Thread: Stright down the hone

Originally Posted by AFDavis11

I guess I'm curious about two things: one, can we as a group agree on one preferred methodology of honing and stropping (and make it a sticky maybe...?

Whether we agree or not, I hope we can all enjoy a good shave!
Hal

You bet . . . I spent a long time enjoying a bad shave too.

Originally Posted by halwilson

Hi Nenad,
I don't know if this is just a case of semantics, but rather than saying "they were made to force the X pattern" I would be inclined to say that barber hones were made small simply because it wasn't necessary to make them any larger. Their size is adequate to the task; besides they are easier to hold in the palm of the hand when honing which would be convenient for a barber who might not have workbench space in his small shop. Larger hones are no better or worse, but we should keep in mind that the modern 3" Nortons weren't designed originally with razors solely in mind; they were made for heavier and larger tools.
Hal

very true...

Nenad

Originally Posted by AFDavis11

I spent over a year practicing and learning to hone. I concluded that the x pattern works best, heal leading works pretty well, and a 90 degree angle works ok until you try to shave with it and then its more mediocre.

This is exactly what I'm atarting to find as well in my eighth month of straight shaving.

Originally Posted by AFDavis11

I guess I'm curious about two things: one, can we as a group agree on one preferred methodology of honing and stropping (and make it a sticky maybe?),

I sure hope not. It's the dissent, the difference of opinion that keeps me on my toes, keeps me learning new things and thinking about others.

Originally Posted by AFDavis11

two, should we as a group consider opening up an experimentation section and open threads like "HONING WITH A 90 DEGREE ANGLE" or "MAKING THE SMALLEST STRIATIONS POSSIBLE" and have guys post into them with their research? And allow others to open threads or reply based on their attempts at trying the idea?

Isn't this what happens now?

X

First...

Randy... it's good to see you here again. Hope you are feeling better.

Okay... Without espousing a right or wrong way to do things, I will throw in maybe something else to ponder. I use a variety of methods. Maybe only cause I keep forgetting the right way to do it, and I'm hoping it'll come back to me by trying a different approach.

When I am making a knife, I change sanding directions with each succession of grit changes to make the steel polished. Changing directions with the smoother higher grit allows me to see if the previous rougher grit has been completely eliminated. I keep doing that until I get close to a mirror finish.

With that in mind, my little pea brain says that it should also work for honing. So, that's what I do. If I decide to just use hones instead of my machine, I may start with 800 grit in a 90 degree push that traverses the blade as I move down the stone. When I am satisfied that the edge is repaired, I will go to an X pattern with maybe a 1,000 grit.

When it's time for the 4,000 grit, I may lead the tip instead of the heel for both sides. Then on the subsequent 8,000 I will usually lead the heel first. This, theoretically, puts all the finer striations parallel to one another on each edge that angle from heel to tip at whatever angle the blade made the trip across the stone.

To really muddy the waters, here is something else. Unless the blade is a true "straight" with a square point, I will use a combo X / scythe stroke trying to insure all parts of the blade edge get the same amount of time on the stone.

If you think about it, pulling the blade straight across the stone in the X pattern puts the center of the blade in contact with the stone more than the heel or tip of the blade. Eventually, I'm thinkin' that could put a belly in the center. ???? Only if it is a true straight blade will the entire blade sit on the stone if it is placed heel to tip and drawn in an X pattern. That doesn't happen with a blade that has a smile.

My own goofy theory is that is one of the reasons the square point came about... it was easier to hone. The guys back in the early 1900's didn't have a forum like this in which to learn. And judging from all the razors I restore, most guys did not know how to hone a razor. I'd even guess that only 2 or 3 out of 10 knew how to hone properly

Something else for the striation defenders. In order for that very plausible theory to be absolute, wouldn't you have to strop the same way? That is... wouldn't you push the blade away from you on a strop with the tip leading, but then have to rotate the blade so the tip is still leading on the pull stroke?

Otherwise, if you strop tip away on the push and heel to you on the pull stroke, you have created the change in the direction of the striations between the stone and the strop on one side of the blade. Maybe the rounding of the striations slightly by the opposing stropping action is what gives us that good shave.

???????????

When you take sandpaper to the blade in the direction of the grind the sandpaper scratches. When you sand the length of the blade it polishes. So wouldn’t make sense that the X pattern is used instead of going with the grind to polish the edge?

Glen

Interesting. I hope no one is of the impression that I'm trying to limit anyones fun or ability to do as they please. Come on now, I'm pretty open minded about anything that works. Now keep in mind that if I am a striation defender that I still believe that a razor can be sharpened up like crazy and give great shaves, even without striations being emphasized. But, I think you only have to shave with a properly striated, yet dull blade, once to realize how important striations are. But your experience with a super sharp blade should not discount striations, even if say they are more effective cutting long whiskers over short, or whatever.

Bill,

You are correct, the X pattern does create a belly. I refer to the 1961 barbers manual which specifically points this out. It also discusses the criticality of striations at length too (it is in our files section for anyone here who wishes to review it). So don't read too far into it, because it dispells alot of our unclear notions very quickly.

So, stropping is a good example. You suggest, I think that, well honestly I'm not sure what you were suggesting. Let me try and say this.

No.

