I've been using leather strops for a number of years. My experience here
supports the comments made that some leather is suitable for stropping and
some is not. 

 

Soft leather is definitely a no-no. To allow the blade's bevel to sink into
the medium is to invite dubbing. I think that the same thing may be said for
honing on sandpaper that is not glued down and, consequently, has a tendency
to "bunch up". 

 

The right sort of leather is the type that is hard and flat. The only place
that I know that you can purchase a reliably hard leather is the "Horse Butt
strop" from Joel at Tools for Working Wood. This comes with a rough and a
smooth side. Some prefer to use both sides, one with rouge and the other
plain. I tried this and found that the leather had a tendency to curl, which
prevented the second of my criteria, keeping the medium flat. 

 

I have a couple of horse butt strops from Joel. They are terrific. I also
managed to acquire a longer horse butt strop on eBay, one that was marketed
for razors. 

 

To keep the leather strops flat I glue them to hardwood battens. I have two
of these - one is used with a scribble of Veritas green rouge (.5 micon),
and the other is plain. When no longer needed, they hang on a hook on the
side of my bench. 

 

Is there a difference between a strop with rouge and one that is used plain?
It may sound contradictory at first when I say that the plain strop creates
the finer edge. However, the strop-with-rouge has the ability to remove
metal and is preferred if there is a wire edge to smooth over, or even after
a 8000 waterstone. The plain strop then seems to take it to a slightly
higher level.

 

http://tinyurl.com/ywkn5z

 

I use these strops to maintain the edges of chisels and plane blades as I
work. They do this task exceptionally well. The trick is to not let anything
get too dull, a point that has been made here by others. I strop both sides
of the bevel - and this is where the subject gets interesting (so you can
now wake up!).

 

Stropping is something one does freehand, that is, it is not done with a
honing guide (well I could not imagine doing it this way - the idea of
stropping is to speed up the sharpening process). All my bevel down plane
blades and all non-laminated chisel blades are hollow ground and this makes
it easy to freehand them on waterstones,  Stropping the resulting microbevel
is equally straightforward. Simple balance the bevel on the strop and pull
it with the grain. However, this process becomes near-impossible with blades
that are honed with secondary microbevels. Try stropping this microbevel and
you will likely dub the edge. So this almost rules of blades for bevel up
planes since these rely on secondary microbevels to achieve the specific
angle of attack. The only way to strop these blades is to do so on the back
of the blade. The additional benefit from doing so is that stropping appears
to remove or minimise the wear bevel. I have not yet got round to taking
pictures, so this is just an observation. Note that this cannot be done if
one uses the "Ruler Trick" (i.e. David Charlesworth micro- backbevel, a
strategy he introduced to speed up sharpening of blades with non-flat backs)

 

Powered strops are a whole separate topic ...

 

Regards from Perth

 

Derek
------------------------------------------------------------------------

I have a strop bought from a carving tool house, it's
a white material on some sort of padding, glued to
a piece of wood.  And I do use a honing guide, more
specifically the LV Mark II.  I simply take it from the
2000 paper to the strop, and take a light backwards
pass.  When doing the back of the blade I also
run it across the strop last, but with pressure.  Using
the test of pulling a shaving from pine end-grain,the strop produces a sharper
edge. (Whether I'm being
anal about sharpening is another topic.)
 Note, however, that I've found that the .3 micron
 paper recently available from Woodcraft (for the
 Pinnacle setup?) is finer than the green stropping
 compound - LV says theirs is .5 micron.  Some may
think this degree of fineness is a bit silly, and perhaps
it is.  Makes me happy, though :-)

Tom Ellis Dayton, OH
> -----Original Message----- From: oldtools-bounces@r...> [mailto:oldtools-
> bounces@r...] On Behalf Of> Derek Cohen Sent: Tuesday, January
> 15, 2008 10:33 AM To: Old Tools Forum Subject: RE: [OldTools]
> Leather strop
>> I've been using leather strops for a number of years. My>
>> experience here
> supports the comments made that some leather is suitable for>
> stropping and some is not.>>> Stropping is something one does
> freehand, that is, it is not> done with a honing guide (well I could
> not imagine doing it this way - the idea of stropping is to speed up
> the sharpening process).
------------------------------------------------------------------------

GG,
 I use a leather strop...the leather is nothing special, just 
a piece of remanant from a wallet maker at the flea, stappled 
to a piece of wood rough side out. I charge mine with white 
polishing compound. It works for me...now. Didn't when I first
tried it, but with a little practice of how to hold, how to stroke,
I figured it out. I do use it on plane blades but it is mostly used 
for chisels. 

