If I got a 1inch hone would I be able to bypass the learning of a rolling stroke?:D
Printable View
If I got a 1inch hone would I be able to bypass the learning of a rolling stroke?:D
Nope. You'd force yourself to learn it on a difficult tool. ... sorry.
X
As X said, no.
A razor requiring a rolling stroke only touches the stone on a tiny area at the same time.
From the razor's point of view, the width of the stone is irrelevant.
In fact, because you need to roll the razor no matter what you do, a wide stone might be easier to work with because there is no risk of rolling too far and scraping the edge along the edge of the stone.
:oHow come:( Wouldn't only a small part of a blade be touching the hone?
Yes.
But because the razor is curved, you need to continuously change the angle to have it touch the hone at every point.
Suppose you don't do this, but keep it perfectly horizontal.
As you start the stroke, the heel is not touching the hone because the razor is touching the hone at a point 1" from the heel.
When you are making the stroke, the heel will never touch the hone at all.
since you are doing the X pattern, the edge will be dragged along the edge of the stone until the middle point is on the honing surface. From then on, only the middle point makes contact until you are near the end of the stone.
At that point, you scrape the rest of the edge near the toe over the edge of the stone.
Heel: no honing action at all
Heel - middle: scraping across the edge of the stone
Middle: lots of honing action
Middle - toe: scraping across the edge of the stone
Toe: scraping across the edge of the stone
You see how this would get you a less than ideal edge?
See attached pic for more detail. As you can see, the width of the stone is not that important. 1" or 3" changes the effects of course. With a 3" stone there would be less scraping on the heel and toe, and more honing in the very midle. With a 1" stone, there will be more scraping and less honing in the middle.
But both options suck.
If otoh you use the rolling stroke, then the wide stone makes it a bit easier because you don't risk scraping the toe or the heel on the edge of the stone.
Now, if a razor is only very lightly curved, the effects I've described are tiny, and you probably compensate (roll) without even knowing.
But if the curvature becomes more pronounced, the effects become bigger and you really need to learn the rolling stroke.
I really don't understand the rolling stroke as I have never been able to roll the blade on the hone without lifting the spine. This defeats the purpose for me as the honing angle is wrong if the spine and the bevel are not both in contact.
I prefer a seesaw stroke.
For this, the best shape to use is a hone with a convex surface across the width. You can then seesaw the blade over the centre of the convex curve. A 1.5 inch wide hone is ideal and narrower also will work.
Using this method, a larger hone is actually unhelpful.
This I believe is the way the big old wedges were honed historically.
I hope this helps.
ok, thanks for the replies!
English, I think that what some people call the rolling x is the same as what you call the see-saw stroke. I didn't have a problem picking up the technique because of my many years of honing pocket knives with clip blades. Although the spine doesn't touch when honing a pocket knife the angle of attack does change as you go from the tang to the point. The rolling x or see-saw requires a similar stroke.Quote:
Originally Posted by English
It really depends on the shape of the razors edge. The greater the "smile" shape then the more the rolling stroke is needed.
If you focus your attention on watching the water flow in front of the edge moving from heel to toe then you will automatically develop the rolling motion. You will be rolling the point of contact from the heel to the toe as you move across the hone.
What a cool guide! Thanks. I'll watch for that next time.Quote:
Originally Posted by randydance062449
I'm glad clarification was added and it was stressed that it depends on the amount of curvature. I've found that for a slightly curved blade that simply will not be honed effectively using a wide hone, a narrow hone and no "rolling hone" stroke absolutely works well. Given the fact that the degree of curvature determines whether a rolling stroke is essential, I do not agree that ALL non-flat blades require a rolling hone stroke even if honed on a 1" stone.
Use the market test. If your 1" stone is taking off the marker evenly on both bevels without using any rolling hone stroke, you're golden.
Chris L
Like Chris says, the marker test is essential. What I do now is check the edge under magnification, 30X in my case, and see if there are any micro chips that can't be seen with the naked eye. Then I put the marker on the edge and do a few strokes to see if I need the rolling stroke or some variation of my normal flat stroke.
Once I know what stroke I need to use I take a tissue and lighter fluid and wipe the marker off of the edge before I go further. It is IMO better to do it before the razor is sharp then after. Once the edge is clean I go back to the hones.
I would add here that AFTER learning the rolling x, I think it is more "pleasant" to do, maybe even easier, on a narrower hone. I also prefer a narrower hone for all honing.