Thread: Bevel Setting

Originally Posted by gssixgun

Actually in real life not the "Gritzone" I am going to explain here so there are no more misunderstanding because you guys just confused the heck outta this very simple thread....

Not everything in life is so simple it can be put in one-liners.
I tried to make my point is the clearest way I could.
I also said that I agree with the big picture, only that I think that the speed difference between 1K and 4K is bigger than you seem to think.

Originally Posted by gssixgun

Now what you guys are saying is according to the grit charts (...)

Nope. I try to offer an explanation for something I experience in real life. (more about that in a minute) From what I understand of your first post, it was you that were saying that 4K is 4 times slower than 1K. That sounds pretty much like going by the figures. If I'm allowed to translate to 4/8K, than 2 laps on the 8K removes the same amount of steel than 1K lap on the 4K. To calculate even further: 4X 16k= 2X8K = 1X4K. This opens interesting perspectives for saving money spend on hones. If it were true.

Originally Posted by gssixgun

and what you read because neither of you actually hone on Nortons that I have ever read about anyway, and please correct me if I am wrong...

That is correct. I don't own any Norton hones. I own the DMTs 325, 600 and 1200 grit. I also own the Chosera 5K and 10K. As far as hones with numbers, that's all real life experience I have to offer. Having used them, I always had the distinct impression that the speeds differences are considerably bigger than what a simple division of the numbers would suggest. The Norton hones might behave differently. I'll take your word for it.

Originally Posted by gssixgun

Bart says my 20 laps would be closer to 320 laps and Tom says I might not ever get there....
Now on the slow bevel I could take 1600 - 2400 by Bart's calculations and for sure would never get there by Tom's....

I don't really get that. Your 20 laps are always 20 laps.
I can't put words in Tom's mouth, but that's not what I made from his post.

Originally Posted by gssixgun

OK now here's the problem, some of us learned on Norton 4/8's we actually have honed razors on them, in real life, in fact some of us quite a few razors...

I NEVER did that many laps, ever... Oh yeah I can get a shaving sharp razor on one...

What the point is here, is don't go by what it says, go by what it does....Charts don't tell the whole truth...


No offense intended here guys, but the point needed making and the problem is with the charts and info not you guys...
I have the utmost respect for both of you...

That is completely mutual, Glen. Somehow I have the feeling that you read what I said in my first post as a public encouragement to do more laps. But it's the reverse actually. I am not shy of doing many laps myself. Sometimes I'm just too lazy to stand up and get a coarser hone. But there are tasks that simply cannot be done without the proper hone, that offers the required abrasive speed and power. I think we agree on that one.

Originally Posted by gssixgun

Now back to your regularly scheduled hone zone programing...

Which says yes a Norton 4k will be fine until you start messing with e-bay blades and damaged ones then you might wanna get a 1k...

+1

Originally Posted by gugi

nope 100 laps, you're off by 10

I stand corrected. It was running late yesterday.

Originally Posted by gugi

So, what is the correct number you ask? I believe it is 4 and that comes just from the depth of the grooves of the removed metal. the length of the groves is he same and as far as the width goes it's the same whether you have 4 times more of them when each is 4 times narrower.

At first sight, a sound theory. Basically, an army of spikes plows through the steel. 1K spikes in theory being 4 times larger in diameter than 4K spikes would make 4 laps on 4K remove the same amount of steel as 1 lap on 1K. That was my reasoning a few years back, but it doesn't hold up in reality.

When I woke up today, I took my DMT 325 - 600 combination stone. I placed a small piece of aluminum T-bar upside down on the 325 and honed till the entire top surface of the T had 325 scratches in one direction. Next I changed the honing direction 90 degrees. It took 2 full length strokes on the 325 to completely replace the previous scratch pattern with one running in the new direction. Then I flipped the hone over to the 600 side. (Note that my 325 doubles as a lapping plate for Coticules and that is has considerably more wear than the 600) Still, it took me 20 full length laps to replace the 325 grit scratches with 600 grit scratches. (I made the new scratches perpendicular to the 325 ones) To finish this humble experiment, I replaced the 600 grit scratch pattern with a new one running in perpendicular direction. That took 4 laps.

I could run the same experiment on my Choseras 5K and 10K, but do I really need to? I already know that the two 10K-laps don't equal one 5K laps. Not even close.

Best regards and no disrespect intended,
Bart.

Originally Posted by Bart

I also said that I agree with the big picture, only that I think that the speed difference between K and 4K is bigger than you seem to think.

That sounds pretty much like going by the figures. If I'm allowed to translate to 4/8K, than 2 laps on the 8K removes the same amount of steel than K lap on the 4K. To calculate even further: X K= 8K = 4K. This opens interesting perspectives for saving money spend on hones. If it were true.