Roy Griggs
roygriggs@w...
www.shavingsandsawdust.com

------------------------------------------------------------------------

Ellis, Thomas wrote:
>  Note, however, that I've found that the .3 micron
>  paper recently available from Woodcraft (for the
>  Pinnacle setup?) is finer than the green stropping
>  compound - LV says theirs is .5 micron.  Some may
> think this degree of fineness is a bit silly, and perhaps
> it is.  Makes me happy, though :-)

The green rouge sold by Lee Valley is not a .5 micron abrasive. It is 
"primarily Chromium Oxide admixed with other fine abrasives (0.5 micron 
size)". From my testing, I think this should read "primarily Chromium 
Oxide (0.5 micron size) admixed with other fine abrasives (greater than 
0.5 micron size)".

Check out the pictures on my stropping page:

http://www3.telus.net/BrentBeach/Sharpen/Stropping.html

If you are improving the blade sharpness by stropping then you should go 
back and review your honing procedures. Stropping will only hurt a well 
honed plane blade or chisel.

Brent

PS But, if it makes you happy, go for it.
-- 
Victoria, B.C., Canada
------------------------------------------------------------------------

In my previous comment I wrote " stropping is something one does freehand,
that is, it is not done with a honing guide (well I could not imagine doing
it this way - the idea of stropping is to speed up the sharpening process)".

 

Tom Ellis pointed out that  he does use a honing guide, more specifically
the LV Mark II. " I simply take it from the 2000 paper to the strop, and
take a light backwards pass".

 

OK, we are talking about two different processes. I did not mean to infer
that stropping could not be done as a part of the sharpening process, as is
indicated by your description, but rather that it is something I
specifically turn to *inbetween* sharpening sessions. Perhaps there is a
better term to use for when sharpening/honing is a process of *maintenance*.

 

I previously wrote, "I use these strops to maintain the edges of chisels and
plane blades as I work .... The trick is to not let anything get too dull ..
"  

 

While a blade is in a honing guide, there is no extra effort in set up when
going from one media to another. However, the effort of setting up a honing
guide to strop a blade in between sharpening sessions seems too great, too
clumsy.

 

In practice, I use my finest smoothing stone to remove the wire edge in
between stones, so the use of a leather strop for me is essentially a
strategy for maintaining an edge, rather than creating or preparing an edge.

 

Regards from Perth

 

Derek

 

 
------------------------------------------------------------------------

Derek and Galoots,

Gotcha!  I understood/stand what you mean.  Not letting the tool get  
so dull that you must re-sharpen is what I try to do,also, at least  
in the best of times!  When I was writing earlier I ran head-long  
into that same sharpen/hone continuum problem and the issue of what  
do you call the process at different points.  You can spend a  
tremendous amount of time  trying to use words to explain something  
that can only be understood as a "tactile feedback loop"  for want of  
a real Galoot phrase! We need some better words perhaps? Where does  
that point lay when one process ceases and the next begins?  Is it  
the same process if we use a guide?  My tactile sense may s*ck, while  
another may have an eye-hand coordination that allows complete  
dynamic interaction. Strop,Hone,Maintenance,sharpen.....  It doesn't  
take long to figure out that what we have is a minor Tower of Babel

I don't think we each have an internal discrepancy, but we each may  
have problems when it comes to trying to explain these small , but  
important concepts to each other and others outside our craft. This  
is just another one of those late night conundrums to make insomnia  
appear to be a productive endeavour!  Till morning...........just  
kidding!

Paul in Normal

On Jan 15, 2008, at 7:11 PM, Derek Cohen wrote:

