Thread: Are X Strokes Necessary If...

...if my hone is wide enough for the whole blade to make contact? I'm having some good results from my honing efforts and am wondering now exactly the distinct benefit of the various strokes. An X stroke seems to me not much different in effect than a stroke straight down the hone with the blade angled heel-first. On a 3 inch hone, an X stroke seems to short-change the heel end of the blade.

Just wondering...

Lawson I'm new to this as well and have thought the same as you. The only thing that kind of makes sense to me is that if your stone is not perfectly even moving the blade across the stone might help ensure that you are making contact across the whole edge of the blade.

I'm interested in seeing what the experts have to say.

Ed

I would not use the X stroke on a wider stone, for the reasons you mentioned, it is not necessary and it will short change the heel.

I'm no pro, but from what I understand, the x-stroke's purpose is more than dealing with an issue of stone width. As mentioned above, it helps ensure that the whole edge of the razor is contacting the stone throughout the stroke by continuously changing the contact point of stone and steel as you move the razor across the hone. (Big Guys chime in if I am totally wrong on this).

Also, in general, the heel tends to get a little more pressure on the hone just by way of physics, and the x-stroke helps deal with this by getting the heel off of the hone sooner rather than later. The x-stroke also helps you avoid the dreaded frown and uneven hone wear.

Long story short, I use the x-stroke and it's variants because it just plain out works for me.

Best,

Mark

I find that of the razors I hone, very few have perfectly flat edges, so most need some degree of a roll in the stroke. But even for the few that are perfectly flat, I still use an X stroke - maybe just out of habit. It works, and I don't feel like experimenting with it, so I'm not going to change it without reason.

Originally Posted by nun2sharp

I would not use the X stroke on a wider stone, for the reasons you mentioned, it is not necessary and it will short change the heel.

Ditto. I do seem to lead a lil' bit with the heal though, but that may just be the way I do it.

Hey thanks--I see the point on blades or hones not being perfectly flat, that helps a lot to see the function on the X-stroke. The problem with my wide hones is that I can't really start with the blade toe off the stone since it seems like the shank often changes the angle that the blade lays on the stone.

I wasn't questioning the practice so much as asking a question about the practice!

I use a full X for sharpening and a tiny, tiny one for polishing.

I always use circles and Xs, as recommended by Lynn, for setting bevels, and X strokes for the rest of it no matter what the width of the hone is. I more or less follow the 1961 barber manual tutorial that I frequently post the link to here.

Running the blade straight across a wider hone is fine as long as the hone and the blade are perfect and making good contact throughout the stroke. I can't see it but I suspect that there will be anomalies between the two. If not at the beginning of the honing as the stone and razor begin to wear. The X stroke seems to be effective in keeping the hone/blade contact more uniform than it might be otherwise. Just IMHO.

I actually feel that the angular striations put into the edge by utilizing the X stroke on all my stones helps the razor cut better for me. Pressure is the evil that hurts the heal of the razor. With a nice even stroke, you rarely have a problem anywhere along the edge. Even when doing circles on a 3 inch stone, I concentrate on the center of the razor which helps to keep it flat and not create extra pressure at the heel or toe.

If I am worried about blade contact, then I'll normally switch to a 45 degree angle X stroke which works well for me in making contact with the entire edge against the stone.

Have fun,

Lynn