Thread: How sharp do you like it?

Perhaps this is a better explanation. By the way, this is the way I see it and it may not apply to everyone. It's a visualisation I use when I hone and seems to work.

There's a boundary point above which a razor will not cut hair. Below that point (the shave zone ...), there is a very wide range of "sharpness". Perhaps surprisingly, something like a 1K hone will put most decent razors in the shave zone. I, and I know others as well, have shaved with a 1K edge just to see what it is like. It works but is not pleasant. I wouldn't call a razor in that condition dull, since it shaves. I'd call it rough.

I guess the thing is how you visualise the grits - it isn't linear as you increase grit, it's geometric basically. Here's a picture I cribbed from Wikipedia showing 2D squares as opposed to 3D, but it does show how quickly the size drops:



The big square represents, say, the 1K particulates. The next a 2K, then 4K, 8K, 16K and so on.

Now if you are getting an edge that shaves (albeit roughly) off particulates the size of the big square (ie, the edge is narrow enough from scratches produced by something of that size), then hopefully you can see that any reduction in the width of the edge will be very slow going off particulates related to the size of the 3rd (4K), 4th (8K) etc squares. In other words yes, they will bring the sides of the edge closer together, but very very slowly.

These higher grits, IMO, primarily serve to make the sides of the bevel smoother and less craggy. It's what you see under a scope when you look at the bevel. This does in turn effect the edge since the sides and the edge connect. But it is such a small reduction relative to what has already happened on the 1K.

That's the way I think about it anyway. It works for me, but clearly it confuses others. So take it or leave it. I'd like to know how others think about it too.

James.