> In my previous comment I wrote " stropping is something one does  
> freehand,
> that is, it is not done with a honing guide (well I could not  
> imagine doing
> it this way - the idea of stropping is to speed up the sharpening  
> process)".
>
>
>
>
> Tom Ellis pointed out that  he does use a honing guide, more  
> specifically
> the LV Mark II. " I simply take it from the 2000 paper to the  
> strop, and
> take a light backwards pass".
>
>
>
> OK, we are talking about two different processes. I did not mean to  
> infer
> that stropping could not be done as a part of the sharpening  
> process, as is
> indicated by your description, but rather that it is something I
> specifically turn to *inbetween* sharpening sessions. Perhaps there  
> is a
> better term to use for when sharpening/honing is a process of  
> *maintenance*.
>
>
>
> I previously wrote, "I use these strops to maintain the edges of  
> chisels and
> plane blades as I work .... The trick is to not let anything get  
> too dull ..
> "
>
>
>
> While a blade is in a honing guide, there is no extra effort in set  
> up when
> going from one media to another. However, the effort of setting up  
> a honing
> guide to strop a blade in between sharpening sessions seems too  
> great, too
> clumsy.
>
>
>
> In practice, I use my finest smoothing stone to remove the wire  
> edge in
> between stones, so the use of a leather strop for me is essentially a
> strategy for maintaining an edge, rather than creating or preparing  
> an edge.
>
>
>
> Regards from Perth
>
>
>
> Derek
>
>
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------- 
> --
> OldTools is a mailing list catering to the interests of hand tool
> aficionados, both collectors and users, to discuss the history, usage,
> value, location, availability, collectibility, and restoration of
> traditional handtools, especially woodworking tools.
>
> To change your subscription options:
> http://ruckus.law.cornell.edu/mailman/listinfo/oldtools
>
> To read the FAQ:
> http://people.iarc.uaf.edu/~cswingle/archive/faq.html
>
> OldTools archive: http://people.iarc.uaf.edu/~cswingle/archive/
>
> OldTools@r...
> http://ruckus.law.cornell.edu/mailman/listinfo/oldtools

------------------------------------------------------------------------

On Jan 15, 2008 6:29 PM, Brent Beach <brent.beach@g...> wrote:
> If you are improving the blade sharpness by stropping then you should go
> back and review your honing procedures. Stropping will only hurt a well
> honed plane blade or chisel.

I had a few thoughts after reading your web page:

1) Your theory going into your test seems to be that the micron size
of the abrasive is the sole factor in the quality of the resulting
edge, and that the method and base for using the honing compound would
not be relevant. I don't think this is an accurate assumption.
2) The Norton 8000 finishing stone that I use is about 1.0-1.2 micron
grit, and that is not as fine as the green crayon. Experts will say
that the stone breaks down finer than the base grit as you sharpen
with it, so maybe we're talking 0.75 micron. Nevertheless, I find that
a few light swipes on the hone improves my edge noticeably - even if
just because it cleans the blade.
3) I use a leather strop with the LV green crayon. I tried rubbing the
crayon on a piece of hard wood for honing, but the lack of "give" made
for uneven results. Leather gives, if ever so tiny a bit, but that
seems to make a difference. Another factor may be the relative
flatness of a piece of wood, compared to float glass or a surface
plate.
4) I suspect that since you were using your honing jig when stropping,
that you may have been applying more force than you would do if you
did it by hand.
5) If you are sharpening all the way down to 0.5 micron abrasive
paper, then I submit that you are already doing final honing on the
paper, and that it is probably breaking down even finer as you use it.
Further honing on a strop would not be necessary. However... and ahem,
I apologize for pointing this out... 0.5micron abrasive paper is a
*very recent* development.

-- 
Bretton Wade (aka Noz Moe King) in Parkton, MD
------------------------------------------------------------------------

...and now we've got DiamondSandPaper down to 0.5 micrometer abrasive  
size that
polishes your cutting tools in no time...

Chris

---
Chris Scholz
Atlanta, GA
www.Galoot-Tools.com

> 5) If you are sharpening all the way down to 0.5 micron abrasive
> paper, then I submit that you are already doing final honing on the
> paper, and that it is probably breaking down even finer as you use it.
> Further honing on a strop would not be necessary. However... and ahem,
> I apologize for pointing this out... 0.5micron abrasive paper is a
> *very recent* development.

------------------------------------------------------------------------

Chris and all:

Apropos of grits and sharpening -- 

(1) I have an 8x8 diamond lapping plate made out of steel.  Picked it up
somewhere long forgotten, years ago, and have no idea where it came from or
what the grit might be.  Any idea how to tell?

(2) Grits, microns, European v American -- it makes my little head ache.
Does anyone know of a head-to-head crossover chart with Euro and American
grits, microns, water stone numbers, and Arkansas stone characteristics so
that one could reasonably know what compares to which?   Chris, I have the
latest WOODWORKING, and it goes part way by comparing sandpapers, but what
about the rest of the story?

