Coticule driving me to drink!

Fair enough. I didn't see where he claimed to have invented anything, just noted that 'problem coticules' were leaving behind scratches despite the following series of regular X strokes he typically uses. But my focus was more on what he observed with the problem coticules than any proprietary claims.

At any rate what stuck with me from that particular video were the left over scratches from circular strokes that hadn't been worked away. I found it surprising that a stone capable of finishing an edge could dig deep enough to cause an issue. Between seeing his close up photos of that, and watching Gary Haywood hone, I decided I'd rather to half strokes than circular motions when I want to speed things up or remove more steel. :shrug:

On a different note, I hadn't realized basic honing oil had disappeared from hardware store shelves. I swung by a few places tonight trying to bird dog some down and had no luck. Guess I'll have to get that the same place I get just about everything else these days - amazon or some similar online outlet.

Here's a good read, if you don't already have it: http://bosq.home.xs4all.nl/info%2020...whetstones.pdf

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Marshal

At any rate what stuck with me from that particular video were the left over scratches from circular strokes that hadn't been worked away. I found it surprising that a stone capable of finishing an edge could dig deep enough to cause an issue. Between seeing his close up photos of that, and watching Gary Haywood hone, I decided I'd rather to half strokes than circular motions when I want to speed things up or remove more steel. :shrug:

---

When honing progressively with a series of hones, the higher grit has to remove the scratches of the previous grit. Failure at any step increases the likelihood that the scratches will remain even at the end of the process.

Coticule honing is only slightly different, with gradual dilution of the slurry and finishing with water. If circles are used in the early stages, the time to remove the circular scratches is not at the finishing step. It has to be right after the circles are finished and the half strokes are the fastest way to accomplish that.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by sqzbxr

Here's a good read, if you don't already have it: http://bosq.home.xs4all.nl/info%2020...whetstones.pdf

---

That was a LOT of information to digest. Seems like I may have a La Petite Blanche on my hands. Well, vein is less important than performance. Right now I'm questioning their grit performance estimations. We'll see what the next shave brings.

So first order of business - fully restore the Norton 8K edge on the GCW. Again. Strop the GCW and Morley I've been using to 'burnish' the Coticule.Test shave both. GCW - smooth and mellow, not bad at all for fresh off the Norton. Morley after over 1,000water only passes on the coticule - not the best edge ever, but not the worst - still needs work.

Second order of business - more burnishing for kicks and grins. Another half thousand laps, total somewhere over 2k if we also add in water only strokes done with the test razor. or would that be 4k, since they were back & forth half strokes? Probably irrelevant. This time around there was even less swarf than ever before, so maybe this is actually doing something? Wipe stone dry w/ paper towel and made sure it was completely water free.

Test 1 - mineral oil, around 200 strokes. Stropped and test shaved. Very nearly gave up at this point - the shave was a tiny bit better than my results with shave soap, but still fell short of a Norton 8K edge. Some tugging, some pulling. I could suck it up and deal with it if all I had was a 1/6 combo stone and this. Might even be good if followed up with chromox but I don't really consider a stone a good acceptable finisher if it needs to be followed with chromox to shave well.

While staring at the razor and calling it unseemly things in my head I remembered reading somewhere, "Some oils are too thick for finishers, some are too thin for coarse stones..." Makes sense, with mineral spirits the draw was still kind of heavy and abrasive. Also read somewhere "Mineral oil can be thinned with mineral spirits..." Dig around the chemicals cave, sure enough I have mineral spirits on hand. Don't remember where I got this or why, but sometimes hoarding things comes in handy!

Test 2 (Pay dirt!) - cut mineral oil left on the hone about 50/50 with spirits. Mixed with spine of test razor, edge lifted off the coticule. This time around it was easier to control the pressure. Pure mineral oil seemed to want to suck the edge to the hone, with it thinned 50/50 it had a slick ice gliding over glass kind of sensation. 200 strokes later it was set for 25 laps on linen and 50 on leather.

