Printable View
Hi all, another question from a newbie honer.
If you have wide stones, such as the norton's, is there a reason to do an X-pattern when the stone is as wide as the razor? I couldn't think of a reason why you'd need to but wanted to see if I'm missing something obvious.
Cheers.
The X-pattern mitigates the uneven pressures applied to the blade by your hand and also compensates for a less than perfectly flat or uniformly textured hone. At least this is how I interepret the practice. If everything were perfectly steady and flat and uniform we could do the I rather than the X, but then there would be no honemeister mystery. And wouldn't that be a bummer?:D
You don't have to but for some reason it seems togive a more consistant edge when you do. Someone else might be able to give a technical explanation as to why it works better, I just know that it seems to make for better honing.
I'm not going to answer your question but give you something else to think about. Look at your edge under sufficient magnification when it's freshly honed and you will see, among other things, 2 primary features: fineness of scratches, and direction of scratches.
For a razor, I'm not positive if scratches perpendicular to the edge are ideal, or if angled ones are. I suspect the latter may have a small advantage when it comes to stropping.
I have a related question:
Why do the X pattern on a hone narrower than the razor, and not simply move the razor over the stone at a say 30-45 degree angle (whatever it takes to make the blade fit the stone), keeping all of the blade in contact at once?
To the related question:
See my answer above it applies.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Seraphim
I'm no hone expert what so ever, but can imagine that flipping the blade at the end of each stroke will be quite difficult this way.
Even with a perfectly flat hone, many blades are not perfectly straight, so the entire length of the blade does not contact the stone at the same time. By using an x-stroke, you improve the odds (considerably!) of having the entire length of the blade's edge contact the hone at some point during the stroke.
Thanks for the replies, that makes sense, I'll switch to an X-pattern and see if I notice any difference.
Cheers.
+1 on that. That's the best 2 sentence explanation for doing X's I've read so far.:tuQuote:
Originally Posted by SteveS
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bruce
+1Quote:
Originally Posted by SteveS
You also get the striations in the direction shown in barber manuals and most hone instructions. In theory that will give smoother cutting while shaving.
I tried it with straight 90 degree-to-edge striations and "barber manual" style. My results agreed with the theory.
I have a related question: When honing in the "barber manual" style on an 8 x 3 hone, would not the top half (or tip half) or so end up with more cumulative contact time with the hone than the bottom half, since the top is in contact with the stone during the entire lap?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Seraphim
This works using the inverse angle, but your picture, a razor without scales is a funny ironic dramatization of the difference between theory and reality. Your method would work great, assuming you had a razor without scales. :)
The base gets a little more pressure to compensate. I sometimes find the tip a little sharper but its nice having the base a little more rigid for the chin and the tip a little sharper for fine work.Quote:
Originally Posted by RayG
I like to use the x pattern also because pulling a razor without using pressure is easier than pushing it down the hone without applying pressure.
An x pattern is a very efficient manner of applying the striations consistently at the correct angle without excessive manuevering when you flip the blade over. You could just angle the blade (in the inverse angle as the diagram above) but you'd be flipping the blade in a lot of excess motion compared to just using an x pattern. Its kind of anti-climatic if the x pattern isn't some magical solution but it could just be that its the most efficient overall travel path.
Makes sense. Thanks.Quote:
Originally Posted by AFDavis11
The serrations and scallops of a serrated knife as far as I've ever seen are perpendicular to a knife's edge. Typically a serrated knife cuts in a parallel sawing motion so the serrations are perpendicular to the object being cut.
Barbers looking down on a customer from above would shave with the toe edge leading (I use the heel leading at an angle unless someone can explain to me how I would shave toe leading on my own face) at angle rather than a perpendicular sawing motion (like my knife example above).
So.........perpendicular serrations on a serrated knife cutting the surface of an object perpendicularly (is that a word?) when cutting straight down.
But.......angled striations on a razor from X pattern honing cutting the whiskers with the razor angled = serrations/striations cutting the whiskers....perpendicularly?:hmmm: (the angled striations and the angled blade cutting motion canceling each other out?).
