Thread: Microbevels.

Originally Posted by guitstik

It is MHBHO that if the manufacturer has to "tweak" the edge with a micro bevel on certain razors due to the characteristics of that batch of steel then there is something wrong and the razor should not be sold. How many novice users out there will know to put a micro bevel on it the next time it needs to be honed, for that matter, how many honemeisters will know to do it from the get go? As I see it, putting a micro bevel on a razor is just making an unacceptable adjustment to a razor just to get it out the door. It is rather like GM selling a bunch of "known" defective cars and letting the consumer deal with it down the road.

I Truley do not think Mr Zowada was/is selling defective razors.JMO

Not knocking any particular maker BUT, if a razor edge performs better(edge retention and chipping is part of performance among others) then whoever makes the blade should tweek the angle to be honed where tape is not necessary. Why should an end user have to do this when it could easily be done in the design? Again its not a big deal to tape an edge, but why should someone "have" to. My .02.

The premise - that nothing other than honing the razor as is - has been my experience for the vast majority of razors that have ever come across my stones. I am no pro honer, though, but I'd bet 75 vintage and two new razors have crossed my stones, and only one had a chipping problem and needed an increase in angle. I gave it away and then the guy who got it told me it settled down and no longer needs it

That makes sense as additional honing with tape can permanently change the geometry of the blade by a small amount, which may be enough to offset the issues. And some blades that are overheated slightly while buffing or grinding, would have problems at the thinnest part of the blade which is the edge.

So, getting back to the OP's question. Is the general consensus, a microbevel is used when a blade honed at its natural angle is prone to chipping ?

If that is true then IMO regardless of who made the blade there is a fault with the steel and thus the razor. Wheather that is due to the choice of steel or its heat treatment is irrelevant, the fact remains in order to get the razor shaving as a user (customer) would expect you need to do something out of the ordinary to overcome a manufacturing fault.

In this day and age where steels are manufactured with incredible uniformity and heat treating ovens able to be controlled to fractions of a degree. It tells me that either the blade manufacturer has chosen the wrong steel or their heat treatment is wrong / inconsistent and I would expect and decent manufacturer to sort the inherent problem out. I wouldn't expect them to effectively mask the fault and sell the deeefective item as a premium quality product.

I think we need some of the true experts (razormakers) to chime into this thread. JMO

Originally Posted by pixelfixed

I think we need some of the true experts (razormakers) to chime into this thread. JMO

It would certainly be interesting to hear from a manufacturer, especially from one who has the problems mentioned.

Out of curiosity I have just finished a shave with my little short blade (which now takes the role of experimenting blade). Half of my face I shaved with the blade as it was (no microbevel). For the other half I set a microbevel using the method described earlier by Euclid440, I verified the existence of the microbevel via a 100x hand held microscope. I could tell no difference what so ever in the shave.

From that, for the time being (I reserve the right to change my mind pending further experience ) I have drawn the following conclusions.

Barring faults with the blade (ie microchipping with a standard set bevel) there is no difference in terms of the actual shave between a razor with a correctly set and honed standard bevel and one with a microbevel.

With that in mind and the understanding that manufacturers such as Hart are relatively small operations producing a product for what is essentially a small neesh market. I can quite understand why they will pass and sell a razor that in order for it to shave properly requires a microbevel.

Is it a fault? I would say that it most certainly is, the question is really whether or not this fault is acceptable or not. Personally, when you weigh everything up I think it is.

Clearly this defect will only show up at the very final stage of production. At that point the manufacturer has to decide whether to reject the blade or pass it. If they decide to reject every single blade with that fault it will ultimately dive up the cost of the razors that are passed (the losses have to be made up somehow). Now it is entirely possible that the increased cost no longer makes it viable for the company to make razors so they stop making them.

I know I have rambled on a bit but in conclusion I would rather see these companies exist and make new quality razors for us to enjoy. Even if the odd one or two need special treatment to get them shaving how we like.

The alternative is that these companies cease to exist and the only razors available are old vintage ones which sooner or later, the supply will dry up.

Ahhhhhh deep breath aaaaand relax

Guitstik -

...As I see it, putting a micro bevel on a razor is just making an unacceptable adjustment to a razor just to get it out the door. It is rather like GM selling a bunch of "known" defective cars and letting the consumer deal with it down the road...

- like GM killing the electric car with the spectacular bombing of the EV1, or the recall of their Spark mini, or their faulty analysis system causing at least 13 deaths and the recall of the Chevrolet Cobalt, or the book 'Unsafe At any Speed' about GMs 1960s Corvair...?

That is just the tip of the iceberg, even Ford and other makes are just as bad. It's a fact of life, lets face it.

Regards,
Neil

I dont think anyone is claiming that a micro-bevel is or gives a superior shave on razors with good enough steel - at least, I'm not and the posts don't seem to be - the non-anecdotal ones, anyway.

With problem steel it is another matter, at least most of us are agreed on that. And it is not just niche makers like Hart that do or have done it.

As for 'true experts - razormakers - chiming in" - why? There are a myriad of users compared to makers for one, users are still using and evaluating razors made by long dead razormakers for two, and thirdly a modern maker has a vested interest and may be assumed in legal parlance to be compromised by virtue of a biased opinion.

One has to explore all the avenues and contrary opinions, otherwise we would be living in a fascist dictatorship.

Regards,
Neil

What I got a kick out of was this post by Tim Zowada 4 years ago ....... after many threads, that went for pages and pages, of guys opining on the 'double bevel'.

Then, updating, Tim said, "Someday I'll update the web page to show just what I'm doing. In short, I don't really create a double bevel. I use extra tape, and an Escher, to very carefully knock of the teeth/serrations off the edge. I actually strive to avoid a double bevel." This was somewhat confusing at the time, considering everything that had been posted before he 'clarified' things.

http://straightrazorpalace.com/honin...tml#post709701

Myself I bought two Zowada Damascus razors, one from Classic, and another off of the bay. The one from Classic appeared to have a double bevel and shaved well. The one from the bay had a couple of chips in the bevel and I honed them out to a normal single bevel. It too shaved well. Both since sold, so don't ask.