Now this edge was much like what I've read about coticules. Sharpness, probably equivalent to the Norton 8K. Didn't tug or pull, and while it may not be the sharpest edge I've ever created it was easily sufficient. But this was perhaps the most forgiving edge that I've shaved with to date. It really felt like this edge wanted to cut hair and not skin.

Usually a second pass going upward ATG on my neck is begging for razor burn. I found this edge didn't even further agitate the already angry spots that were touched by the bad edge of the Morley and fresh Norton edge which are usually a bit prickly to me. Might even be able to do a full 3 pass shave, but 2 was good enough to get close, clean, and comfortable. I also got into a rush and made a bad stroke with my non dominant hand. Came in way too fast, way too much pressure, and at a terrible angle. I really should be posting in the cut of the day thread. And scrounging up superglue to stitch myself back together after filleting myself like a tilapia. If that was an Arkansas edge I would be doing just that.

Success achieved. It's a finisher that likes a thin oil. I think I'll set this Germania Cutlery Works aside to be maintained by nothing but the coticule. If I keep up at this rate I'll need a notebook or spreadsheet to keep track of what razor has an edge by what hone...

Edit: One more random thought - controlling oil viscosity along with slurry thickness could add a whole other dimension to slurry work. But if the level of burnish the coticule has is in any way shape or form imperative to it's success as a finisher, this particular beast will not be used for any mad science experiments that can ruin a burnish that's 3 days and several thousand strokes in the making. Nope. Not this guy. Maybe if I find another coticule in a bargain bin at a yardsale or something...

Nice, sounds like you nailed a good coticule edge with it. They are super comfy but not quite as keen as some other stones' edges. If I were you I wouldn't bring a slurry stone anywhere near that coticule. It will continue to improve with more razors honed on it, IMO raising a slurry on that one will set it back.

I wouldn't use slurry either. I wrote a small article on why I don't use a slurry anymore.Why I NEVER use slurry. | The Coticule Club

I would say in your case drop the slurry use because the stone doesn't work very well with it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by S0LITARYS0LDIER

I wouldn't use slurry either. I wrote a small article on why I don't use a slurry anymore.Why I NEVER use slurry. | The Coticule Club

I would say in your case drop the slurry use because the stone doesn't work very well with it.

---

This is a good read, and I think it hits on a lot of good points.

I think the reason the slurry method works for some and not others is simply down to the variance in the coticules. You need one that is hard, and probably fine as well. And you likely need a slurry stone that has smaller garnets to really, really be successful.

I feel like if your stone is soft, or the garnets that are released are large, you end up with 2 issues. 1- more damage/deeper stria cut into the edge, and 2 if your stone is soft the garnets are going to be abrading the binder too and not just steel from the blade. This is going to expose more of the large garnets, and work to make your stone more coarse. Possibly to the point you can't get a finished edge to save your life. Water only or anything else thrown in the mix, it just degrades what can be done.

I've used slurry on stones with great success. All the time with my Dragon's Tongue Welsh slate to set the bevel and work up slowly to an 8K edge. Kind of like the Dilucot method. It's never been a problem and was very intuitive to learn. Probably because the abrasives in the slate are inherently smaller than garnets, may splinter like Nagura slurry, and the base stone is harder.

I've used coticule slurry from several different rubbing stones (4 now) on my Arkansas hones. Never had a bad edge. And various slurry with my PHIG. Coticule, Welsh slates, and of course slurry from the stone that came with it after it was polished too. The difference between these stones and the coticule seems to be that not only can all of them be burnished, but no matter what I slurry them up with neither the action of stone rubbing on stone nor the working of slurry on the surface seems to degrade that polished smooth edge used for finishing.

