I don't think that the shape of the bevel is a concern because the radius of the stone is so large that the bevel is flat for all practical purposes.
Last edited:
If they wanted the razors to be dead flat they could easily use a belt bench sander to achieve this. Like the knife sharpeners use. The entire bevel would receive equal grinding as opposed to the current method.They do this in Germany because the razors are run through the grinding wheels by hand which can introduce unwanted variance and the razor is no longer “truly straight”. The purpose of the spherical gradient is to help compensate for this. This is the explanation I’m familiar with at least. A likely fix for this would be to set up the razor to where it can’t move during hollow grinding for super tight tolerances but they do their initial grinding by hand.
And I’m not sure why they don’t do this. I suspect that for whatever reason they’re just dead set on their traditional methods. I’ve wondered why someone hasn’t tried making SR’s with CNC marching yet. Might not be worth the cost based on market demand though.Ok. But what value is this
If they wanted the razors to be dead flat they could easily use a belt bench sander to achieve this. Like the knife sharpeners use. The entire bevel would receive equal grinding as opposed to the current method.
I don't think that the shape of the bevel is a concern because the radius of the stone is so large that the bevel is flat for all practical purposes.
Yes! Hone the blades as they are! Lol.I think that a straight edge on a convex hone is all about mimicking the rolling x of a smiler on a flat stone.
Even if your straight edge razor is perfect in all ways there are advantages to this style of honing IMO.
I think that a straight edge on a convex hone is all about mimicking the rolling x of a smiler on a flat stone.
Even if your straight edge razor is perfect in all ways there are advantages to this style of honing IMO.
Yes, I would agree with the honing aspect of the cylindrical hone, but lapping a hone to an accurate spherical surface is much much easier than to an accurate cylindrical surface, and the process is well established from the lapping of telescope lenses and mirrors. Two surfaces lapped together until they mate in all orientations always results in a spherical interface with the case of a flat interface represented by a sphere of infinite radius.I agree, as I mentioned in my first post (#20). But can't this be done on a cylindrical-shaped stone as well? No need for the spherical gradient in other words...
Yes, I would agree with the honing aspect of the cylindrical hone, but lapping a hone to an accurate spherical surface is much much easier than to an accurate cylindrical surface, and the process is well established from the lapping of telescope lenses and mirrors. Two surfaces lapped together until they mate in all orientations always results in a spherical interface with the case of a flat interface represented by a sphere of infinite radius.
Well, most people start with something relatively small say 4" in diameter to sort of artificially start the dish in the concave piece. One guy was starting with pitch filled dog food cans, IIRC. When making a concave mirror once they have the shape they use pitch as the convex side to carry the grit for polishing. I ran across this when I was researching the three stone method for making flat lapping plates. The grit that I bought was mostly sold to telescope makers which is what got me interested in this technique. There are several videos on mirror lapping for telescopes.
For making convex hones I would think of using anything to start with to get close to the spherical concavity and then start using the actual hone as the convex piece. The basic premise is that the larger piece goes concave and the smaller goes convex. When they mate in all directions they are spherical. Our purposes are much less demanding than telescope mirrors.
As all of my razors smile I have no need to try this, but I do find it interesting.
In on of Jarrod's videos he said that the Germans told him to use as little convexity as possible. For what its worth.
At the risk of beating this dead horse back to life. I maintain that there is no benefit with a smiling edge, and that the benefit is being able to hone a straight edge with the same 'section by section' sequence as if it were smiling.If the main benefit is with a smiling edge, the irony is that the Solingen production tends more towards a blade that has a parallel relationship between edge and spine, and yet Solingen is the source from where the convexed hone is being celebrated.
As all of my razors smile I have no need to try this, but I do find it interesting.
I maintain that there is no benefit with a smiling edge, and that the benefit is being able to hone a straight edge with the same 'section by section' sequence as if it were smiling.