Just a thought. And to that, why AREN'T knife serrations angled if the simple fact would be that angled striations (same as the scallops on a serrated knife really) cut better?
Chris L
First: You can shave with the toe leading. It just take a little practice. It is worth the effort to learn to do too, it does give a smoother shave than either going straight down or with the heel leading. Don't ask me why or to explain how to do it, I really can't. All I can say is give it a shot.Quote:
Originally Posted by Chrisl
Second: Serrated knives don't have a angle to them because they aren't knives at all but really saws for food. It is the teeth tearing through the surface that provide the cutting action for these cheap knives. Good knives are smooth and cut just like a razor does because they are sharpened similarly using an X-pattern on a hone.
That's a good point, Tim. I didn't think of a serrated knife in that way; when you put it that way, I agree, a serrated knife if more like a saw. I'll say though that a razors edge viewed under extreme magnification (electron) often shows a toothiness or serration which I visualize as the toothiness of such razor edges being really like micro-saws slicing through whiskers (maybe that's why a scythe motion toe or heel leading lends more to slicing/sawing whiskers rather than a head on chopping motion).Quote:
Originally Posted by Wildtim
I will try to figure out the toe leading approach. To me it would seem very easy for a barber standing above, in my mind it seems awkward, but that's probably only because I haven't tried it and am used to heel leading.
Chris L
Toe leading, even slightly, really does give me a noticeably smoother shave. Once you get used to it, it's hard to go back.
I think that is a correct statement. If you look in the honing chapter of the 1961 barbering textbook, http://straightrazorpalace.com/compo...id,3/Itemid,3/Quote:
Originally Posted by Chrisl
there's a drawing on the top of page 22 (page 2 of the PDF) that gives a good impression of the teeth being formed by the striations. If the striations are all parallel to eachother and angled at 45 degrees to the edge of the blade, I think the resulting micro-teeth will be equilateral triangles. So it won't matter if you scythe toe leading or heel leading. In everyday shaving practice, I use a mix of all possibilities, toe and heel leading and straight chopping as well, depending on where on my face I am shaving. When going straight down (or up) though, I try to slant the blade a bit, so it cuts guillotine style. That's usually much easier to do with the heel leading.
On a different note: a while back, when my honing skills were not exactly were they are now :fim:, all this mattered to me much more. Without scything motions my razors simply wouldn't give me a close shave. Then I had a breakthrough with honing, and now it all seems to matter less. I'm more focusing now on attacking the hairs from the right angle during my second pass (ATG), then trying to scythe-by-all-means. When it comes to improving closeness of the shave at my stubborn jugular areas, sharp razors and the correct angle of attack ATG have done more for me than the scything motion.
So, on your cheeks for example, with toe leading you're shaving toward your ears rather that the overall direction being toward the midline of your face as with heel leading?:shrug: When I say heel leading, I really mean drawing the razor across at a downward angled slant, heel down toe up toward the midline of my face; reversing the process in my mind, angled slant toe leading would mean the heel would be close to my nose and I'd be angled toe downward with the angled pass on a cheek going towards my ear/jawline. Is that correct???:thinking:Quote:
Originally Posted by Sticky
That's so funny how sometimes what are probably the simplest things are things that for the life of me I just can't visualize. Heh, such is one of my challenges in life, and a challenge for those around me!;)
Chris L
One thing that hasn't been brought up, which may help a few people, is that the angled striations on both sides of the edge supposedly work together to create a cutting edge. Its not so much that they are angled, its that both sides are angled and work together. You have to think a little 3Dimensionally to understand the theory.
You can sort of get a sense that the theory might be correct when you shave off a 4-6K hone directly. Big teeth, wicked cutting power, yet not quite as close a shave as you might desire.
I've had a few people lately working on convincing me that teeth have nothing to do with the cutting power of a straight razor, though, and they've made some really good arguments. I'm almost convinced, but not completely.
