Does it make a difference? Your thoughts?
Selected and Standard Coti
- Thread starter Walker
- Start date
Nope no difference. IMO standard coticules are much nicer and more character to the piece. Save yourself the premium and pick a standard stone and apply the difference to the slurry stone or some other goodies.
none whats so ever. just price tag and looks. i have had both and standard performs just as well .
From what I've gathered from Barts excellent posts (& forum!)
its only a question of looks.
The old way of grading coticules was more of speed, the faster the stone, the better the grade.
Also, almost any coticule gives the same results in the end, only the ways there differs slightly.
its only a question of looks.
The old way of grading coticules was more of speed, the faster the stone, the better the grade.
Also, almost any coticule gives the same results in the end, only the ways there differs slightly.
- Thread starter
- #5
Thanks guys for the help. 
Ditto on Barts forum at www.coticule.de
Bart has mentioned that most of what gets a stone labeled "standard" is manganese (or magnesium, I forget) inclusions (veins and spots). He says that these are byproducts of garnet birth, are softer than steel, and indicate a faster stone. I say that they look awesome. My apologies if I misrepresented what he's posted.
In either case, Standard grade for me all the way. My Ardennes standard was a lovely salmon with a single wisp of Magnese vein towards one end. I almost never use it since I have larger vintage ones now, but it's too pretty for me to sell.
In either case, Standard grade for me all the way. My Ardennes standard was a lovely salmon with a single wisp of Magnese vein towards one end. I almost never use it since I have larger vintage ones now, but it's too pretty for me to sell.
No difference in sharpening ability, simply cosmetic. All coticules vary from soft to hard, doesn't matter whether they are Standard, Select, or the elusive Kosher.
What they all said.
I've been among standard/select discussions. Basically, they want all Coticules to be select. But that's not how people react to naturally occurring variations. Sometimes, there is a little void near the glue line. That would give reason to make someone unhappy, because he knows a guy with a stone that doesn't have a void. The same thing was true for black manganese lines. They often look like cracks, and people would reject them for that, not knowing they were rejecting a promising stone, because manganese presence is an indicator of fast speed. (SliceOfLife explained it quite well).
To deal with this kind of customer expectations, they made 2 classifications: select and standard.
If you buy standard, then you accept that the stone will have particular cosmetic shortcomings. And you get a bit of a rebate in price. That's the deal, nothing more.
Since the word starts to be thoroughly spread that black manganese dots and line are a sign of quality, rather than a flaw, I don't think it still gives cause to rating a stone "standard". But of course, you canl get "standard" Coticules with black marks. They will most likely just be "standard" for other reasons.
Anyway, Ardennes is very serious about quality control, if a stone shows any real problems, they cut in into slurry stones, trimming out the problem parts. What they sell, can be expected to be good.
Kind regards,
Bart.
I've been among standard/select discussions. Basically, they want all Coticules to be select.
But that's not how people react to naturally occurring variations. Sometimes, there is a little void near the glue line. That would give reason to make someone unhappy, because he knows a guy with a stone that doesn't have a void. The same thing was true for black manganese lines. They often look like cracks, and people would reject them for that, not knowing they were rejecting a promising stone, because manganese presence is an indicator of fast speed. (SliceOfLife explained it quite well).To deal with this kind of customer expectations, they made 2 classifications: select and standard.
If you buy standard, then you accept that the stone will have particular cosmetic shortcomings. And you get a bit of a rebate in price. That's the deal, nothing more.
Since the word starts to be thoroughly spread that black manganese dots and line are a sign of quality, rather than a flaw, I don't think it still gives cause to rating a stone "standard". But of course, you canl get "standard" Coticules with black marks. They will most likely just be "standard" for other reasons.
Anyway, Ardennes is very serious about quality control, if a stone shows any real problems, they cut in into slurry stones, trimming out the problem parts. What they sell, can be expected to be good.
Kind regards,
Bart.
honed said:
I read last week in an old thread where Bart mentioned that all coticules finish the same. (Of course, the thread was old, so his opinion may have changed since. What's your opinion now, Bart?)
