Thread: Dry Honing

Hi guys,

I've recently been experimenting with using my Coticule dry, also my barber's hone. I've found it to be really great for developing good honing technique. The sensation is nowhere near as satisfying as with water or slurry, but for the beginning honer it's gives really good feedback, both tactile, and sound, that have really helped me get better at honing quickly.

Any new honers out there might want to try this if they're having problems getting a good technique going. You can't hone dry with every type of stone, but Coticles are fine and so are most barber hones.
Just wanted to share.

And, dry honing doesnt remove nearly as much material, which means more time spent practicing and less chance for mistake while learning.

Also the results are a finer edge than that of the same stone when used wet. I do a progression of slurry, water, dry on my finishing hones, it greatly speeds up the process once you've got a good technique

Russel,

I have to disagree that dry honing removes less material than using the coticule wet. The old barber manuals taught that the progression was dry, wet, then coated with shaving lather for the finest finish.

I've tried my coticule extensively with all three methods, and for me the wet coticule produces the best edge. (I've never had much luck with lather, for some reason, although others have.) A slurry on the hone cuts fastest but leaves a slightly duller edge, and dry honing produces an edge that's sharp but not as smooth as you get when using water.

Everyone's beard is different, though, so it's entirely possible that a dry hone would produce an edge that's better suited for someone else.

It is a good technique for practicing your honing, though. Mistakes become much more obvious without the water there to cushion things.

Josh

I am basing this on a visual inspection of the honed edge. Honed with water leaves a smooth finish but the scratch pattern is obvious under magnification, dry leaves less scratching, almost mirror finish which never occurs with water and especially not with slurry.

I've just always done tests to see what method gives what result and worked from there, and the visual difference lead me to the conclusion that dry is finer. Which I think is supported by the fact that the water releases (or retains the released) garnets, whether you let them build into a slurry or not is the only differing factor.

but I do some kinda "non-traditional" honing styles too which may be a factor, but maybe not.

Experimenting is a good thing.

One thing I'd caution you against here is assuming that what happens on the bevel translates directly to the edge. It does give you some clues, but it's not definitive.

I'm also not sure that water "releases" the garnets. The matrix on the coticules I've used is pretty hard, and the only thing I've found to create a slurry is a slurry stone or using lots of pressure on the razor. I don't think normal light honing strokes release very many garnets, if any. It's not like a typical waterstone like the Norton, where the abrasive is constantly breaking free and refreshing.

Josh

I also get better shaves off a wet, no-slurry coticule than a dry coticule.

Originally Posted by JoshEarl

Experimenting is a good thing.

I don't think normal light honing strokes release very many garnets, if any.

Josh

First, I agree! I cant seem to stop myself from hypothesizing and formulating test procedures.

Second, maybe the water doesn't "release" the garnets, but what garnets are loosened by the blade are concentrated by the water as the razor moves over it (in the small puddle ahead of the blade), whereas with a dry stone they pretty much remain where they were released, at least, this is my analysis based on my procedure. It may also be dependent on the size of the stone, mine is 1-1/16 by 6-3/4, and it forms a slight haze in the water as I go, maybe a larger one would not.

I dont have pics of the edges from my coticule, but check out the pics in this review I posted, similar results occur with my coticule (but to a lesser degree).
http://straightrazorpalace.com/showthread.php?t=19510

And there may not be a direct correlation between the visual results and the feel of the edge, but they are not far off and the other factors seem to be accounted for in my procedure.

Russel,

I think we're not really disagreeing here. It sounds like you have a softer coticule than I do. This has come up before, with some people swearing that a coticule creates a slurry just from honing, and others insisting that it doesn't.

I have a 2x6" coticule and a 4x4" coticule, and I could hone for hours with plain water and not generate a speck of slurry. I've done experiments where I honed for a while, then let the hone dry without cleaning it off to see if there would be any dust on the surface, and there wasn't. The only way I can raise a slurry is with my rubbing stone or by grinding the blade on the hone with significant pressure.

So it's quite possible that your "plain water" edge is more like my "light slurry" edge. I've found that a slurry always leaves a duller edge than either plain water or dry honing.

You said yours is a vintage coticule, right? Maybe the older ones were softer. Mine are both new.

The main pitfall of looking at the hone marks on the bevel is that they are two-dimensional. You can see the width of the scratches, but you have to guess at the depth. I've had edges from a "coarser" hone that shaved much more comfortably than those from a finer stone. In my opinion, wider, shallower scratches create a more comfortable edge than shallower, finer ones. That's why chromium oxide produces a nicer edge than diamonds of the same grit.

Just my 2 cents.

Josh

Ah, I see, it very well could be that mine is a softer specimen. In order to maintain a "just water" set of strokes, I have to change the water every twenty strokes or so.

The commonly agreed on difference between the old and new stone is amount of garnet right? So maybe it being an older "model" means the garnets are released more rapidly since there are more touching the blade per stroke. Just a theory, maybe incorrect. But I also have a new coticule slurry stone that isn't too far off from that of the vintage one, though I use it for smaller tools, and that would mean more psi so I guess this isn't very relevant. Oh well.

Yes, I agree with you that the shape of the cutting media plays a role in the comfort of the resultant edge, but it shouldn't be a factor here since we are comparing garnet to garnet.

Anyway, I guess what matters is that we are each achieving our own desired goals. And that deserves a "cheers".

As a point for consideration.
Garnets suspended in slurry will have a different sharpening action than those locked in matrix.
As the blade moves across the stone of a locked matrix the garnet abrasion will be along the metal side facing the stone. So on one side of the blade.
When the garnets move up into a slurry you now have garnets working the edge facing the stone and garnets abrading the leading edge of the blade as they are pushed ahead and dragged under the edge during a honing stroke. You will still get the greatest abrasion on the side against the stone and subject to the weight of the razor but this leading edge abrasion may have a smoothing action on the leading edge that will affect the nature of the cutting action.
Can't speak to that as my experience has been with trying to stop that kind of abrasive action in industrial use.
Just observing and now formulating a test or two.
What fun!!