The other thing I find is that a lot of people sort of underestimate is the difficulty of honing without pressure, they look at the theory of moving the blade around and come up with all kinds of ideas about what would make sense, then fail consistently to achieve a sharp edge. You do not want to move your wrist at all when honing a razor. If you run the edge down the hone at an angle you can easily see the difficulty of not twisting your wrist as you go. And that makes it harder to keep consistent "pressure" (the lack there of actually), and angle during the stroke. In theory, it would be easier to walk down the street with one leg, instead of two, but in practice pulling the razor off the bottom of the hone is just an easier way to do it. But, given enough where-with-all it can be done, and angling the blade sometimes helps people get a more consistent edge when beginning, and before you attain really keen sharpness when perfect pressure strokes are less important. If I were forced to hone without an x pattern I would probably orient the stone at 12/6 and pull the blade toward me, because I know the importance of a pulling stroke when honing without pressure. Its not the blade manuevering on the stone that is the issue at all, its what it takes a human to produce the movement, without pressure, that is the challenge.
For me, I think the x pattern (or angling) is an easy way to hone the bevel into itself. You can get more thinness from the edge, I feel, if you cut the edge with the edge supporting itself as you go. I would need a picture to explain this but if you take any two spots on the edge that are next to each other. Spot one can get sharper because your using Spot two to support the edge of the edge against breaking. If you run the blade straight down the hone you break the edge into little crumbly sections because the grit breaks the edge up. It has no support from the direction your cutting into. The edge breaks in the vertical plan off the hone because its unsupported against the tearing action of the hone.
Nice explanation Alen!!! makes a lot of sense. As far as the teeth go, I think they do make a difference, the rule though is that the finer the better until they reach the point where they can't support themselves against the force of running into the hair.
Chris,
I'll try to explain a toe leading stroke a little better.
I start with the razor at my side burn line and the stroke will be straight down the back of my cheek just in front of the ear to the point of my mandible.
The razor is held in the same side hand and my other hand stretches the skin by reaching over the top of my head and pulling straight up with one finger in my side burn.
The point of the razor is towards my ear and the razors edge slants up to the heel with an angle of about ten degrees from the direction of travel. The toe leads the heel down my face. I used to do this exact same stroke with the heel leading the toe, that sounds like what you do, for some reason it doesn't work as well.
I do every stroke on my face with that same razor position whether I'm going with , or across the grain. When I go against the grain, it's usually fine cleanup and there I do whatever I have to to get the last stubborn hairs.
Boy thats a lot harder to explain than do :cool:
The scything motion, or "skew cut" also cuts with less effort because more of the blade is cutting the hair. (see attachment)
And for those that say toe leading gives a smoother shave, of which I am one, doesn't the "toe leading = better shave" phenomenon disprove the idea that serrations are the main component of the blade's cutting power since the majority of blades are honed with heel leading? A blade honed with the heel leading would have serration in that direction, and shaving with the toe leading would be at an angle that does not make the fullest use of those serrations, so they are, at the very least, not as important as the average sharpness of the cutting angle itself.
One might even argue that they are a negative component since on some scale they are creating tiny zones where the hair does not contact a cutting edge and is therefore pulled slightly before being severed. But that is an argument of diminishing returns, and is subjective to each persons preferences.
The bottom photo shows four electron microscope photos of razor edges. Top left is a craft razor and human hair, 20 microns across the photo. Top right is the same razor at 2 microns across the photo, the human hair is the width of the page at this magnification. Bottom left is a Wilkinson craft razor, 2 microns across. Bottom right is a chisel sharpened on a 6000 grit water stone, honed with Chromium-oxide 2 microns across. So that just goes to show you how small the changes are that we are talking about (in comparison to the size of a human hair), and what a noticeable effect they have on our faces.
edit: photos are from Leonard Lee's book "Complete Guide to Sharpening" , a Fine Woodworking book. The book deals mainly with cutting edges for woodworking, but the principles of severing fibers with sharpened edges are universal.
WOW, Russel, those are some nice pictures you showed us.:)
I have been thinkering about this some more today.
I wonder if there is any "sawing" action while cutting a hair with a razor. I guess we all know that a saw works by tearing fibers and cells out of the material it is cutting, making a kerf that, when it reaches the far end of the material, separates it into two parts. Cutting does the same, but without removing any material. The wedge of the cutting bevel forces the cells apart, and always separates two adjacent cells. If I have this right, one cell is never being cut in half. It are always two cells that are being separated.
