be it's a CF, but hone afficionado hi_bud_gl had some interesting contrariant observations. CF, he reasons, is a very hard and very slow-cutting hone. Therefore most of them were cut oblong in lenghts above 8", usually even 10"-13", otherwise honing would have been far too weary. A CF of only 5", like this one, wouldn't make sense. Therefore it most likely is something else.
- but what?
Give it a go with a razor or two and if it doesn't work for them perhaps a knife blade. Whatever it may be if it is effective that is the important thing. The ideal situation is that you would find that it is the greatest razor hone yet known to man. Then you would be the only one in the world with one, no one would know what it is, and hi_bud and I would be pulling our hair out. :gaah: :D
Actually, I think it is! Now you and hi_bus_gl can start competing for my favour. Let me think what I'd like...
Heavens, was that a pig flying past the window?
:roflmao
h;mmmmmmmmmm interesting
is this guy pulling our legs Jimmy?
Lets be strong not to fall his ........../
Darn I want test that stone?
Problem is this .This person is overseas that kills me or i would say send it to me and let me try.
Now lets get serious.
Jimmy is right try it out.the easiest way to figure it out .
at first lap the stone you will feel it feels like a glass after lapping.
Then make a slurry use dmt or hardest stone you have.Use slurry from it not another slurry stone.
Then hone the blade.check it under miscroscope.
Edge wont be as shiny as come of from norton 8 but will be finer.(all this done with water)
after this
try same blade with oil edge will be wonderful
Lastly lETS HOPE THIS STONE WON'T BE MISTAKE MADE " CLUED TO THE BASE UPSIDE DOWN."
From what I've read, the stones that didn't come from the Whittle Hill quarry tended to be mostly olive green in colour and given to inclusions - they are said to be a recrystallised form of chert (flinty stuff) of which the novaculites like arkansas stones are formed. One reference cited that darker areas going towards purple were not desirable, as a lot of the faults were found in the dark areas.
The size is a bit odd to me. Mostreferences I've seen say that the stone is so slow that it was usually cut a lot larger than the usual hones, say 250mm or more, so you got more out of it on each stroke.
Regards,
Neil
Neil, did what you read say that stones from the Whittle Hill Quarry were not olive green in color or that they were olive green but without the inclusions ?Quote:
Originally Posted by Neil Miller
Jimmy - it said that the best ones tended towards a greyish colour (it didn't say that there were not olive coloured ones), that they had red spots and swirls and that the ones from the lesser quarries were decidely green and had inclusions. A lot of it was crushed and used as roadstone. The ones with large dark areas appear to had have softer veins with hard bits in the veins.
Regards,
Neil
Hmm, :hmmm: Neil, you may have just made my day. The description above sounds very like my Charnley Forest stone gotten from a vendor of antique tools in the UK thanks to littlesilverbladefromwale.Quote:
Originally Posted by Neil Miller
It is shown below underneath the Charnley that hi_bud so kindly loaned to me for a comparison. :tu
Edit; hi_bud's stone is a lovely piece as well.
That's right Jimmy - both lovely stones. The ruler in the pic bears out the longer=better-for-honiong theory, too! Just one other thing - one person said that the grain on his Charnley had a grain that was almost 3D - that you could "look down" into it, sort of thing.
Regards,
Neil
Another thanks is in order. I would say that is true of mine as well.Quote:
Originally Posted by Neil Miller
Hmm interesting treand this is....
Now I feel the need.... I want one Charnley :p
Yes this all is very interesting. Thank you all for your thoughts!
I'll try and make some time this weekend to engage in a bit of honing.
Neil, what is (are) your source(s) of all this wonderful information? I found some info on the net, but nothing very detailed, mostly just a line or two on Charnley Forests. Not that I doubt what you write - it's just that I would like to read all of it!
Aaaargh! There were quite a few different sources - I wish I had made a note of them! I will post the links to them as I find them again. For now, here are a few to be getting on with:Quote:
Originally Posted by Oldengaerde
1
2
3
4
5
6
Tiy may have to read down into some of the articles before getting to the reference, which is sometimes quite short. There were others - on woodworking forums and so on - I'll post the links when I find them again.
Regards,
Neil
I guess you guys saw this - £83, not bad!
Regards,
Neil
Yes, it was on my watch list (and that of at least one other member). Not bad at all, £83.
It's the same as this one by the way.
The hone of the original question is indeed a Charnley Forest. After some honing with it, I can say it is marginally harder than other CF's and produces an ever so slightly rougher result (meaning it can well be used as a final polisher).
Moreover, I found another hone that has similar inclusions to the ones that fed my suspicion. This one is an unmistakeable CF in boxing, colour (including purple streaks), behaviour and size. It's the second stone from the left and the aberrant inclusions can be seen in the top section of the (the swirly bit).
Dry:
Attachment 22528
Wet:
Attachment 22529
Full size scans here and here.
WOW
ARE YOU SITTING ON CHARNLEY FOREST FACTORY?
HOW MANY YOU HAVE NOW?
sorry about capitals didn't relize .
Congratulations great collection
Hahaha! I'd wish!
It's just that prior to visiting these bearings the thought never occurred to me that these old grimed hones were fit for razors too. Now that I'm enlightened I finally gave them due respect, cleaning and lapping them. And now that I've used them: bugging each acquintance and checking out every place I can remember where and with whom I think I saw them...
Here some pictures of the stone from the first post loose from its setting. Attachment 23897Attachment 23898Attachment 23899Attachment 23900
Shape, colour and texture (the latter two admittedly not very clearly visible in the pictures) of the sides and back corroberate the CF-classification.
The glue used is a composite based on beeswax. It still smells remarkably strong of it! I couldn't say what more it contains, skin, collagen, casein - does any of you know what was generally used? The darker shiny spot are resin-like, but I think they're just dried and hardened residues of oil that leaked in.
What's interesting too is the large chip: there's glue between it and the rest of the stone. That means it broke before the stone was set and probably after the box hollow was carved. This was made to measure, following the shape and varying thickness of the stone. I think the craftsman just roughly refitted the fragment with a dollop of glue without caring if it was exactly in place, just putting it back to fill the space.
