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.....