Bart said:
Shortcomings? I absolutely love the dark lines and blooms in my standard coticules. In fact, I prefer them. (Standard coticules rock!)
Me =)
Suppose I would hone 20 identical razors on 20 different Coticules. If someone mixed up the razors after that, and I had to reassign each razor to the Coticule it was finished with, there's the chance I would have them all wrong. I've always found the differences between the final edges extremely small, in any case much smaller than the typical differences you could find between different razor makes, models and steels.
Differences in Coticules are far greater in speed, the feel and feedback they provide, peculiarities in use, then in the final outcome.
That said, when I "formally" test a whetstone to put test results in the "Coticule Vault" on Coticule.be, I test shave with a minimum of 3 different razors, including some razors that I know very well and exclusively use for that kind of tests. I nearly always shave with 2 razors at once, one for the left side of my face and one for the right side. That allows me to compare both razors: how well they glide through the stubble, how my skin responds to alum afterwards, etc...
When I'm ready to publish my findings, I usually also have an impression about minute finishing differences. This mostly concerns how the edge affects my skin. After giving it some though how I could include that notion in the published test results, I came up with 3 adjectives: "brisk", "engaging" and "mellow". Paul (Richmondesi) came up with the following interpretation of my terms. He interpretation is pretty accurate:
Richmondesi_on_Coticule.be said:
Kind regards,
Bart.
The only caveat here is where there are veins you have two different materials and at the contact points under the right conditions it could lead to cracking. Also with the standard grade you can have very minor cracks to begin with which can grow over time.
- Thread starter
- #13
Ok guys. Instead of starting a new thread I figured I would try to post this here. I am zeroing in on my coticule after the "Standard, Select" info now let me ask you this.
For a new guy....would a big 3" wide Coti be easier to hone with or would the smaller ones be better in you opinion. I have read some posts that the smaller width ones are better for newbies because I haven't developed enough "Muscle Memory" to use the 3" ones yet.
For a new guy....would a big 3" wide Coti be easier to hone with or would the smaller ones be better in you opinion. I have read some posts that the smaller width ones are better for newbies because I haven't developed enough "Muscle Memory" to use the 3" ones yet.
- Thread starter
- #14
I cannot recommend strongly enough to adopt a diagonal honing stroke, aka the "X-stroke" for razor sharpening.
There sometimes is debate over this, notably by guys who also complain that razors with a slight warp in the blade (they are many) can't be properly sharpened, which is indeed the case if you're only prepared to push the razor straight up and down the hone.
For performing a decent X-stroke 40mm (1.6") is wide enough. 150mm (6") is long enough. Personally I would opt for 1" longer than for extra width.
I totally don't see the benefit of 8"X3" for honing razors, but that doesn't mean it doesn't work. But if you plan on using the Coticule hand-held, and you insist on a large stone, I still wouldn't buy one bigger than 8"X2".
I've never had a Coticule cracked, so I can't comment on that issue.
Kind regards,
Bart.
I'd get the biggest stone I was willing to pay for. I've used a 40x40mm Coti for awhile. I'd say 125x30 is really the smallest I'd recommend paying for. I think 150x40 or 175x40 are the best size/cost ratio imho.
Right now I've got 40x40, 100x50, 150x40 up to 175x50. I don't use the first two often, but I use the 150x40 and up interchangeably. It probably takes a few more passes on the smaller stone to accomplish the same as the larger stone, but I don't really notice it.
Right now I've got 40x40, 100x50, 150x40 up to 175x50. I don't use the first two often, but I use the 150x40 and up interchangeably. It probably takes a few more passes on the smaller stone to accomplish the same as the larger stone, but I don't really notice it.
I really agree that narrower stones, 30-40 mm, give the best results. In fact, I had my two hones that were 3" wide cut in half.
- Thread starter
- #18
Thanx guys this has been most helpful
That's the reason they bond it to slate. It makes em more stable and less likely to crack.
