Thread: Stone Widths: 8"/3" vs. 6"/2"

Folks,

I'm in the market for a Belgian Blue and Coticule stone
from Howard, and I've heard a few recommendations on
the different stone widths. Lynn seems to recommend the
wider and longer surface, but I think I recall Josh finding
the 6"/2" to be a better size when using the X-pattern
stroke.

Does an X-pattern stroke give inconsistent honing from
the toe to the heel on a 3" wide stone? If money is not
an object, what's the ideal width for the Belgian stones?

- Scott

That is a very difficult question you ask grasshopper. Its like saying what is the ideal size car for everybody. Hones come in all sizes so its a matter of what size you personally like and feel more comfortable with. Some like barber's hones which are very small and some like very large hones. personally I like larger hones, meaning 3 inch across and 7 or 8 inches long. With a three inch hone you have the flexibility of going straight up and down the hone or doing X honing. You have more surface area to play with and you need to do fewer trips back and forth. I also have smaller hones but my Coticule is a larger one as is my Blue and I always gravitate to the larger ones.

I'm sure the small hone guys will chime in with why they feel smaller hones are better.

I got the small and I am ready to sell to get the large IMHO if money is not the issue on the coticule get the large but if it is get the small they are great stones

As you mentioned, I have the 6x2 size, and I haven't really felt the need for a bigger stone. Bigspendur's right about the bigger stones giving you the option of going straight across, although most vintage blades seem to have some degree of curve to the blade, usually right near the heel and toe. You'd need to do some type of rolling stroke to get these with a straight stroke.

The smaller sizes appeal to me because I like compact things. I like being able to fit all of my honing junk in a small shoe box. The smaller hones can be hand-held, which sometimes can be helpful.

Narrower hones can make coping with warped razors a little easier at times, although there are ways you can get them sharp on wider hones, too.

Get whatever appeals to you and fits in your budget.

Josh

Lol, Josh - I cannot call my hone arsenal *junk* - not with the prices on some of these puppies

Anyway, I guess I prefer to have both small and large hones

If I had to have just one - I would choose a small because it's more versatile for me, and easier to hold in hand. However, I certainly see how a large hone can be more convenient and faster for some razors.

When I say small - I actually mean width less than 2" - 1 or 1.5 works better for me. Short was never a preference for me but I would work with as short as 3" - if I have to.

Cheers
Ivo

I prefer the narrow hones, 1"-2", because they are more versatile. They can handle straight edges, smile edges and slightly warped/badly ground blades easier than a wider stone. Historically, they are the norm and I think that is for a good reason. The 3" x 8" size is a recent format. That being said I do like my Norton single grit 3x8's. Sometimes I will use the 3" side and when necessary the 1" side comes in handy.

Just my two cents,

I picked up a couple 2"x6" "mud" stones a while back to play with, turned out they are kind of nice for a blade with some smile to it. I'm still trying to get used to a smile edged razor and I'm not quite there. I may just sell them to be rid of the issue

I find the 2" wide handy but really like the 3".

The trouble with coticules is that the finest grits come from veins that do not allow cutting large bench hones acoording to Ardennes Coticule's proprietor.

I started a thread on this a while back...wide vs. narrow on both hones and strops and why. Most European made strops top out at 2" wide. Jemico and Dovo both have many models 1 3/4" to 2" with a single 3 1/4" version. Most of the early Coticules and Eschers found are 1 1/4" to 1 3/4" wide with few even reaching a full 2". Even tradional Barber Hones and natural sold specifically for straight razor use are 2" to 2 1/2".
Back then ther X pattern was the norm and since in doing this pattern part of the edge is off the stone on every stroke there are advantages to narrower stones.
The example I brought up was a standard 3" blade. If doing an X on a wide stone like a 3" Norton the entire blade is on the stone at the start with the heel leaving the stone on every stroke so part of the blade is getting more time on the stone than others. On a 2" or 2 1/2" stone it changes a little. At the start of a stroke the tip is off, the heel is on. At the end of the stoke the heel is off the tip is on, but the center never leaves. Over time this may contribute to the frowning blade issue often seen on old razors.
Now, 1 3/8" to 1 1/2" seems to be a very common width to many vintage Escher and Coticule stones found on eBay. In theory a 1 3/8" to 1 1/2" stone lets every part of a 3" blade have equal stone time when doing an X pattern because it's width is 1/2 the blade's length.
Just theory here guys from my earlier thread on this.

Tony

Heavyduty's words on a different thread sum the situation up pretty well. Someone asked, the X-pattern is the recommended honing stroke, but doesn't X'ing on a wide stone cause unequal wear on a blade?

Originally Posted by heavydutysg135

This is a very common question here, and a very good one; in fact I remember asking this same question J. In theory you are right; however, in practice it does not really matter. One theory as to why this is not an issue is that the heal receives more pressure because it is closer to where the weight of your hand is. The heal of the blade gets slightly more pressure and the toe gets slightly more contact with the hone but the least amount of pressure so it roughly evens out in the end. Of course this theory only holds up if you are a one handed honer which to my knowledge all of the honemeisters are. In my experience thick and thin hones work equally well and will produce the same edge. It really comes down to what feel you prefer, what sizes the stone is available in, and how much you are willing to spend.

With the exception of warped blades as Randy and Josh have pointed out, I think Heavyduty's point holds. Randy uses narrow stones, Lynn uses wide ones, and I have never heard anyone complain about the edge on a razor from one of those two. Get what you like.