Thread: confused about honing stones

Del,
Instead of beveling a stones edge, and I thought the Norton was actually sold this way, one should slightly round it. A bevel on the stone protects the very edge of the stone from chipping if it gets bumped against something. It does nothing to protect the razor which will contact the hard corner and possibly chip itself. A slight rounding will result in no hard edge for the razors to inadvertantly nick itself on.

For the most part the Norton is the workhorse tool for establishing a bevel and keeping a razor sharp over the long haul. One can go right from the Norton to a hanging strop and then shave. Many take an intermediate step. Here things vary. A barber hone can be used except they tend to be small and unless a well known vintage brand, or one experiemtns you never know just what grit it is and where it fits in. A pasted paddle is another option. Mild abrasives on a leather or wood surface bonded to a hard paddle. This requires an easy to learn stropping motion but may in time slightly round an edge requiring a trip back to the Norton.

A Belgian coticule is another good choice too. It is a natural stone, chock full of little garnets which provide the cutting action. They have been around for well over 100 years and can be found from Howard at www.theperfectedge.com The Escher stone is another similar choice. While different from the coticule it works much they same and for the most part will cut the same and give the same level of polish. The vintage ones are somethimes found on eBay and I often have NOS Thuringens which are the same stone. The Hunsruecks are a little different but have a similar makeup. They are easier to find (when shipments don't get held up) and are an economical choice. In tests from a few customers they cut very similar to Belgians as well.

I myslef use all three types of stones, Belgians, Eschers and Hunsruecks.

Tony

Tony, I double checked. You are right. My Norton did come with bevel edges. thanks for clearing things up about the honing stones. I looked at your website this morning. I believe it stated you are still waiting on your shipment of Hunsrueck stones correct? Do you think you will have Thuringen stones to sell in the near future? Thanks for your help Tony.
__________________________________________________ ______________
Del

The supply is hit and miss. I've got 35-40 stones somewhere between Germany and here but no idea when they will arrive. I'm picky about what I will buy and this has slowed supply greatly.

Often members here have stones for sale privately and Howard may have coticules in stock right now as well. Any are good choices so no need to wait for a certain one if you need a hone now.

Take care,
Tony

Good Morning all,

I'm curious. I went to the web site with the belgian coticules and noticed that the highest grit was 8K. Wouldn't the 4k / 8K Norton stone be the same? Wouldn't I want to go to the higher grit...like that Japanese 12K grit stone?

From reading different postings on this forum and watching Lynn's dvd it is my understanding that these yellow belgian coticles cut much finer than a Norton 8K. If I have understood correctly they are considered the equivelant of about 12K. At any rate they get used by members here to put a polished edge on their straights after using the Norton 8K. Hopefully on of the honemeisters will post a reply to verify this and add any needed information.
__________________________________________________ _______
Del

Originally Posted by Mac

I'm curious. I went to the web site with the belgian coticules and noticed that the highest grit was 8K. Wouldn't the 4k / 8K Norton stone be the same? Wouldn't I want to go to the higher grit...like that Japanese 12K grit stone?

The difference is between technical specifications and practical application. they may officially claim that the coticule is 8k, but is generally agreed to be about 10k and a slow cutter, so on par with a 12k waterstone in action.


X

All the conversation here seems to be on the relative merit of Belgian and German natual stones used with water, some Japanese water stones, and the newer Norton artificial water stones. Can some of the cognoscenti here tell this tyro why there is so little dicussion about what I thought were the marvelous razor hones from Arkansas? And if it's a case of the old stones worked so well but the new stones aren't worth a pinch, what is the difference and how significant is it?

Much obliged