As an unpaid or solicited promotion -- On Monday my copy of the hard-bound
edition of the first issues of WOODWORKING arrived.  It is nicely done, on
better stock than the actual mag, so the illustrations are clearer.  Have
been browsing, and can happily report full satisfaction.

Cheers!

J 

Joseph Sullivan
President
JSA
(972) 463-1125
-----Original Message-----
From: oldtools-bounces@r...
[mailto:oldtools-bounces@r...] On Behalf Of Chris Scholz
Sent: Wednesday, January 16, 2008 9:15 AM
To: Bretton_Wade@ACM.org
Cc: Old Tools Forum
Subject: Re: [OldTools] Leather strop

...and now we've got DiamondSandPaper down to 0.5 micrometer abrasive  
size that
polishes your cutting tools in no time...

Chris

---
Chris Scholz
Atlanta, GA
www.Galoot-Tools.com

> 5) If you are sharpening all the way down to 0.5 micron abrasive
> paper, then I submit that you are already doing final honing on the
> paper, and that it is probably breaking down even finer as you use it.
> Further honing on a strop would not be necessary. However... and ahem,
> I apologize for pointing this out... 0.5micron abrasive paper is a
> *very recent* development.

------------------------------------------------------------------------

Try this: http://users.ameritech.net/knives/grits.htm

> 
> (2) Grits, microns, European v American -- it makes my little head ache.
> Does anyone know of a head-to-head crossover chart with Euro and American
> grits, microns, water stone numbers, and Arkansas stone characteristics so
> that one could reasonably know what compares to which?   

-- 
Ron Hock
HOCK TOOLS  http://www.hocktools.com
16650 Mitchell Creek Dr
Fort Bragg, CA  95437
(707) 964-2782 fax (707) 964-7816
------------------------------------------------------------------------

Bretton and Others:

Bretton Wade wrote:
> I had a few thoughts after reading your web page:

Thanks for taking the time to write.

> 1) Your theory going into your test seems to be that the micron size
> of the abrasive is the sole factor in the quality of the resulting
> edge, and that the method and base for using the honing compound would
> not be relevant. I don't think this is an accurate assumption.

More accurately, my theory is that the size of the scratches on the part 
of the blade that makes contact with the wood during use is *a* factor 
in the quality of the resulting edge. Other factors: final included 
angle, defects made by earlier abrasives not removed during the full 
honing process, ...

I strongly believe in a couple of other factors as well. For example, if 
you use a jig and hone the front and back of a plane iron you can 
quickly and consistently achieve any desired edge geometry. Also, you 
will always get a better result by using a hard, flat abrasive in 
preference to a soft, uneven abrasive.

A reproducible test could be done with one type of leather, for example. 
The results could not be extrapolated to other types of leather. No 
freehand results could be considered reproducible.

My pages describe a honing method that anyone can use and get 
exceptional results quickly and consistently.

> 2) The Norton 8000 finishing stone that I use is about 1.0-1.2 micron
> grit, and that is not as fine as the green crayon. Experts will say
> that the stone breaks down finer than the base grit as you sharpen
> with it, so maybe we're talking 0.75 micron. Nevertheless, I find that
> a few light swipes on the hone improves my edge noticeably - even if
> just because it cleans the blade.

I don't have a Norton 8000 stone, but Steve Elliott has one. Steve has 
done a lot of testing of plane irons as well. You might check out his 
experience with this stone.

Steve includes images of bevels off the Norton 8000 stone and testing 
done with blades which used this stone as the final honing step.

> 3) I use a leather strop with the LV green crayon. I tried rubbing the
> crayon on a piece of hard wood for honing, but the lack of "give" made
> for uneven results. Leather gives, if ever so tiny a bit, but that
> seems to make a difference. Another factor may be the relative
> flatness of a piece of wood, compared to float glass or a surface
> plate.

There are a number of ways of applying honing crayons to various 
surfaces that get pretty even coverage. I had planed the wood prior to 
using it as a strop and the resulting blades were scratched pretty 
uniformly across their full width. I don't see this as a contributing 
factor.

> 4) I suspect that since you were using your honing jig when stropping,
> that you may have been applying more force than you would do if you
> did it by hand.

The way I hold the jig for honing I do not put a whole lot of pressure 
on the blade. I have had no pressure problems with use of this jig with 
other abrasives with one possible exception.

I hadn't thought of this before, but there could be an effect somewhat 
like that I found with using coarse Norton 3X abrasives. The relatively 
small number of large grit particles meant that there were fewer grit 
particles under the blade and hence more force per particle. This 
resulted in serious damage to the edge.