On the premise that there is NO sawing action (something I can only assume, but not know for a fact), the striations have to be there for another function.
What Alan said makes a lot of sense too me, but I don't think it's the only principle at work here.
The outer layer of a hair is made out of microscopical overlapping cuticular scale-like cells. In order to cut a hair the razor must grab between two of those overlapping cells. I think the saw tooth pattern might play a key role when it comes to "catching" between two cuticular cells. That would explain why a scything motion cuts better. When the razor is dragged across there's a much bigger chance that a "teeth" grabs a cuticular scale and pulls it aside enough for the cutting wedge to find its way in.
Without a scything motion there's a greater chance that the razor skates over a few cuticular scales before it is able to force its way in. It would also explain why ATG shaves closer then WTG. ATG being against the direction of the scales as well. It would also mean that the scything motion is less important when going ATG. I think.
This is just a theory.
Luckily one doesn't have to understand the principles of the combustion engine on a subatomic level, in order to know how to drive a car... I would be one lousy driver;)
Bart.
First, grab this "1961 Barbering text - Shaving" so I can use it's illustrations. Figures 27, 28, and 29 use an angle of about 40 degrees toe-leading. I only use 10 to 20 degrees. When I first start the sideburn trim I use about 10 degrees and take a very short 1/4" or less stroke (so as to miss the ear), as in Figure 27 (cutting edge horizontal, stroke around 10-20 degrees, from vertical, toward the toe.). For almost all of the remaining shave, I angle the cutting edge with the toe 10-20 degrees horizontally lower than the heel, and making the stroke vertically (very close to Fig. 29).Quote:
Originally Posted by Chrisl
Either way: the edge sees the actual cut the same way; we're just looking at identical geometry described in two different ways.
I don't use 40 degrees as in the barber text because I think it's too much and too risky for my skill level.
We all instinctively use a drawing/scything motion with a knife because we know it cuts better and cleaner that way. Why should the same idea, with a razor, surprise us?
I'm in the group that likes the x-stroke on cutting edges of all kinds. I just think I get better edges that way. That's my story and I'm sticking to it...:D
First, thanks! I'd recommend the book to anyone, look it up on amazon etc, you won't be disappointed. There is a wealth of information on natural vs. synthetic stones as well as metallurgy, and it is presented in a very understandable manner.Quote:
Originally Posted by Bart
Second, the question of whether the teeth play a significant role is, to me at least, subjective to preference. If you look at the comparative sizes of the hair and the striations (teeth) in the electron micrographs above, you'll notice that the teeth are extremely small. You would be moving at a very risky angle if you were creating a kerf of any relevance. so, I would say that the teeth just grab the hair, allowing the keen edge to sever the fiber, and the amount of grab is a personal preference.
Thanks Steven. I'll definitely be checking this out. I appreciate it.Quote:
Originally Posted by Sticky
I agree, great book; I recognized those pics right away. I was actually thinking of the toothy edges that would be commonly found on a razor's edge when I first saw the pic of the chisel honed on 6000 grit and finished with chrome ox in my copy.Quote:
Originally Posted by Russel Baldridge
Chris L
Might as well be a razor, the same principles are at work whether your honing razors, chisels, knife blades, gravers, etc.Quote:
Originally Posted by Chrisl
I just wish someone with enough money and passion for straight razors would do tests like the ones they did for chisels and planes, tearing and slicing wood fibers while the whole experiment is recorded with highspeed cameras to catch every possible motion of the subject being severed, that'd be enlightening.
yeah... so maybe the toe/point leading shave should be marked as "advanced" :)
if i wasn't half asleep, the 3 or 4 surgical incisions while i experimented with the angle would have REALLY hurt.
on the plus side i learned that using the styptic pencil right away, instead of after the shave, may hurt a heck of a lot more, but is way more effective...
My personal observation is that on a wide hone, with an X pattern it is much easier to sharpen a blade because the bevel does not have to be perfectly flat in all areas.
