Thread: Flat or hollow

I've always used 3 1000, 4000, 8000 but recently I've added the strop Pauls recommendation and I think it's an excellent addition but I have noticed something though if I'm paring and I just want to touch it up I use the strop only but even though it feels super sharp the results are not the same as if I take through the stones and then the strop. Odd

Originally Posted by derekcohen

David, is that you!

Only one guy I know in this world who has as many sharpening stones as you do!

Welcome to Ubeaut.

Regards from Perth

Derek

It's me, the stone pig!

Thanks for the welcome

Originally Posted by auscab

That's interesting DW , I dint realize there was a shaving community that were into razors and stones.

I follow them (Oil stones) on UK ebay and have found some here at markets. I'm amazed at what labeled Turkey stones have sold for, the one or two I have seen.

The shaving community practically has a disease with stones. With woodworkers, people like me are uncommon. With shavers, such people are common. Strange thing being that an experienced tool user will sharpen something several times per shop session. An experienced shaver should only be sharpening something every several hundred shaves. But they pay more and buy more than woodworkers in terms of stones.

UK does sell washita stones HIGH. They're cheaper here in the states, but far better found in the wild as you've found out, where they'll be a couple of bucks and not - in the case of some perfect labeled stones - a couple of hundred. All I find in the wild here in the states (where I am), though, is india stones - unfortunately. Many old tool and die and metalworker shops here and gone (Pittsburgh), but no thriving craft scene that I recall, except for the few who did high end work for the wealthy.

You have to remember that Paul does sharpen freehand and does encourage having a convex? Bevel. So I can see how having a hollowed stone length wise might not be an issues. Being uneven across the stone would cause some trouble I think. I don't buy into the it was only rough and ready carpenters that had these hollowed out stones. I haven't come across any literature of old timers explaining the process of them flattening their stones. That doesn't mean they didn't of course. Also note I'm a Paul Sellers fan boy so I might be biased ) .

There is one that I have seen, and it's the novaculite stones that are called turkish stones by some (they are black with a flaky look to the surface). I think holtzapfel (however you spell his name) has an entry in the book about the stones being favored for their ability to cut quickly due to their friability, but that workmen using them often had to flatten them several times a day.

I could get along with a stone that was hollowed along its length, including for working the wire edge off of the back of a blade (or thinning it, or whatever you'd like to call it).

A chisel that is steeply bellied at the edges is far more problem than a grossly out of flat stone because on such a chisel, you can't easily get to the wire edge to remove it without exacerbating the problem of the bellied chisel. Same with an iron where the last bit is steeply out of flat (and not gradually), it's very hard to get the wire edge.

An out of flat stone can be used (one hollowed along its length) on a relatively flat iron just by allowing the iron to pass on and off of the highest point, and the iron can be used with some back wear as long as you can remove a wire edge (which will not be a consideration for craftsmen these days who use submicron abrasives, but in the day these stones were used, you'd have to get to it).

Originally Posted by auscab

He had to touch it on something to take off the burr Though ?

No, Rob, he insisted the burr would come off with use. This is true, but as you're all well aware, breaking off a thickish burr (& they were thick), is going to leave a something-less-than-sharp edge. The only commonly available stones were carborundum & India stones, which are not as fine as the better natural stones, & not remotely as fine as the higher grade water stones, so they were palpable burrs!

Virtually every stone I saw as a kid was more or less hollowed lengthways. I probably thought they were made that way, until I saw new ones in a hardware store! You could take the burr off the back of a plane blade or chisel with a dished stone, though, if you were careful to only rub on the flat rim around the edges. So I cannot fathom where the uncle got his strange idea about leaving the burrs on, and he's long since gone to hone his burred edges in some other-worldly place, so I can't ask him now. Maybe it would have been worth the clip over the ear to debate it, it might've satisfied my current curiosity.....

Cheers,

The difficulty in removing the wire edge/burr, if using hollowed stones, may explain why there are so many chisels with rather rough backs.

The way to remove the wire would not be on a stone, but to instead run the edge across a piece of wood. Slicing into the wood would do the job.

Regards from Perth

Derek

Originally Posted by IanW

No, Rob, he insisted the burr would come off with use. This is true, but as you're all well aware, breaking off a thickish burr (& they were thick), is going to leave a something-less-than-sharp edge. The only commonly available stones were carborundum & India stones, which are not as fine as the better natural stones, & not remotely as fine as the higher grade water stones, so they were palpable burrs!

Virtually every stone I saw as a kid was more or less hollowed lengthways. I probably thought they were made that way, until I saw new ones in a hardware store! You could take the burr off the back of a plane blade or chisel with a dished stone, though, if you were careful to only rub on the flat rim around the edges. So I cannot fathom where the uncle got his strange idea about leaving the burrs on, and he's long since gone to hone his burred edges in some other-worldly place, so I can't ask him now. Maybe it would have been worth the clip over the ear to debate it, it might've satisfied my current curiosity.....

Cheers,

You nailed it dead on with working the burr off on the ends of the stones.

It's not hard to do at all, and it doesn't leave suboptimal sharpness or threaten the flatness of an iron or chisel.

On finish work, even with something a bit coarser like a washita, it's important to do exactly what you're implying - thin the burr a little bit with light pressure work on the bevel and back side before removing it, or a coarse edge is left.

The art of doing that is lost these days, which is a shame, because it's satisfying.

Originally Posted by derekcohen

The difficulty in removing the wire edge/burr, if using hollowed stones, may explain why there are so many chisels with rather rough backs.

The way to remove the wire would not be on a stone, but to instead run the edge across a piece of wood. Slicing into the wood would do the job.

Regards from Perth

Derek

Just an opinion, because the old chisels are all over the board, I think that those less than flat backs are the product of laziness or chisels for heavy work. A chisel for heavy freehand work isn't affected too much if it's not perfectly flat on the back. Modern shops are all kitted out with all kind of references and paring guides, and with those, a bevel on the back of a chisel is a big problem.

For someone in a hurry and who is doing freehand work, a back bevel on a chisel is probably the product of lifting the handle to thin the wire edge.

There are japanese chisels that are basically made that way, with bowed backs, but they are, of course, bowed that way much more precisely and somewhat more gradually.

If someone hones a chisel with something like a broken in hard arkansas, then it's not really that important to work the back of the chisel as long as you have a strop. The wire edge after a hard arkansas (a real one, like black or translucent) is not that thick - it's long and thin.

I'd still prefer to be able to work the wire edge from both sides.