With fewer particles of the honing compounds, a similar effect is 
possible. However, others would have the same problem and the same results.

Having said that, I believe that the large scratches were a result of a 
wide range of grits being present in the crayon. As mentioned in the web 
page, many different grades of green crayon are available with different 
concentrations of CrO. Higher concentrations cost more. The CrO sheets 
from 3M are pure CrO and carefully graded as to size. One sheet lasts 
for hundreds of uses, when used as described in my pages.

> 5) If you are sharpening all the way down to 0.5 micron abrasive
> paper, then I submit that you are already doing final honing on the
> paper, and that it is probably breaking down even finer as you use it.
> Further honing on a strop would not be necessary. 

And, almost certainly given the micrographs, counterproductive.

> However... and ahem,
> I apologize for pointing this out... 0.5micron abrasive paper is a
> *very recent* development.

The 0.5 micron abrasive I used was mentioned in Leonard Lee's 1996 book 
on sharpening. I have no idea how long it was available before that. 
Certainly long enough to Leonard Lee to have done a lot of testing with it.

The named ingredient in the Lee Valley green crayon is the same abrasive 
as the 0.5 micron sheet. I presume it is of the same vintage.

In fact, this abrasive has been around for so long that it is no longer 
available in the PSA backed version. Too bad.

Old enough to qualify for discussion on the oldtools list, I hope.

Brent
-- 
Victoria, B.C., Canada
------------------------------------------------------------------------

Welcome to my world! :>)

On Jan 16, 2008, at 4:33 PM, Joseph Sullivan wrote:
>
> To be honest, and not being a troll here or trying to stir anything>
> up, but I am experiencing great skepticism about the most refined
> theories of sharpening, because I just don=92t think the materials and
> available measurements function at the level of the theory (available
> in a> pragmatic sense, not an absolute sense).
>
Jim Thompson, the old millrat in Riverside, CA.

------------------------------------------------------------------------

Great, now let's talk about Rockwell hardness...

On Jan 16, 2008, at 8:40 PM, James Thompson <jdthompsonca@s...> wrote:

> Welcome to my world! :>)
>
>
> On Jan 16, 2008, at 4:33 PM, Joseph Sullivan wrote:
>>
>> To be honest, and not being a troll here or trying to stir anything
>> =20 up, but I am experiencing great skepticism about the most refined
>> theories of sharpening, because I just don=E2=80=99t think the
>> materials and available measurements function at the level of the
>> theory (available in a >> pragmatic sense, not an absolute sense).
>>
> Jim Thompson, the old millrat in Riverside, CA.
>
------------------------------------------------------------------------

Lest DO talk about Rockwell hardness.  I'm all ears and pretty darned
ignorant.  This is great stuff.

J

Joseph Sullivan
President
JSA
(972) 463-1125

-----Original Message-----
From: Chris Scholz [mailto:chris@g...] 
Sent: Wednesday, January 16, 2008 8:50 PM
To: James Thompson
Cc: Sullivan Joe; Old Tools Forum
Subject: Re: [OldTools] Leather strop

Great, now let's talk about Rockwell hardness...

On Jan 16, 2008, at 8:40 PM, James Thompson  
<jdthompsonca@s...> wrote:

> Welcome to my world! :>)
>
>
> On Jan 16, 2008, at 4:33 PM, Joseph Sullivan wrote:
>>
>> To be honest, and not being a troll here or trying to stir anything  
>> up, but
>> I am experiencing great skepticism about the most refined theories of
>> sharpening, because I just don't think the materials and available
>> measurements function at the level of the theory (available in a  
>> pragmatic
>> sense, not an absolute sense).
>>
> Jim Thompson, the old millrat in Riverside, CA.
>

------------------------------------------------------------------------

Joe,

I guess it is really bad style to link to 'competing' discussions, but
here it is anyhow:

http://www.forums.woodnet.net/ubbthreads/showflat.php?Cat=&Board=handto-
ols&Number=3451462&Forum=&Words=rockwell&Searchpage=0&Limit=25&Main=345-
1234&Search=true&where=bodysub&Name=32957&daterange=1&newerval=1&newert-
ype=m&olderval=&oldertype=&bodyprev=#Post3451462

Somewhere I on my HD there is a NIST report on hardness measurements.
IIRC a very well calibrated machine at NIST is about precise within .8
HR grades (I believe this was about precision not accuracy), well
calibrated production grade machines are quite a bit worse.