The moment I rake a small piece of coticule across the surface of this particular coticule, all that surface performance is probably shot to hell and back by tearing up the binder and exposing fresh large garnets. I have a feeling the only thing the 'burnishing' of this stone has done is the same thing we seek to achieve with a diamond plate. I've knocked away most if not all the large loose garnets, and while an errant one may chip or break away once in a while, it's not nearly at the rate it was when I started fresh after upsetting the surface on my ZY hone. Each 500-700 stroke pass with the Morley produced less and less metal particulate than the previous one, and I'm certain it was little if any difference in the pressure I was using on the hone.

With any luck there's some dulling/rounding action going on as well, and what we'll see with time is what eKretz predicts - the stone getting progressively finer with use as an oil only finisher that remains undisturbed by working up a slurry.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Marshal

I think the reason the slurry method works for some and not others is simply down to the variance in the coticules. You need one that is hard, and probably fine as well. And you likely need a slurry stone that has smaller garnets to really, really be successful.

I feel like if your stone is soft, or the garnets that are released are large, you end up with 2 issues. 1- more damage/deeper stria cut into the edge, and 2 if your stone is soft the garnets are going to be abrading the binder too and not just steel from the blade. This is going to expose more of the large garnets, and work to make your stone more coarse. Possibly to the point you can't get a finished edge to save your life. Water only or anything else thrown in the mix, it just degrades what can be done.

---

Variance in coticule may very well play a part in that, but in my experience it is not as absolute as you think it is. I do believe there are coticules that are not suitable for razors, or that are too slow to be a viable honing option. That being said, I have yet to find a coticule that doesn't give me a comfortable shaving edge after trying to figure out how it works (apart from one that had visible, hard inclusions which I was made aware of by the seller previous to purchasing it - not from Ardennes, by the way). Also, I have never come across a coticule whose slurry prevented me from getting a comfortable shaving edge. Some frustrated me as they were tricky to figure out, and there were coticules in there I didn't like to use quite as much as others.

But I don't know, maybe I just got really lucky 15-20 times in a row.

As far as I know, there is not a great variance in spessartine garnet size in coticules. Also, I have owned/used a bunch of relatively soft coticules that were in no way coarse (my first coticule, a La Veinnette, comes to mind) and ones that were quite slow when compared to e.g. a hybrid Les Latneuses (which tend to be quite dense/hard stones).

I'm not saying that slurry is mandatory; if you can manage without it, props to you. For me, it speeds up the honing process and the process itself is relatively easy to duplicate (for a particular stone I am familiar with). I also vary pressure, at any given point in the dilution process, whenever I feel the edge calls for it or if I feel a certain spot on the edge requires a bit more attention. And again, if you can hone a razor start to finish by only varying pressure: great, have at it, it's good to see people finding methods that work for them.

Best regards,

Pieter

Well, most of this is speculation based on what I know of the shape and Construction of garnets and coticules. I figure there must be some reason that some are absolutely not finishers, and others can be.

In the case of this particular coticule, it degrades an edge honed up to 8,000 grit on a synthetic and makes it a very uncomfortable shave. The only remedy for that isn't just oil, but the right mixture of oils to obtain a certain viscosity.

I am thinking perhaps it is more likely that I got unlucky once, than it is that you got lucky 15 or 20 times. But I can only work with the experience given me by this one stone. And it gave me a devil of a time getting a single shaving edge, I am still not sure it can be repeated.

Perhaps it would be in my best interest to contact Ardennes about an exchange, since this stone is rather difficult to work with and may actually have a toxic inclusion that prevents proper performance with water as the honing medium?

I am not sure whether slurry dulling has been mentioned. That is when the garnets released to the surface are larger than the fin of the edge. That is why the slurry reduction goes to running water for a finish. It removes all of the loose garnets and leaves the garnets in matrix.
~Richard

Such was my frustration with the coticule that I worked out my best coticule edge was when I sat my razor on the same table as my Gok20, I'd say it is shave ready.

