Thread: Norton Honing Pyramid

It does work for other stones, just in different proportions. That Quote is only about the number of strokes refered to in THAT guide. A guide for barbers hones would have a different stroke count, Arkansas different yet.

Thae plain facts are that pyramiding works. It works faster than progressing from one grit to the next and it produces a finer edge. It does this with less risk of overhoning and a better chance for success than any other method tried.

When I first tried to hone my razors I tried using a straight progression because the pyramid seemed overly complicated and cumbersome. I did have success doing this, but after trying the pyramid method I foud it wasn't as cumbersome as I feared and it produced a much better edge.

Originally Posted by AFDavis11

. . . because 5 strokes is all you need for effective testing off an 8K Norton, not so with all the other stones. If it doesn't shave ok after 5 strokes, 30 will make little difference. Other stones require a different # of passes.

Its a simple, reliable method of honing that requires little experience. With pyramids you can start honing without reading 300 threads on how to do it, a myriad of edge testing thesis' and all sorts of arguments about bevel quality and criteria. You just hone and test.

So then... the 5 strokes on the 8k are to test if you have done enough on the 4k?

In effect, the 5 strokes on the 8k are useful if one can not tell when they have spent enough time on the 4k? Being more useful to those who aren't yet familiar with testing an edge?

That is my opinion, others have differing views on its purpose. For me, if I'm using a pyramid it takes me, thoughtlessly, to a spot just before its time to finish the blade. I don't really have wire-edge problems anymore either.

When I'm working with say 5 different razors I've never honed before I'll use the pyramid because steel hardness is unknown to me. If I go up into the bathroom to hone my own razors I never pyramid, because I just know what to do with them.

There are times though when I want my edge to have a balance between cutting and polishing. I will start slewing this balance as I hone, changing the numbers and the ratio of 4 and 8K passes. This ratio of cutting and polishing as a ratio is, I think, why some people find the pyramid has strong honing powers from a strategic perspective. As a methodology some people feel it is even better than straight linear progression. I'm not sure I'd be in that camp because I think the ratios need tuning sometimes. But I understand their perspective. There are many, many ways to hone. Understanding them all isn't as easy as just thinking your way is the only way, but if you want to think like that, go ahead. Just be careful of trying to explain it in text, most peoples honing methods need to be taught or demonstrated. Pyramiding requires neither.

Originally Posted by AFDavis11

...
Just be careful of trying to explain it in text, most peoples honing methods need to be taught or demonstrated. Pyramiding requires neither.

I can see how going back to 4k every five or ten 8k strokes can prevent a new fella' from getting a wire edge. I just have a lot of trouble with the proposition that applying a rougher 4k finish will improve an 8k finish. It also seems to me that getting a nice evenly finished 8k edge will take far longer to do if I keep applying 4k (or 1k, et al.) striations to it.

I am assuming that the main reasons for going back to the 4k is:

• preventing a wire edge
• if five 8k strokes doesn't improve the edge then you know you do not have a full bevel properly established on the 4k yet, try again...

So, especially for the new user, using pyramids is thought to be a quicker and safer (no wire) way to get a bevel and shaving edge w/o having to learn the other intricacies?

I was under the distinct impression that pyramiding did need to be taught (hence the existence of the "Norton Pyramid Honing Guide").

Not trying to be argumentative. It's just that when I compared a pyramid method to normal progression (4 razors each, in various states of sharpness), it took me longer to do. In one case about three times longer. And the edges were a bit rougher.

This is what I was trying to ask in my earlier post. The answers so far, are very interesting. I am like Sticky though, about the polished edge and the scratch patterns one is trying to develop.

Fred

preventing a wire edge
if five 8k strokes doesn't improve the edge then you know you do not have a full bevel properly established on the 4k yet, try again...

Right, as a minimum it does these two things

Not trying to be argumentative.

I think you just don't like the system, and I'm okay with that, and I'm okay with you being argumentative . . . its a forum. Its Lynn's system, not mine. If your being argumentative with anyone; its Lynn, not me.

It's just that when I compared a pyramid method to normal progression (4 razors each, in various states of sharpness), it took me longer to do. In one case about three times longer. And the edges were a bit rougher.

Okay, so your impatient and you need to learn how to finish better.