I am always amazed that some woodworkers notice a difference between
say HRC60 and HRC61, this kind of difference is close to impossible
to measure.

Chris

On Jan 16, 2008, at 10:41 PM, Joseph Sullivan wrote:

> Lest DO talk about Rockwell hardness. I'm all ears and pretty darned
> ignorant. This is great stuff.
>
> J
>
> Joseph Sullivan President JSA
> (972) 463-1125
>
> -----Original Message----- From: Chris Scholz [mailto:chris@g...]
> Sent: Wednesday, January 16, 2008 8:50 PM To: James Thompson
> Cc: Sullivan Joe; Old Tools Forum Subject: Re: [OldTools] Leather
>     strop
>
> Great, now let's talk about Rockwell hardness...
>
> On Jan 16, 2008, at 8:40 PM, James Thompson <jdthompsonca@s...> wrote:
>
>> Welcome to my world! :>)
>>
>>
>> On Jan 16, 2008, at 4:33 PM, Joseph Sullivan wrote:
>>>
>>> To be honest, and not being a troll here or trying to stir anything
>>> up, but I am experiencing great skepticism about the most refined
>>> theories of sharpening, because I just don't think the materials and
>>> available measurements function at the level of the theory
>>> (available in a pragmatic sense, not an absolute sense).
>>>
>> Jim Thompson, the old millrat in Riverside, CA.
>>
>
>

------------------------------------------------------------------------

Very interesting, Chris.

Back in the dark ages, I was reasonably well trained in testing and
measurement, and in drawing inferences from data. To greatly
oversimplify -- and fully expecting a response from the equally or
better trained folks here on the porch, in all measurements at some
point, the distinctions become irrelevant or unreliable. No point in
going into the whys and wherefores -- and certainly not getting as
esoteric as the Heisenberg Effect.,, but it is so. This problem is
vastly magnified, of course, where there are issues with definitions and
standards such as exist here.

I suspect that with sharpening, other issues exist, such as the rapid
destruction in work of an edge that has been polished down to the limits
of the crystalline structure of the steel.

Therefore, being a pragmatic person who wants to make stuff out of wood,
I just need tools that are hard enough and sharp enough. The grit and
hardness guide numbers are more general than absolute, and should merely
be used to simplify the process of getting hard enough tools sharp
enough to use.

How is that for a sharpener's manifesto? Jim Thompson -- am I still
functioning in your world

J

Joseph Sullivan President JSA
(972) 463-1125

-----Original Message----- From: Chris Scholz [mailto:chris@g...] Sent:
Thursday, January 17, 2008 11:44 AM To: Joe Sullivan; Old Tools Forum
Cc: James Thompson Subject: Re: [OldTools] Leather strop

Joe,

I guess it is really bad style to link to 'competing' discussions, but
here it is anyhow:

http://www.forums.woodnet.net/ubbthreads/showflat.php?Cat=&Board=handto-
ols&N umber=3451462&Forum=&Words=rockwell&Searchpage=0&Limit=25&Main=34-
51234&Searc h=true&where=bodysub&Name=32957&daterange=1&newerval=1&newe-
rtype=m&olderval&oldertype=&bodyprev=#Post3451462

Somewhere I on my HD there is a NIST report on hardness measurements.
IIRC a very well calibrated machine at NIST is about precise within .8
HR grades (I believe this was about precision not accuracy), well
calibrated production grade machines are quite a bit worse.

I am always amazed that some woodworkers notice a difference between
say HRC60 and HRC61, this kind of difference is close to impossible
to measure.

Chris

On Jan 16, 2008, at 10:41 PM, Joseph Sullivan wrote:

> Lest DO talk about Rockwell hardness. I'm all ears and pretty darned
> ignorant. This is great stuff.
>
> J
>
> Joseph Sullivan President JSA
> (972) 463-1125
>
> -----Original Message----- From: Chris Scholz [mailto:chris@g...]
> Sent: Wednesday, January 16, 2008 8:50 PM To: James Thompson
> Cc: Sullivan Joe; Old Tools Forum Subject: Re: [OldTools] Leather
>     strop
>
> Great, now let's talk about Rockwell hardness...
>
> On Jan 16, 2008, at 8:40 PM, James Thompson <jdthompsonca@s...> wrote:
>
>> Welcome to my world! :>)
>>
>>
>> On Jan 16, 2008, at 4:33 PM, Joseph Sullivan wrote:
>>>
>>> To be honest, and not being a troll here or trying to stir anything
>>> up, but I am experiencing great skepticism about the most refined
>>> theories of sharpening, because I just don't think the materials and
>>> available measurements function at the level of the theory
>>> (available in a pragmatic sense, not an absolute sense).
>>>
>> Jim Thompson, the old millrat in Riverside, CA.
>>
>
>

------------------------------------------------------------------------

Ayup!  I definitely concur in your assessment.