Progress update:

Saw something in another thread about buffing Arkansas stones with a cotton wheel and such to help with the final burnishing of the stone. Well I dug out and started to work over a bunch of stones, and about halfway through I started the coticule and seriously contemplating if this was as good an idea as I wanted it to be...well, only one way to find out! So I covered it with green crayon and set about polishing it along with just about every other natural hone in my collection.

I think the hardest part was actually getting the green schmootz off the rocks. Turns out Mineral spirits dissolves the crap out of whatever wax binder they used for the chromox crayons. Used the same test razor I've been using, gave it a quick reset on the Norton 8K, then a little over 100 swipes on the coticule with 1 part mineral spirit and 1 part oil as the honing medium. Stropped 20/50 linen & leather after cleaning the oil off the blade.

Shave test: Passed with flying colors. No tugging, no pulling, 2 pass DFS with no need of spot touch ups. Kinda crazy that the key to this stone was finding a way to burnish a soft stone that easily auto slurries, but who am I to argue with results?

Attachment 255039

This is the surface with a skim coat of mineral spirits.

Lol, told you guys I wasn't crazy! :deal:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by eKretz

Lol, told you guys I wasn't crazy! :deal:

---

Crazy like a fox!

:bow :tu

Just when you think you have things figured out you get thrown a curve ball. A couple of weeks ago I got a whim to pull out the coticule and tune up the GCW razor I've been using as a test bed. I don't know what changed between the day I put this hone away and the day I pulled it back out, but the edge I got from it was nowhere near as good as it should have been.

This of course led to another round of tweaking and fiddling until I hit pay dirt. Reading through another thread, I saw mention that lapping with a diamond hone could potentially shear garnet and leave you with an unhappy hone. Well, I got nothing to lose so I picked up the slurry stone and set about working the surface of the coticule here and there. I scrubbed it pretty good over the course of a week. As I did, I got to wondering...which is harder, the coticule or the slurry stone? So I pulled out a small Arkansas stone and did a little not so definitive test. Seemed like the hone was harder than the slurry stone. So I scrubbed at the top a little bit with the Arkansas stone too, just in case.

This eventually took my mind down another rabbit hole. Which has finer garnets? And how would I even figure that out? Well, to make a determination I plucked out the tried and true Cnat that's just about as hard as an Arkansas stone and built up a slurry with the slurry stone. 50 passes of the razor on a nice thick slurry, followed by another hundred or so on the Cnat's surface with pure water should tell me what I want to know. The slurry to make nice deep scratches, and the pure water passes to polish away shallow ones and leave only the deeper ones behind. What I saw was scratches that one might equate to a 1K hone left on the edge.

Zero the blade on the Norton 4 and 8K stones, and repeat the process with slurry made from the coticule. This time there weren't any deep scratches, but I was left with a sort of Kasumi finish for lack of better terminology. That may be the target with a Jnat and an excellent edge but not what I'm looking for out of this particular stone. So I took it to the coticule itself with pure water and...well it really wasn't getting any better. No worse, which is good. But also no better.

While looking at it beneath the loupe I was seeing imperfections I didn't like. Dings and edge damage resulting from 7 months give or take since the last honing and being knocked about for a week or two sitting on the honing bench most likely. So I decided to take it back to the Norton 4K and work the ugly out. I already had that soaking and didn't feel like digging anything else out. Then on to the 8K so I could give the coticule the same sort of test it had been subject to in previous honing sessions.

125 laps give or take on pure water and...well I wasn't particularly impressed with what the loupe revealed. I've gotten a bit spoiled I think, nearly every natural in my collection makes an improvement over a Norton 8K edge without any special tricks, the coticule met the mark but didn't seem to exceed it. But at the same time this was equivalent to the good result I got with a thin oil, and better than previous attempts with water or failed attempts with thin oil. So I pressed onward and did another hundred laps give or take with a thin shave lather.