The only way that I know to make the process faster is to do a greater ratio of 4K strokes. That is why there is an aggressive pyramid. You wanna hone fast? Overhone on 4k, then back hone, then overhone on 8K, then backhone, then finish. Waallllaaaaa. Lets call it "Impatient" honing. I'll even take a shot at the numbers . . . 100 passes on 4K, back hone 4 passes, 80 passes on 8K, 4 passes backhoning, then 20 passes on 8k. Done. The only problem is the loss of steel, but its not my razor so what do I care? This system will work for every razor, consistently. Now . . .

What is a normal progression? Please comment on what a normal progression is by way of the number of strokes to use to sharpen every razor. I'm not familiar with what you consider normal.

When I hone a razor at some point I have to make an educated guess as to when "I'm done" on the 4k. This requires quite a bit of experience. I haven't been wrong in a few years but, in the first couple of years I would sometimes have to "go back" to the 4K. This "going back" is failure and it is a pyramid. Whether you "go back" once, twice, or three times, its a failure in properly analyzing the edge. If your not going back, even for one stroke on 4K then more power to you. You've arrived, so to speak on the ability to assess a bevel. You've developed an ability to judge what the steel will do on 8k before even getting there and trying it. If you go back, even one stroke, then your just in denial about your ability. But, using any linear progression isn't that hard. Many people do it. But it is experience that helps, particularly in the one question that everyone seems to think they want know. "How many strokes on which stone?"

This part about taking more time is logical. Maybe you just did a conservative approach when you were supposed to do an aggressive approach. But, it would be logical for this process to take more time. Your right, the pyramid requires learning, you've got to learn whether the razor shaves and pulls or doesn't shave to decide which pyramid to use.

Keep in mind that many people have different beards and the pyramid is designed to provide maximum cutting power and adequate comfort. What I like about the pyramid is that it is a simple progressive approach that applies a consistent, easily measureable edge, to the razor. The addition of a consistently equal number of 8K strokes allows me to consistently rate the sharpness level across a spectrum of steel hardness and quality. Do I pyramid all the time, no. Do I often pyramid during the middle progression of honing, between the dull stages and the finishing stages, yes.

Either way, lets do this. When the next person who buys a razor on ebay and posts a picture of it tell him how many 4K strokes he needs to put on the edge to create a bevel and how many finishing strokes he needs on 8k afterward, and then after he puts them on we'll see how well your technique works. How does that sound? Don't describe pressure, stroke, bevel analysis, steel hardness or type. And ofcourse, you can't use the phrase "if its not cutting well enough just go back to 4K"

You just whip out the number of strokes he needs to put on the edge to sharpen the blade perfectly and not overhone. Shouldn't be that hard. I don't think I could do it, but again, I'm not familiar with the "normal" process.

If you can do that you'll impress me, but I'll still advocate the pyramid system, because it works, especially for those starting out. I'm already impressed actually. It took me years to learn how to hone all the different types of razors. Where have you been?

And maybe you don't even need a picture . . .

. . . btw I've got a razor coming next week I need to hone, how many strokes will it need on each hone?

Thanks guys,

The pyramid actually isn't mine either. It was taught to me. I have found that after honing thousands and thousands of razors that it is the most repeatable and consistent method for honing razors out there. It is the easiest to learn for new people. It is progressive and incremental. Simply put, it works! There have been several variations that people have found to work but the principle has remained sound. People, especially knife guys and those naturally inclined to nay say have tried to poo poo this method for sand as already said, "Go For It".

Have fun,

Lynn

Originally Posted by AFDavis11

...
I think you just don't like the system, and I'm okay with that, and I'm okay with you being argumentative . . . its a forum. Its Lynn's system, not mine. If your being argumentative with anyone; its Lynn, not me.
...

I like the pyramid system ok, I just have a different and more efficient way of reaching the goal. So I don't currently use it.

I didn't say I was being argumentative. I said I'm trying not to be. Hence my willingness to test the pyramid method, as opposed to knocking it w/o trying it.

I'm just saying I get faster, and better, edges by not using the pyramid system. Tested, repeatable results.

Okay, so your impatient and you need to learn how to finish better.

I'm not at all impatient. I simply prefer the shorter route to a good shaving edge (for me). The edges I'm getting shave with no pulling and no irritation. "Better" than that isn't needed. Or is it?

The only way that I know to make the process faster is to do a greater ratio of 4K strokes. That is why there is an aggressive pyramid. You wanna hone fast? Overhone on 4k, then back hone, then overhone on 8K, then backhone, then finish. Waallllaaaaa. Lets call it "Impatient" honing. I'll even take a shot at the numbers . . . 100 passes on 4K, back hone 4 passes, 80 passes on 8K, 4 passes backhoning, then 20 passes on 8k. Done. The only problem is the loss of steel, but its not my razor so what do I care? This system will work for every razor, consistently. Now . . .