Unless you are talking about just holding the blade at a slant and keeping it entirely in contact with the hone, if that's the case then I'm not sure the difference, but I would venture to guess it's marginal since people seem to get very sharp razors in either way.
I have to chime in- not that I'm a skilled honemaster, but I do have woodworking experience (in fact I sold woodworking tools for a few years).
You're definitely on to the cusp of the issue with the scything/angle of the edge
- an edge cuts, it does not scrape- and without the sything motion an edge simply tears the fibers. Many fine woodworkers will sharpen their chisels and then hone them on 8000, 12K, 14K, etc, (Chinese water stones are very popular for that) stones just like we do razors. A chisel bluntly cutting a dowel off (as shown in the book) will tear some of the wood fibers and crush others leaving a rough cut- even the sharpest chisel will leave a rougher cut this way, but the scything motion allows the edge to do what it is designed for- cut and leave a much smoother joint, if you will. The same would hold true for the hair, crushing and tearing the hair fiber as opposed to slicing cleanly through it. Remember too what a scythe is and why it works- by allowing the edge to slice through the stalks of grain with a simple motion of the human arm. As many know, and was reminded me by Stephan at the Mass get-together- one can often grip and edge and apply direct pressure without getting cut, but the moment you slide against that edge you bleed. Sword techniques of holding the blade were the discussed as I was gripping and squeezing the blade and edge of my Paki razor in my hand to show how dull it was.
Pondering this while reading this thread and starting to type it it suddenly dawns on me I don't use the angled stroke for fear of slicing my face open...and it becomes clear the source of so much of my "pulling" is self inflected. Another breakthrough is made and better shaving awaits!
Now, with regard to the ridges, grooves, teeth, or whatever you wish to call them. For a moment think along the lines of general sanding or finishing of any material- a course grit finish is large scratches and we progress through finer and finer grits th erase the course grooves and replace them with finer ones. As we do this we change the properties of the surface- from non reflective with the large grooves reflecting light in different directions and increased surface area and ridges (friction ridges) to contact on the surface to smaller grooves that both scatter less light and eventually become so small as to actually reflect increasingly the light available in the same direction and to reduce the amount of friction ridges decreasing the friction against the surface.
Now, when we have finished with the finest grit we have we have the smallest grooves... the smoothest surface.... the least amount of friction....
Why couldn't this be the mechanic at work reducing the friction of the edge and the blade against the skin and not the grooves making teeth to saw through the hair?
This would be supported by the results obtained by pasted strops with even finer and finer abrasives- newsprint, cigar ash, rotten stone...smoother and closer shaves.
There are many experts (at least, those whom I would deem experts) who claim the x pattern was simply and only established to allow for even wear on the blade with a smaller stone, and this is essentially what we all use to sharpen out pocket knives, and kitchen knives. Some of those experts are barbers, almost all of whom would have used one of those barber manuals at one time or another. Many experienced in sharpening use other patterns and get very good results in the application the have. In the non shaving world the x pattern is a minimally used thing- and I have seen and produced edges sharp enough to pop hairs on non shaving items using other methods and patterns. Have I shaved with a chisel? No, not my face, but when I have to put one to a stone it will all shave my arm before I'm done.
Don't forget too the tools the barber would most often have available to hone- the technique most predominantly used in any field is based on the tools available. If the majority of stones and hones were less then the length of a razor, (and based on what I have seen for barber hones, the all were) the technique taught to the new barbers (as in what the barber manual would say) would be directed to using those hones, and not likely to include techniques for using hones not commonly available or not available at all.
Now, I'm not saying I'm right- just giving another angle to look at it from.
Has anyone examined a commercial DE blade under an electron microscope for comparison- they are sharper by comparison to a straight or a Feather Razor blade which is also so much sharper to see what pattern they have? Physics and metallurgy will dictate the smallest edge that can be created and stand up to the task of shaving, so if we rule out a difference in the metallurgy from older technology to newer technology (which I believe we can since there are currently manufacturers still making straights) the difference must be in the sharpening process.
