Thread: A reason for narrow hones and strops?

Regarding this topic....

I don´t know why I have to do an X motion if the stone is 3" wide

Or the X move is not needed, or the 3" stones are not needed in razor sharpening....

Originally Posted by vulcano

or the 3" stones are not needed in razor sharpening....

that's it.

I guessed that....

Originally Posted by vulcano

I don´t know why I have to do an X motion if the stone is 3" wide

To even out the action on the blade.

Originally Posted by vulcano

Or the X move is not needed, or the 3" stones are not needed in razor sharpening....

Larger stones provide more stability, especially for the inexperienced hand.

X

Have you ever thought that 3" hone requires a precise gind on a razor compared to a 1.25"- 1.5" Hone?? Perhaps having a thin hone made the task of honing poorly ground razors easier, (I have found this to be the case and can only hone a couple of my razors on thin hones due to thier bow or swelling spines). I belive you get far greater control over the process on a thin hone. As mentioned, the contact area being decreased also makes for an easier passage over the hone thus giving better control. I look as the X pattern as a Razors equivelant to the Knife sharpening steel in its motion and being that you can't hone a razor on a Steel, then a thin hone does the same job. If using a 3" hone you can X hone but if the razor is well ground and straight edged then a straight up down stroke is OK and with ba slight heal leading all the better.
As to strops, I think the theorys will translate as well. I find I get better control over the process on a 2" strop due to the easier passage of the blade over the strop but still getting the same amount of draw. I can concentrate on needed areas of the blade better on a thinner strop the same as the hone, this is best noted on full hollows. A wedge razor is a forgiving beast when it comes to hones and strops and I find the wider strops as good as the thinner when it comes to wedges. A thin blade like a full hollow will match a strops cross sectional profile while traveling oiver it. So I suspect that unless your strop is dead flat you will be applying uneven stropping to the surface. This is why I think that the Xpattern is needed for stropping on wider strops, you are effectivly only stropping on a part of the strop and even then it is decreasing as the stroke progresses so that all points of the balde will recieve even attention. With a 2" strop this becomes even more controled by way of the fact that less blade is in contact with it and it is not unreasonable to do W stropping to get the same effect as X but gaining the ability to apply more action to areas requiring it.
Arguments that material costs were the factor in hone and strop manufacture do not stand up IMO, the argument that inconsistancies in manufacture promoted hone and strop development I think is a valid argument.
I posted my most used hone the other day that was passed down to me by my father. This hone is 1 1/4" wide and has no problem honing any shape of razor. My Norton I find I'm using just a half of the surface and I must appologise to Tony too, I cut the Thurigen I got off him down the middle to make it 2" and also in half. I now have two Thuringens of barber hone size and rubbing stones.

Sorry guys, I "waffled" a bit there

PuFF

If I had to choose between a wide hone, 2.5-3.0 inches, or a narrow hone, 1.0-1.5, I would choose the narrow hone.
The reason is that the narrow hones can accomadate the differences in bevel angles that exist with razors that have even the slightest "smile" or curve in the edge or slight warping.

Only a razor with a perfectly straight edge will lay flat on the hone for the full length of the razor. All others will not. Thus a person will need to do something in either their technique or tools to accomadate the differences in angles.

For some razors with a pronounced "smile" or "taper" I will use the side of a 1" thick single grit hone like the Norton 1-4-8k.
As has been said by others in this thread the narrow hones allow for more contact in a given portion of the blade and I also agree that the pressure is increased so one must be mindful of that.

If I had to do it all over again I would select hones that were 1.25 inches wide. In fact, I just may cut my Nortons right down the middle with a metal cutting band saw.

Just my two cents,

Hi Randy, does that mean that you don't use the rolling hone method?

I recently honed those Joseph Rodgers 6/8 wedges for Nick that were as curved as a banana.
They honed up excellent on the Norton by rolling the edge from heel to toe with each pass.

In fact, the blade never left the surface of the stone. I never drew the heel across the edge of the stone because the rolling motion did not require it.

Since you are way more experienced than I am, I figured you hone differently, or not?

What I've done is make my paddles very slightly convex. For the razors that are a little off I can get them very close by using light pressure on the concave side with an X pattern on the convex side. Then I finish the job on the convex boron carbide paddle.

I suspect that you could do the same thing with the hones. Give them enough of a belly when you lap them that you can barely feel them rock on a flat surface, and that would probably be enough to handle most of the razors that are worth saving.

Last year I found a large bench strop in an antique shop. While wider than we are discussing here it too was convex. It was leather over felt with about an 1/8" crown. It was a factory made strop too. So maybe narrow abd crowned have soe advanatges.

Tony

You guys might find it interesting to do a search under Google patents with the key words "razor" "strop" and "convex."

Apparently a strop with a convex shape had some desireable property. If you read the description of the invention, you get some insight from the inventor as to why.


Scott