Thread: Coticule driving me to drink!

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!

Originally Posted by JimmyHAD

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

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