Neither a DE commercial blade or a feather blade should be sharper than a straight razor. They are sharpened differently, and with coarser grits than many of us here use on our straights, so they may be sharper than some straights from the factory, but not those in the hands of "pros".Quote:
Originally Posted by Justme-
And as far as metallurgy goes for making the edge as thin as possible, you are partially correct. For the most part, the quality of the steel is consistent throughout the time periods we deal with, though there are some regions that made better steels at certain points than others. There could also be some fluctuation in the degree of hardening of a given razor with respect to another, which would mean that a variable degree of sharpness is possible for different razors. But that variance wouldn't be a function of the time that the item were made, it would depend on the manufacturer, and the quality of workmanship by the craftsmen involved.
So, yes, a big difference is in the sharpening technique and to what final grit level you take the edge. But another part of it is almost a gamble, between getting an outstanding specimen and an average one, that is dictated by sundry external, indeterminable factors.
I do agree that the x pattern aids in maintaining even wear on uneven blades. But it also could be lessening the amount of pulling caused by the teeth created, as I mentioned somewhere above, thus actually providing a "smoother" edge for a given grit level... enter diminishing returns argument... enter personal preference... etc.
Great perspective on the friction reduction aspect, btw.
Au contraire.Quote:
Originally Posted by Russel Baldridge
Those feather Pro blades are the sharpest thing to ever touch my face.
I can get a wicked sharp edge on a good blade, and it might come close to a feather blade, but the feather blade will be much sharper.
I've heard that people have gotten feather sharp blades with the 32 K shapton, but even then it is not a given.
Normal straights may be more smooth, forgiveable and comfortable in the skin, but in pure sharpness a feather beats the snot out of most honemeister honed blades.
Well I just want to put in my 2 cents.
I actually had a brand new Dovo that was sharpened by one of our hone meisters. I didn't buy it for that reason, I just wanted a new straight and liked the look of it. Being pre-honed was just icing on the cake. Having already successfully brought a Dubl Duck, Sanguine and Union Razor Cutlery Co. into shave readiness, I was curious to try one that was the epitome of shave ready. The darn thing pulled like crazy. After about 20 runs up and down the Norton in an "I" pattern, it is now one damn good shaver.
Now I'm not knocking who honed it but I have since come to a conclusion. That for some guys, that pattern gives better shaves.
When I first started, I used the X pattern for quite some time and struggled with it. Then one day I switched to the I pattern and Kaboom. HHT passed and shaves were awesome. I've used the I pattern ever since and haven't looked back. I'm beginning to think that everyone's whickers are different and what seems to shave me best is a blade honed in an I pattern.
I'm not knocking anyone's technhique or experience. I just think that what seems to work for one is not necessarily the solution for everyone.
Later,
80s
I can get most razors to pass the HHT easily- but that (as has been discussed) is not the be-all end-all test for sharpness.
Russel, I find it very hard to believe the smooth, irritation free shaves of a DE blade (agreed, they must be sharpened commercially, which would lend toward course measures) and the ultra sharpness of my Feather AC are not sharper than my honemeister honed Dovo, which does pull and irritate in comparison. The research data and results do not support the .
Recently I was privileged to spend some time with Howard from The Perfect Edge, and received an education on his thoughts and method for finish honing, which is the "I" as well. The virtue of that, extrapolating from what he told me, is you can apply light pressure to the bevel evenly across the blade which takes much more effort with the x pattern to be consistent.
I guess I stand corrected, but from an intuitive perspective that seems strange that something mass produced would be of that quality, but if that's the case then great!
How do they compare to edges that have been diamond pasted, say, up to .25? Because thats just about the finest grit level available, after .25 the variable grit size is hard to control and also becomes extremely expensive, even for mass production. What I'm getting at is that either they are somehow getting grit levels sub .1 micron (which would give a noticeable difference, impressive and expensive) or the bevel is much more acute which would give the feeling of a sharper edge. Or some other factor that is, as of yet, undetermined.
Anyone know the process they use?
Maybe gamma rays? I think .25 micron gets the blade sharp enough...Quote:
Originally Posted by Russel Baldridge