Now the edge is looking proper! I'd put the polish on par with my Cnat. Somewhere above 8K. 50 laps on linen and 100 on leather and the blade provided a one pass DFS with no tugging/pulling, little aftersahve sting (mostly me being heavy handed/rushing), and very little touch up after that first pass. If I can keep getting results like this out of my Belgian rock it may just start to grow on me. I just hope the next time I get the notion to employ it I don't have to tweak and fuss and fight to repeat this result.

At least I know the :soapbox: thing can do it. The question seems to be if it will want to, or if I'll have to beat it into submission. :deadhorse:

I feel if there is anything I learned from naturals is this, buy from sellers that are willing to give a refund or is selling it at an amazing price. (Or let's you test the stone first)
I had about 4 cotis and my favorite was a smaller one that was actually in the softer side. It felt weird honing on it but the edges were nice.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Christian1

I feel if there is anything I learned from naturals is this, buy from sellers that are willing to give a refund or is selling it at an amazing price. (Or let's you test the stone first)
I had about 4 cotis and my favorite was a smaller one that was actually in the softer side. It felt weird honing on it but the edges were nice.

---

In all fairness I bought it from Ardennes during a holiday sale for nearly %20 less than they normally run. They're known for their customer service, and I'm sure if I pursued it they would've offered an exchange or refund.

That said, even with the struggle I've had figuring this rock out I'm hesitant to blame the stone. Utopian has had some 40 odd coticules and only deemed two as non-finishers. That tells me that maybe 1 in 20 are unable to perform in the capacity we require as straight razor shavers.

Sure I have 10 or so different types of natural hones and a handful of synthetic options and barber hones that I get good shaving edges from easily. But that doesn't mean anything when looking at a different hone type. And this is certainly unlike anything I've ever honed on prior to it. The fact that it CAN finish (proven twice now) and I've only gotten two good shaving edges from it in 8 month's time says more about my prowess (or lack of) than it does the coticule. To steal a quote from Gssixgun:

Quote:

---

"No amount of money spent on a Stone can ever replace the value of the time it takes learning to use it properly"
Very Respectfully - Glen

---

Yea I would say buying a coti from Ardennes is always a safe bet. I do believe they offer refunds but I am not sure, but I don't think they would have a problem refunding/exchanging if you wanted.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Marshal

That said, even with the struggle I've had figuring this rock out I'm hesitant to blame the stone. Utopian has had some 40 odd coticules and only deemed two as non-finishers. That tells me that maybe 1 in 20 are unable to perform in the capacity we require as straight razor shavers.

---

Sorry, but I'm not sure that the sampling of my toys can be extrapolated out to all coticules. I don't have any reason to speculate that mine are particularly different from the general population of coticules, but that ratio might not stand with a larger sampling or with someone else's judgment.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Utopian

Sorry, but I'm not sure that the sampling of my toys can be extrapolated out to all coticules. I don't have any reason to speculate that mine are particularly different from the general population of coticules, but that ratio might not stand with a larger sampling or with someone else's judgment.

---

It goes without saying 40 is a small sample size. Yours just happened to be the largest collective I could think of off the top of my head. I've read comments here and there from others that also have a fair sized collection, most report a similar success rate. I've yet to encounter someone that had more than one or two stones they just couldn't work with. And when you do you have to wonder were the hones actually bad, or was there a component of user error?

Besides, if they weren't more hit than miss I imagine they would not have such a dedicated following and be viewed in the same light as a PHIG. Russian roulette with sharpening stones - one in 3 chance that it will be a great finisher, OK-ish 8K hone, or slow mid range hone shaped paperweight.

I suppose partly the scientist in me did not want poor stats attributed to me!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JimmyHAD

Whether that says more about the hone, or the honer, I leave to the reader. :confused:

---

I just came up with a coticule poem. :)

Coticule:
The name sounds French, so we use the hone like a wimp
And pretend that we have, the arm of a gimp
The particles are large, in the mind of the honer
Still better to work them stiff sometimes, less limp, more like a boner

:)