Honing to create 45 degree angled striations does not mean you have to strop in an x pattern. I think this is just another one of the many falacious logic arguments we develop on here. My experience is that stropping straight works just fine. I have found no evidence that stropping needs to be done in an X pattern. We are not trying to straighten striation with stropping. All your doing is aligning the blade. Perhaps we are aligning the striated edge? An x pattern keeps the razor on the strop nicely but in my experience doesn't draw the blade well. I would think that the striations combined with a sharp blade is what creates the draw of the blade as we try to push it down the strop against the striations. After all, you can't eliminate them, right? There always there, despite everyone trying to eliminate them.

Secondly Bill, you say you put all the striations on the blade in wildy differing patterns. Some this way and some that way. Well your helping to prove the point, not discount it. Your striations still exist, and they are still at opposing angles to each other on each side of the blade. You've created, the ultimately striated blade. A bride of Soligen! :-) The point, clearly identified again in the barbers manual is that as you push the razor into a beard the striations on the top of the edge work against the striations at the bottom side of the blade and shear the whiskers as the blade moves through the beard. The variances in angle on a hone, although neat (as in tidy) are described to ensure the striations are not emplaced parallel to each other. Thats all that is required. If you create them in vastly differing directions your using striations to shave, perhaps even more than I am. Your blades shave well?

So, lets say for a minute that you do need to run the razor on the strop in an X pattern. So what? Does that ruin somebody's day? If thats the case then I'd like to know it, and I'd like to discuss why? I just wanna know . . .

And Mr. X, to you I wanna say ....

NO! We aren't!

LOL, sorry, I"m on a roll here.

If we were experimenting we'd all decide to try and create striations on the blade, any blade, all together and run atleast one razor that shaves well now and run it at a 90 degree angle down the hone and see, after say 40 laps, whether it still shaves well. Or, on your next Ebay purchase one of you would hone on 4K a little, striating at opposing angles, run to 8K for a few passes at opposing angles and continue until you get a razor that shaves. Or try this, just washboard the edge back and forth on the 8K hone at an angle to create good opposing striations. You'all who think that backhoning is so destructive to an edge would have to say that the blade won't shave well at all right? You'd be good candidates for this experiment, we could kill two birds with one stone. Don't forget to striate the other side now....no fair! Then, try and shave with it and see what you think. Does it suddenly stop shaving? What happens now if you run it a few passes forward to replace the edge? What happens when you mix the power of striations and the power of a sharp blade together? WoW!

OK, I'm just playing with you guys. Those of you who say you don't use striations are simply kidding yourself. There still on the blade doing yoemans duty on your whiskers, you just don't know it. Should they be as small as possible? Probably! But I find they work great when reapplied. Once, you understand whats happening on the blade I think it helps explain phenomenom like this better . . . why does a blade draw on a strop? Why shouldn't you use a 90 degree angle honing? Why does a completly sharp razor, having been run over .5 paste over and over again suddenly require a few passes on 4K to get it shaving again? You don't think .5 paste was removing metal all those months? Sure it does, and polishes down those striations too I should think!....

HA! Wheres that damn pipe now .... oh sorry, I gave up smoking 30 years ago.

OK, so if I'm wrong, I'm wrong. Lets take down the barbers manual out of the files then, we don't need the darn thing. What do professionals know about their own tools anyway. We know better because . . . well, because . . .
because we say so! Yea! :-)

Oh, ranting is so much fun . . . hope your guys don't get mad, I'm just having fun here.

Originally Posted by urleebird

If you think about it, pulling the blade straight across the stone in the X pattern puts the center of the blade in contact with the stone more than the heel or tip of the blade. Eventually, I'm thinkin' that could put a belly in the center. ???? Only if it is a true straight blade will the entire blade sit on the stone if it is placed heel to tip and drawn in an X pattern. That doesn't happen with a blade that has a smile.

Bill,

Some very astute observations. Thanks. I can follow you about the X pattern, particularly when using a wider stone (i.e. where the whole blade is in contact with the hone at beginning of the stroke), but insofar as you know what your doing, don't you think there would be less of a tendency to put a belly in the centre of a blade using the X stroke on narrower barber hones? (Actually, on ebay, I tend to see more blades way over-honed toward the tip, than bowed in the centre).

I don't use the X stroke exclusively with my classic barber hones. The stroke I use depends on the blade's geometry, its degree of keenness and whether or not I'm at the sharpening or finishing stage. Sometimes, I need a "windshield wiper" pattern, a scythe pattern, "washboard style" strokes, back-honing strokes, circular and oval patterns, long strokes with the heel leading etc.. but I never use a blade at 90 degrees.

Hal

Originally Posted by AFDavis11

Bill,

You are correct, the X pattern does create a belly. I refer to the 1961 barbers manual which specifically points this out. It also discusses the criticality of striations at length too (it is in our files section for anyone here who wishes to review it). So don't read too far into it, because it dispells alot of our unclear notions very quickly.

Alan,

I will definitely check this file out. Thanks. This is a terrific thread with lots of lively and informative discussion. I'd offer you a pipe Alan, but I too gave up the habit long ago.

Hal

Originally Posted by AFDavis11

HA! Wheres that damn pipe now .... oh sorry, I gave up smoking 30 years ago.

Here it is Alan!



Cheers, Hal