Thread: Vintage Hones

Ok, I want to know why "Vintage" hones are better? I've had this conversation with some pretty heavy hitters. Howard for one. We talked about Coticules He feels as do I, it is contingent on the stone. My contentions is that you could have a hone today that's every bit as good as a Vintage hone. What do you think? Here something I posted in another thread. Hones, or say, Coticules from the 1960's would be considered Vintage by today's standards. A Coticule from the Swinging 60's would be Vintage.

Now, fast forward to today. Ardennes opened up a mine that's been shut since 1960. I, and some of you have hones from that mine. Are they considered "Vintage"? Hmmm, Good question right ! But, I want to know why they are considered, "Better" I've read this before on the forum by senior members, but no one can give me a valid answer other than, "people hold onto good stuff" Wow. really, Now, Escher is vintage, they are not mining any new hones. That mine's been shut for years, like Nakayama. I don't know about that stuff that Mueller sells, I don't own any. But I have seen my share of Vintage Coticules. The Garnet content is not any higher, so is just that their old, not that they cut or give a better edge. We like them because they are old and collectable. Is it Psycological? We paid a lot, therefore, we want it to cut better...?I really want to know. Those of you who have "Vintage stones" Chime and let me here your thoughts...Especially if you've had any evaluations done, or have done side by side comparisons...What are your findings.....

when talking about a piece of natural rock. I dont think vintage really comes into play other than talking about collectability.

I have a vintage coticule combo that came with a wooden box and instructions. It does not work any better/worse(all coticules are a bit different), but it has more of a collector value to it than a new stone.


That is like talking about vintage diamonds vs new diamonds i guess....

Yes, Thank you, That the answer I'm looking for. Ive read time and time again, that Vintage is better. It is not. It has nothing to do with. It depends on the stone. You are right, Vintage is cool, and Collectible. I agree.

I think vintage vs new comes in to play when you are dealing with actual manufactured items.

For example, the vintage norton stones apparently have some magic that makes the axemen scream 'YEAAAHHHH!"

Originally Posted by zib

Yes, Thank you, That the answer I'm looking for. Ive read time and time again, that Vintage is better. It is not. It has nothing to do with. It depends on the stone. You are right, Vintage is cool, and Collectible. I agree.

The only way I could see it's possible that they are any better whatsoever is if the selection process has changed. If they were more selective in what they would toss out. It would still make very little difference on any individual stone, but less stones with inclusions and irregularities may lead to the feeling of superior quality.

Just out of curiosity, who said they are better ? I've read that the best Arkansas stones were mined years ago but I haven't read that about coticules. IME, having 12 coticules that I would say are an appropriate size to hone razors, and 2 that are a little too small ,that they are all good. Of all of my coticules three are recent production that came from Ardennes and one of those is my 'best' one. An 8x3 natural.

I have a 'Deep Rock', an 'Old Rock' and a Salamander, all with labels. The 'Old Rock' is my 2nd best and IIRC that came out of Ardennes back in the old days. My impression from my own experience is that they are all good. Reading Bart's comparisons he says that they are close and that some cut faster, are harder or softer. I haven't had the amount of experience with them that Bart has had but in my limited experience I have drawn the same conclusion.

Bottom line is if you get a coticule and hone razors with it and if it delivers the goods you will stick with it and if it doesn't you will move on until you find something that does. The guy I got my best one from, TheTopher, used to be a member here and is an expert honer. He had bought his 8x3 natural from Howard and it wasn't doing it for him.

He told me that it would sharpen a razor satisfactorily to shave but not to the 'scary sharp' level that he looked for. He sold the coticule to me for what he had in it and I love the edges it produces but I'm not crazy about 'scary sharp'.

Talking about vintage, AFAIC Eschers are the best natural hone for finishing. They are not as versatile as a coticule on the lower end but, for me, they produce a finer edge on the top end. I also think that vintage Eschers are better than the Thuringans that came later. Mullers and such as that. Just IMHO. That said sometimes I like to hone a razor on a coticule for the feel of the edge that it produces and I do think it is a unique and characteristic feel. YMMV. I have yet to try the legendary Nakayamas or any other J-nats... from what I've read they are quite the finisher too. Nice to have so many choices of hones to experience.