(I never said anything about 8k stones but just for S&G yes you can do the exact same one stone trick as you do with a Coti with the 8k Norton, bevel set to shaving sharp)


See this is where the problem started, as I wasn't going by numbers (as in multiplying 4 by 1) I was going by actual experience on the actual hones that the OP was asking about ...

But that wasn't actually good enough you, had to confuse the issue by bringing in facts and figures which were totally meaningless to the actual discussion that was talking place....

Let me reiterate for you
THE OP:
"I have a 4k NORTON can I set the bevel on razors with it or do I need a 1K NORTON"...

Not DMT, not Shapton, not Chosera, not any other stone or question...

Very simple straight forward answer, YES you can, however it will take about 4 times as many strokes as the 1K to set the bevel.. (ACTUAL NUMBERS NOT A THEORY)


Now for some reason we had to expound on that very simple answer ??????? and 20 plus posts later we are still at the same place YES A 4k Norton can set bevels...

And I will be very, very, clear here, IME it is about 4 times slower then the 1k Norton....

Originally Posted by gssixgun

But that wasn't actually good enough you, had to confuse the issue by bringing in facts and figures which were totally meaningless to the actual discussion that was talking place....

(...) Now for some reason we had to expound on that very simple answer ??????? and 20 plus posts later we are still at the same place YES A 4k Norton can set bevels...

Originally Posted by Bart

+1 on the very essence of what Glen said...
(...)But yes, bevel correction can be done on a 4K synthetic water hone.
Bevel repair is in an entirely different realm.

Originally Posted by Bart

The bottom line is that we all agree, except about how much the speed difference precisely is.

Originally Posted by Bart

I also said that I agree with the big picture, (...)

I don't think we disagree. It surprises me that the Norton 1K and 4K relate to eachother in that way. I would have suspected the 1K to be much faster than that, based upon experience with other hones and how the speed difference seems more on a logaritmical scale than on a linear one.
We can easily agree to disagree on these details, if that's how you feel. It was a nice discussion and I have learned a thing or two about the Norton hones. Whether it confused the original poster, I can't really tell, but in that case, I apologize. Would this thread have appeared in the newby section, I would have started a new one here.

Originally Posted by gssixgun

(I never said anything about 8k stones but just for S&G yes you can do the exact same one stone trick as you do with a Coti with the 8k Norton, bevel set to shaving sharp)

that is great news Glen. Imo, internet forums are always a bit inclined to develop gear fetishism. For straight razor users who are not into collecting hones and razors, I acclaim every option that allows great results with nominal equipment. It would be great to see the Unicot method translated to hones like the Shapton 16K or the Naniwa 12K. I've been trying it myself with a Nakayama and with a Chosera 10K, but I had problems getting a decent bevel on razors that were a bit off. Once the bevel is there, produced by a DMT1200 for instance, using the secondary bevel procedure to jump straight to one of both these fine finishers works like a charm.
Without even owning them, I don't doubt that for the thrifty among us, buying a Naniwa1K, a Naniwa12K and a roll of tape is one of the most economical ways to get a razor from very dull to wickedly sharp. Set bevel on 1K, apply one layer of tape to the spine, refine and finish the edge on 12K. Strop without tape. When in need of a touch up: 12K with tape.
I know the above strays away from the original question, but in case this thread was inspired by searching cost-effective honing options, I feel it's worth mentioning.

Best regards,
Bart.

I wrote the following this morning but got distracted at the last moment and just found the window and submitted it...

Originally Posted by Bart

When I woke up today, I took my DMT 325 - 600 combination stone. I placed a small piece of aluminum T-bar upside down on the 325

I could run the same experiment on my Choseras 5K and 10K, but do I really need to? I already know that the two 10K-laps don't equal one 5K laps. Not even close.

So whatever you find, you still have the problem with transferability to Norton 1k/Norton 4k? I think depending on the hone and the way it's used the cutting process can scale as anything from sublinear to cubic with the particle size. Just consider your experiments with belgian hones.

Originally Posted by BKratchmer

Not to muddy the water... but unless I've forgotten everything from my Micro classes, a micron is one-millionth of a meter...
I think it is roughly 1/30,000 of an inch... Could be wrong. Will grab a chem/microscopy book and check.

I believe that is right - 25 microns = .001"

The true philosophical question here is how many angels (spelling is correct) can we fit onto a 30K abrasive particle?

Originally Posted by JimmyHAD

A friend told me just yesterday that a micron is a millionth of an inch.

I wouldn't trust that friend if I were you, he's off by a factor of roughly 40.
A micron is short for a micrometer, so it's one millionth of a meter.
1inch = 0.0254meters

BTW you can do math and conversions on Google too. Type
'1micron in inches' or '1micron in meters' or '1meter in microns'
or whatever number you want for that matter.

Since I have a browser with a google bar opened all the time I usually do quick calculations there. It's faster than typing bc -l or octave...