Thread: Hone identification

I've avoided commenting on this one because I only have negative comments. To me the slurry of the one one the left does not look like that of a Thuringian. The spottiness of the one on the right makes me doubt that it is a coticule. I'm sorry to say though that I don't have any good suggestion as to what they actually might be.

In the close up of the smaller of the two if those are little dark speckles it could very well be a Tam. Not sure on either of them. If they are good hones when steel meets stone call them what you will, that is all that matters.

Not really negative comments imo, any info is good info. Even if they turn out to be something I can't use for razors, I have may other things I can try them with and really that has been half the fun is messing with them lol. Plus it gives me a reason to get more razors so I can eventually try my hand at honing!

Originally Posted by StevenP

Not really negative comments imo, any info is good info. Even if they turn out to be something I can't use for razors, I have may other things I can try them with and really that has been half the fun is messing with them lol. Plus it gives me a reason to get more razors so I can eventually try my hand at honing!

By negative comments, I didn't mean a criticism of the hones, just that I could only speculate on what I thought they were not.

Howard has been a sporadic member lately but he is a geologist. You might consider sending him a PM or contacting him at his website, ThePerfectEdge. Most likely he could give you a more informed idea about your hones.

The left hone looks like a Thuringan/German Waterstone and the one on the right is a real mystery. The speckles resemble a Tam O'Shanter but the condition of the stone says otherwise. Tam's are a very hard stone so to see one so beat up suggests otherwise. It would have to be compared to a known Tam. Also, Tam's are a bear to raise a slurry on.

Just My $.02,