Its all the same rock AFAIC, one piece may be better than the other, it would depend on what nature has done and not when it was mined. Vintage is cool because most vintage stones are set to a wood block or box and have a little human history to them.

Rich some one could argue and say it is better because At that time they dig out good ones and left bad ones untouched. Example why there is No good new Escher's available now? Couple years ago they surfaced and wasn't even close to old ones.
. New ones which i have experienced isn't good. Smart people dig as much as they could.
In the other hand if that rock formed millions years ago it shouldn't be differences among them. at least a lot.
I cannot say anything about coticules.
Depends how deep or which layer's etc.
I am really not archeologist .lol
Hope this helps.

Originally Posted by hi_bud_gl

Rich some one could argue and say it is better because At that time they dig out good ones and left bad ones untouched. Example why there is No good new Escher's available now? Couple years ago they surfaced and wasn't even close to old ones.
. New ones which i have experienced isn't good. Smart people dig as much as they could.
In the other hand if that rock formed millions years ago it shouldn't be differences among them. at least a lot.
I cannot say anything about coticules.
Depends how deep or which layer's etc.
I am really not archeologist .lol
Hope this helps.

Yes, good point. The new so called Escher's aren't as good as the Vintage ones. The older Escher's are superior IMHO...

I'm really talking about Vintage Coticules....

I think that the argument that rock X, which is however many millions of years old, is better than rock Y, which is however many millions of years plus a few decades old, is pretty redundant. If there is a difference in quality then I think that it would be due to being able to be more selective a few decades ago, when the supply may have seemed more inexhaustible, as opposed to today, when we are becoming more aware just how finite these resources are, and rocks that may have been discarded back then, now make the grade to be sold. But, as always, we are dealing with natural articles that do not have the consistency of synthetic abrasives. Each hone is an individual, and therefore it is equally likely that the one in a million hone could be found today, just like they could have been found decades ago.

Another factor at play here, and one that is not just limited to coticules, is that today there isn't the same diversity when it comes to sources of honestones. Considering the coticules, Ardennes Coticule have worked one mine, and have recently reopened another. Going back to the 1800's Belgium was exporting hones from many areas, including but not limited to: Ambleve, Bihain, Herbeumont, Lierreux, Namur, Recht, Salm-Chateau, Spa and Vielsalm. With more areas exporting more hones, competition was higher and only the best would have been able to complete in the international market.

I have coticules from: Ambleve, Bihain, Herbeumont, Namur, Spa and some that are labelled as Old Rock. There are definite differences between these hones, as would be expected based on the fairly wide geographical range, but they aren't all excellent by virtue of the fact that they are vintage. The hones that were mined near Spa were regarded as being without equal in the rest of Europe when the stones were being worked in the 1800's, and my Spa hones are better than my other Belgians. My Namur hones are excellent also, Namur was one of the principle sources of export for hones in the 1700's up until the mid 1800's before their supply was superceded by the more familiar sources.

Also, way back when, Coticules were used primarily as razor hones, and those that were exported would have been selected based on their suitability for that particular purpose. So that would explain why vintage coticules may seem better to us as razor enthusiasts. With the rebirth of the straight razor being a much more recent phenomenon, the Coticule has been adopted by other fields as well and therefore the selection of the stone more recently, would have to embrace all applications, and not just razor hones.

As long as you are buying from a knowledgable source, who knows what you intend to use the stone for, I don't think one has to worry about how much better the vintage ones may have been. Coticules today are being retailed by many people who are primarily straight razor enthusiasts themselves, and therefore know what a good coticule for a straight razor is. Older stones are not better simply because they are older, it's just that certain excellent sources of hones may have been worked out may years ago, and as the stones became more unavailable so they become the subject of myth.

Kindest regards,
Alex