Thread: wider at th toe

Originally Posted by Wullie

I ain't near as old as those blades and I look a damn sight worse for the wear.

8

Been busy. Stuff is C-R-A-Z-Y at work with all the flooding and damage from the water to the roadways. The idiots with their cell phones haven't managed to kill me yet. Just hoping the monsoon season will come to an end for a bit. My 'maters are dying from too much water. Managed to get the yard baled this evening before the latest flood maker blew in. Got a couple more inches of rain in the last hour or so. I'm on a pretty good hill so if the water gets high enough to flood me, there'll be a LOT of folks under water ahead of me.

Wullie,
Sounds like you have a much better location than some of your neighbors! That's good. Ya never know what each day will bring! It's crazy & I know how ya feel about damn cell phones! I just don't understand what is so f*ckin' important that people have to have them held to their damn has when they drive! And better yet.........they're too damn cheap to buy a bluetooth! It is so frustrating when I'm going somewhere & someone starts coming over in my lane because they have a damn cell phone in one hand & the other hand (maybe) is on the steering wheel unless they are doing something else & steering with their knee!!!!!

The French made a lot of faux framebacks that were bigger at the toe than the heel. I've always just thought of it as a "style".

I agree, I think it was just a fashion.

You can get them slanting the other way too - wider at the heel than at the tip - looks like bad honing but isn't.

I think either Tom (Sharptonn) or Voidmonster hve a number of examples.

Regards,
Neil

it also helps "larger" blades sit in the scales without either the heel hanging below or necessitating mucho curvo in the scales to accomodate the extra width at the heel. look at the massive 11/8 blade in the second lummus article and think of how curvy the scales would need to be to fit that blade if it was made even width bow to stern!

The bit about the scales does make some sense, but there are also huge razors with tiny scales all around as a result of the heavy grind to the blades. My GB, which is around 8/8 has scales that would be right at home on a 4/8 razor.

I think it was just the style; I also think we'll never know the real answer. I gave up on asking those kinds of questions and just accept what is as what is.

Originally Posted by holli4pirating

The bit about the scales does make some sense, but there are also huge razors with tiny scales all around as a result of the heavy grind to the blades. My GB, which is around 8/8 has scales that would be right at home on a 4/8 razor.

that is accomplished on larger blades by having more rake to the tang, essentially lowering the pivot hole and raising the heel in relation to the scales. on examples with tangs that lay more straight in relation to the spine/cutting edge plane you generally see more slantedges to fit the scales. "Form follows Function" in both cases because of a seemingly simple design change. As a maker I think it very worthwhile to examine older examples and try to decipher why they did what they did back then.
as an aside- the tang with more rake changes how a blade sits on the hone and strop, angling the toe in the direction of stroke a bit. Ive had and made some that were accentuated in this way a bit more than normal and there is definitely accounting in the stroke that needs to be done, adjusting the mechanics slightly. the difference in most examples is so slight, not likely to even raise a brow.