7/8 or 1/2 which(thickness) one used most for straight razor's?
Printable View
7/8 or 1/2 which(thickness) one used most for straight razor's?
It depends...
You can stack the wheels on the spindle. If you have two 1/2 wheels you can use one or put two together and have a 1" wide surface. It gets a bit bumpy with sisal wheels if you don't get them to run concentric but the spiral and loose wheels don't have any issues after raking them out.
I prefer single wheel for greaseless, and stacked for buffing.
I use 1/2" but I do not see anything wrong with 7/8 apart from the higher price.
does it matter which kinda wheels to use for different compounds.
example
Spiral Sewn Cotton Wheel for greaseless or better will be to use sisal wheels?
etc?
thank you
For newbies, spiral sewn is recommended, because sisal are pretty aggressive.
I personally use spiral sewn for greaseless, sisal/spiral sewn/loose cotton for black emery in that order, then spiral sewn for stainless green compound, and loose cotton for white rogue and CrO compound. the loose cotton wheels have two kinds 40 ply and 80ply I like the 80 ply a lot. In my experience with loose cotton you can go 8" (may be even 10") and make the cutting more aggressive while achieving a lot of give to fit the razor curves.
Sham a lot of this is what fits your style and what you start with and learn on...
I don't use sisal at all anymore I use the sewn wheels until I get to the last few wheels then switch to loose buffs...
The size of the wheel also depends somewhat on the speed that you are spinning at, higher speeds + smaller wheels = less heat because the relative speed across the blade is slower..
There are a few threads on here that have the equations done for you but it is surface speed that really counts not just rpm...
Personally I like the 4" x 1/2" wheels because I can get into the hollows better, but I try and spin spine to edge most of the time,, I rarely go heel to toe, only on the really bad ones at 80 grit and at the polishing stage if I am going after a real mirror finish..
Like I said some of this is personal some is what razor you are working with...
Thank you Glen . it helps a lot.
i get confused with above statement.
higher speeds( we assume speed is same and just wheel changes)+bigger wheels= less heat?
this is what i was thinking.
let me explain why i think so.
arbor speed is 3600 x 6. will make buffer turning more faster then 8 wheel?
am i wrong?
8 wheel has more surface and touching speed to the razor should be less then 6 wheel because 6 will radius smaller and will touch more then 8 wheel/
Am i clear on this?
This link will explain better than I can about speed and other tips: Introduction To Buffing and Polishing - Caswell Inc.
In short, the larger diameter the wheel the faster the surface speed at the business part of the wheel. Faster surface speed, more heat potential.
Good luck.
Sham it's very simple, imagine you want to cover 10 feet distance in 2 seconds, this will require a speed of 5ft/s.
Now imagine you need to cover 20 ft in 2 seconds, that means you need to go with 10ft/s.
The same principle applies for surface speed which is nothing different than covering different distances at fixed amount of time as the above example.
i have to learn something different every darn day.
thank you guys.
I actually like the sewn wheels and loose cotton for most of my work. I use 4, 6 and 8 inch wheels depending on the media or compound. My personal preference however are wheels that are close to 1 inch wide and I will use 2 thinner to get there when I need to.
Have fun,
Lynn
An easier way to look at this is that for any given RPM, just consider a single revolution of the wheel. A six in wheel travels 6 inches. An eight inch wheel travels 8 inches in the same amount of time, so the larger wheel went farther so it's going faster.
The bigger the wheel, the faster it is going.
I hopes this helps you see it better.
Correction...a 6" wheel travels 6" x 3.146 (Pi) = 18" +
a 8" wheel travels 8" x 3.146 ( Pi ) = 24" +
assuming both are rotating the same speed.
A 3600 RPM buffer travels at 60 revolutions per second irregardless of the buffing wheel size.
So...... the distance covered per second....
18" x 60 = 1080 " per second
24 " x 60 = 1440" per second
More distance = greater heat
:gaah:
Of course you're right.
I'm a moron.
Honestly, I did know that simple concept of the difference between diameter and circumference. I shouldn't post when I'm tired. I was simply thinking in terms of the 8 inch wheel being bigger than the 6 inch wheel and was just comparing the two and shouldn't have assigned numbers, since they were clearly beyond my ability.
I use 1/2" all the way. Less strain on the motor, less friction (assuming the same pressure is used), costs less and takes up less room in storage. The only disadvantage is you end up applying compound twice as often.
Room becomes an issue when you have about 20 wheels. I use an old filing cabinet for storage. The wheels, mandrels, rake and compounds occupy a whole drawer.
i have buffing belts for my grinder so i can use whatever wheel i ground on to match up with the felt belt and buff out
also i have a multi speed grinder
I just bought a 3/4 hp Baldor that runs at the lower speed (1800rpm). I'm going to try the whole process of greaseless compounds, up to polishing, all on this low-speed buffer. My question is in regards to wheel size and type. I do realize that much depends on the size and type of blade I'm working on, but perhaps someone with experience could add some generic advice.
I'm not sure if loose cotton wheels at 6" will be substantial for the lower grit compounds. I've always hesitated to try an 8" wheel since I am weary of its ability to get into the hollowed curve of smaller blades. Can I use 6" or 8" sewn cotton wheels and still reach the entire surface of the blade? Is it better to use sewn for lower grits and loose for higher grits; or can I use loose all the way through? I guess I just don't know how well loose wheels conform to the curve. Lynn's post was close to answering my questions:
Any help would be greatly appreciated, thanks.