Thread: Convex black translucent ark razor hone

Originally Posted by JP5

I would like to see the process for convexing a trans ark.

Jarrod has a video of how he did his first ones, but if you study techniques for lapping telescope mirrors you will get a much better understanding of the process. Basically, two stones lapped together until they mate will produce a spherical interface with the case of a flat interface represented by a spherical interface with infinite radius. I find the topic interesting also.

Originally Posted by Euclid440

The rolling X, where the heel comes off the stone will and has honed most any razor for hundreds of years.

Not having tried one of Jarrod's convexed hones (and not really wanting to), I can't support or criticize it. But such convexing would seem to be introducing a Rolling X by default. Not a bad thing, but I can do the same thing with a narrower (and cheaper) flat stone.

Originally Posted by jkatzman

I saw this stone advertised on The Superior Shave web site. I purchased a coticule from them that is nothing short of fantastic. I was looking for a Ark stone for my son-in-law when I came across the Convex stone. I watched the video on You Tube about honing on a convex stone and it peaked my interest. The idea of a stone not perfectly flat was against everything I have read and seen about honing. I should have the stone tomorrow and will take it out for a test hone. Anyone used a convex honing stone? I know the purist's will be screaming about the idea of using anything that isn't perfectly flat, but remember, everyone thought the world was flat until Columbus set sail.

Awesome! Thanks for checking it out and including all of us. I’m looking forward to your thoughts after you have used it for a while! There is nothing wrong with experimenting.

Ps. The world is flat and is like a computer screen- when you reach the edge you start out on the other side again.

Originally Posted by Brontosaurus

... but I can do the same thing with a narrower (and cheaper) flat stone.

This was my thought. A 12 x 1/2 inch hone would do the same thing. I've seen one glued perpendicular to a stick so you needn't hold the stone in your hand.

Originally Posted by cau

This was my thought. A 12 x 1/2 inch hone would do the same thing. I've seen one glued perpendicular to a stick so you needn't hold the stone in your hand.

If you take this "convex stone" idea to the limit, you end up with a round file.
Dan's Whetstones sells them, as a matter of fact.

Originally Posted by PaulKidd

If you take this "convex stone" idea to the limit, you end up with a round file.
Dan's Whetstones sells them, as a matter of fact.

Actually it would be more like a 66 foot diameter sphere. The math assumes an 8" long hone with a`.5 mm crown.

You would only need a convex, domed stone to hone the concave side of a warped razor, to allow clearance for the toe and heel to not touch the stone at the same time, or drop the heel off the stone.

For all other parts of the blade, an X stroke must be use or you will grind the middle of the blade and create a frown, like Dovo does. Notice the X stroke the Dovo gal is using in the video, (Not). Hence the “Dovo Factory Frown”.

Yes, with the proper technique it could work, but so will a simple rolling X stroke on a flat hone.

As pointed out by Alex Gilmore in another fora, the Dovo video is not of a production station, but apparently of a QC trouble shooting station where problem razors (warped) are sorted out. I doubt they are all hone on convex stones, why would one?

I am curious how do we know that the convex stones are only used for QC failed razors?
From reading through different forums there appears to be an ongoing clash between Jarrod and the rest of the community regarding using convex stones. He sells Dovo's and has visited the factory and as far as I have read he insists that convex stones are the standard at Dovo.

I am trying to get a handle on all the comments from people relating convex stones to Dovo problems. If there is a slight crown in the middle of the width of the stone, why do people think it should only be used to correct honing problems. I have used the stone to hone 5 razors in excellent shape and if you use light laps with a x or rolling x stroke, the results are very good. The edge feels like a cuticles but a little sharper. I found trying to lap with the blade going straight up and down the stone slightly more difficult but that may just be me. This stone is at least twice the size of my Dans Surgical black Ark and heavy. I get much better results holding the stone then having it sit in a holder. The other variable no is mentioning is what you use on the stone? I am getting excellent results with Jarrod's 1 part Ballistol and 4 parts water. I suggest trying the stone before drawing conclusions.

Glad it is working out for you, but really if as he says, once ground “a razor is never really truly flat”, how have folks been shaving for hundreds of years, with millions of razors, without a convexed/dome hone?

Not saying it can hone an edge, just that it is not needed to hone an edge.