Results 21 to 30 of 34
Thread: Newbie question on hone use
-
08-06-2010, 01:21 PM #21
Here's some photos of my combo stones. The biggest one comes from Michael -- almost 9" by almost 4". It's like honing on a dinner table, and I never use it. The middle hone is the one with the most veins and magnesium spotting, but it's the one I use the most. The small one is excellent too. I hope this helps.
-
08-06-2010, 03:06 PM #22
A. I'm sooo jealous!!! And it looks totally homogeneous...isn't that desirable?
B. Why don't you use the 9x4?
D. By using the narrower hone, don't you run the risk of getting an uneven hone from using an X pattern?
After our discussion I'm resolved to keeping the stone but I have not yet heard back from BSS and I'd simply like to know if he has another one with less blemishes to swap. THANKS!
Lastly, if I were to add just one more stone to extend the range of options I have with regards to managing my razors...what would you recommend?
-
08-06-2010, 08:37 PM #23
Homogeneous Coticules are boring, texture and/or some imperfections will give it character.
Such wide natural hones are nice to show off to friends but impractical for razor honing IMHO.
Probably less chance than with a 3" wide hone, but it's not really an issue because you can just lap it once in a while to keep it flat
I wouldn't buy anything finer than this Coticule just yet. First learn how to get the most out of this one. I would recommand a coarse synthetic (combo) so you don't have to rely on using slurry for bevel setting.
Here are some nice Coticules with character
-
-
08-06-2010, 08:59 PM #24
That is one beautiful Coti. It looks like someone speckled it with blue paint...very nice.
Thanks....
BTW, If you ever get sick of it, Well, you know.....We have assumed control !
-
08-06-2010, 09:42 PM #25
-
08-06-2010, 10:18 PM #26
I think you're a little confused - the homogenous hones are in no way better or worse functionally. It depends on the garnet content in the hone and the composition of fossilised binding particles. The lines are cosmetic, usually manganese deposits.
There is not any relationship between quality of honing and the consistency of a coticule's colour. And when you ask 'will they hone as well?' it would depend upon what you deem 'as well' to be...but I digress. Bottom line is that the character associated with the natural imperfections within the rock is purely cosmetic.
And Jeff - that 9x4 would serve FAR more use as two 9x2s. Have a professional cut it up! I'd personally hate to hone on such a wide hone. And if you never use it as you say, then really I don't know what you are doing with it.Last edited by Scipio; 08-06-2010 at 10:23 PM.
-
08-06-2010, 10:54 PM #27
Again I'll ask at the risk of sounding dense.
Why is a wide stone not as good as a narrower one? If I'm dragging a razors edge across a stone that is as wide or wider than the stone...doesn't that help to get a more even and consistent hone versus dragging a razor blade across a stone that is say 1/2" narrower than the edge.
-
08-06-2010, 11:12 PM #28
Firstly, a four inch hone is far wider than any razors edge, they aren't often much greater than 3 inches. He could cut it in two, sell one and still have a better hone than before!
Second, many prefer an X stroke for 2 reasons. 1) If the hone is even a tiny bit out of true (ie. not 100% flat) the X will minimize any event that the razors edge will not touch the hone. 2) Often a blade is warped. Again, the latter applies in that it is easier to put a correction stroke on a narrow hone.
-
08-06-2010, 11:15 PM #29
Some guys feel a narrow hone is better for smiling blades. In the case of the 9x4, 4 inches wide is really wide, so about an inch of the hone is not being used, more or less. I see what Scipio means...
Cutting into 2in wide pieces would be more practical. However, That is a rare site, and me, personally, I wouldn't cut it. Also, any work done on a narrow hone, like 1.5 can be done on a 3 inch wide hone...It's personal preference....We have assumed control !
-
08-06-2010, 11:19 PM #30