Sharp enough and hard enough to do the job. The rest is, well........ I 
leave that to your imagination.

On Jan 17, 2008, at 10:25 AM, Joseph Sullivan wrote:

> Very interesting, Chris.
>
> Back in the dark ages, I was reasonably well trained in testing and
> measurement, and in drawing inferences from data.  To greatly 
> oversimplify
> -- and fully expecting a response from the equally or better trained 
> folks
> here on the porch, in all measurements at some point, the distinctions
> become irrelevant or unreliable.  No point in going into the whys and
> wherefores -- and certainly not getting as esoteric as the Heisenberg
> Effect.,, but it is so.  This problem is vastly magnified, of course, 
> where
> there are issues with definitions and standards such as exist here.
>
> I suspect that with sharpening, other issues exist, such as the rapid
> destruction in work of an edge that has been polished down to the 
> limits of
> the crystalline structure of the steel.
>
> Therefore, being a pragmatic person who wants to make stuff out of 
> wood, I
> just need tools that are hard enough and sharp enough.  The grit and
> hardness guide numbers are more general than absolute, and should 
> merely be
> used to simplify the process of getting hard enough tools sharp enough 
> to
> use.
>
> How is that for a sharpener's manifesto?  Jim Thompson -- am I still
> functioning in your world
>
>
Jim Thompson, the old millrat in Riverside, CA.

------------------------------------------------------------------------

Hard enough, sharp enough, and some time this morning would be nice.

 There can be absolutely no doubt, cutting tool edges can be made 
sharper than what I use. No doubt at all, never was. 
  I don't have much trouble planing curl or burl or ebony though.
 Pretty much lay out any wood that it's possible to plane and I'll have 
a go at it.

  I get my edges on common bench planes in about two minutes and 30 
seconds.
 (This is assuming an already lapped back of course. Nothing takes pitts 
off a back fast enough! )

 From roughing at the grinder on 36 grit, to back inside the plane, 
under 3 minutes.
 How about you?
  yours, Scott

 
Scott Grandstaff, Box 409, Happy Camp, CA  96039
scottg@s...

Tools <http://users.snowcrest.net/kitty/sgrandstaff/>
Tools <http://oldtoolsshop.com/Galoots/sGrandstaff/>
Kitty's PageWorks <http://users.snowcrest.net/kitty/hpages/>
 

------------------------------------------------------------------------

It takes me longer to get the lateral adjustment right than it does to 
sharpen a blade. Ten to 15 seconds on the grinder, 30 seconds on the 
stone, 30 more seconds on the hard felt wheel. (Provided the back is 
already shiny.)

I don't grind a new edge, I just grind the hollow behind the edge 
leaving the sharp edge, then hit the stone. That way I always have a 
straight edge and it only takes a few seconds to drag it across the 
stone a few times.

My carving tools get a swipe on the felt wheel when they need it. I 
rarely have to do any grinding on them.

I got better things to do than to agonize over a perfect edge that will 
be dull as soon as I have used it. This does not apply to carving 
tools. They gotta be perfect.

On Jan 17, 2008, at 4:32 PM, scott grandstaff wrote:

>
> Hard enough, sharp enough, and some time this morning would be nice.
>
> There can be absolutely no doubt, cutting tool edges can be made 
> sharper than what I use. No doubt at all, never was.  I don't have 
> much trouble planing curl or burl or ebony though.
> Pretty much lay out any wood that it's possible to plane and I'll have 
> a go at it.
>
>  I get my edges on common bench planes in about two minutes and 30 
> seconds.
> (This is assuming an already lapped back of course. Nothing takes 
> pitts off a back fast enough! )
>
> From roughing at the grinder on 36 grit, to back inside the plane, 
> under 3 minutes.
> How about you?
>  yours, Scott
>

>
Jim Thompson, the old millrat in Riverside, CA.

------------------------------------------------------------------------