I haven't had a wire edge yet with either method. I'd call repeatedly putting 4k striations on an 8k bevel a "waste of time"; and a repeating "waste of steel". This assumes a bevel has already been properly established on a 1 to 4k.

What is a normal progression? Please comment on what a normal progression is by way of the number of strokes to use to sharpen every razor. I'm not familiar with what you consider normal.

The beauty of a normal progression is having no need to keep track of a table of stroke counts, nor continually flipping back and forth between grits. A normal progression is going to successively finer hones/pastes until you have a shave-worthy edge. Start with a coarser (1200 to 4k grit, your preference) , establish a bevel. When you pass the marker and TNT at the same time, you have a good bevel. Use the next finer grit until you notice a nice change by testing every 5 to 20 strokes (depending on the media of choice). Rinse and repeat for each finer hone. Some will stop at 8k, some will continue on to 0.1 micron (approx) newspaper. Use TPT and "mow hair" test to judge when you are done at each step. My point is: If you have established a bevel, there is no need to establish it again on your coarser, "bevel setting" hone.

When I hone a razor at some point I have to make an educated guess as to when "I'm done" on the 4k. This requires quite a bit of experience.

We have a big difference of opinion here regarding the primary bevel, as set on a 4k. I think anyone who has reasonable vision, and tactile sensation, can use the marker test and TNT with minimal instruction/practice. Anyone with access to a DE razor blade can quickly learn to use the TPT.

I haven't been wrong in a few years but, in the first couple of years I would sometimes have to "go back" to the 4K. This "going back" is failure and it is a pyramid. Whether you "go back" once, twice, or three times, its a failure in properly analyzing the edge. If your not going back, even for one stroke on 4K then more power to you. You've arrived, so to speak on the ability to assess a bevel. You've developed an ability to judge what the steel will do on 8k before even getting there and trying it. If you go back, even one stroke, then your just in denial about your ability. But, using any linear progression isn't that hard. Many people do it. But it is experience that helps, particularly in the one question that everyone seems to think they want know. "How many strokes on which stone?"

I don't have the slightest bit of trouble knowing when I have the bevel set. It isn't that hard. Maybe much knife experience helps with that, maybe not. Either way, using marker and the TNT is a definitive test for me. Ain't that hard to do. I definitely agree with you that "Whether you "go back" once, twice, or three times, its a failure in properly analyzing the edge.". I feel sure that almost anyone realizes there is no set number of strokes. The rule here is "sharpen until it is sharp". This is the reason for testing.

...
Either way, lets do this. When the next person who buys a razor on ebay and posts a picture of it tell him how many 4K strokes he needs to put on the edge to create a bevel and how many finishing strokes he needs on 8k afterward, and then after he puts them on we'll see how well your technique works. How does that sound? Don't describe pressure, stroke, bevel analysis, steel hardness or type. And ofcourse, you can't use the phrase "if its not cutting well enough just go back to 4K"

Any instruction, progressive or pyramid, will obviously require mention of both "pressure and stroke". Since the "Norton Pyramid Honing Guide" (found on this very site) mentions bevel analysis in it's text (the dreaded TPT), so would I. However; unlike the pyramid system, I could describe the process without using a "table of stroke counts".

You just whip out the number of strokes he needs to put on the edge to sharpen the blade perfectly and not overhone. Shouldn't be that hard. I don't think I could do it, but again, I'm not familiar with the "normal" process.

If you can do that you'll impress me, but I'll still advocate the pyramid system, because it works, especially for those starting out. I'm already impressed actually. It took me years to learn how to hone all the different types of razors. Where have you been?

And maybe you don't even need a picture . . .

It doesn't take years to learn how to sharpen a razor. It's only complicated if you convince yourself that it is. It takes about the same time as learning to sharpen a knife freehand. When I got back into sharpening razors, after a long hiatus, I made it far more complicated than it really is (even though I really knew better). This was cured by talking to two recognized honemeisters. I'll still advocate the progressive system because it works, and faster, for anyone who can use the marker, TNT, and TPT.

Where have I been? Relative to what? Relative to when?

. . . btw I've got a razor coming next week I need to hone, how many strokes will it need on each hone?

See my reply above describing normal progression. You'll do fine. In less time, too.

Originally Posted by Sticky

I'm just saying I get faster, and better, edges by not using the pyramid system. Tested, repeatable results.

+1 to that brother!

Jim, its posted and a sticky.