Thuringian questions

[wdwrx]

So I've been playing around with my vintage thurry, and I've been wondering...

Slurry on my Thurry... lots, little, none?
I currently use a slurry stone from a different thurry, (harder stone) and start with a fairly thick slurry, diluting it as I go, until I finish with just water.

I guess you could say I'm using some bastard version of the "unicot" method, I tend to use about three stages; thick, thinner and no slurry.

I've done a couple of searches, and found reference to using no slurry, and talk of thurry's being no good for setting bevels as they don't function the way coti's do.

I'm curious to hear about other's methods or thoughts or experiments, particularly in regards to slurry and how it functions or is different from other types of stones.

To clarify: how do I get the most from this stone?

 

[mainaman]

I can think of 4 ways to do it( someone can add if I am missing).
#1.
no slurry all the way , do 50 laps and test shave if needed do 50 more, but after that if the shave is still not good then that tone does not cut well with no slurry.
#2.
Thin slurry and the same lap count as above.
#3.
Thick slurry for 50 laps then dilute as you were doing, I like to do 10 laps for every dilution, and pretty much end up with 100 laps.
#4.
Thick slurry all the way.

Some experimenting will tell you which of the methods would be best.

 

[Kees]

Thuringians are not for setting bevels with or without slurry. Slurry gives you faster results but creates a slightly less fine hone (i.e. slightly reduces the effective grit size).

If your bevel is good you need no slurry.

 

[SliceOfLife]

So I've been playing around with my vintage thurry, and I've been wondering...

Slurry on my Thurry... lots, little, none?
I currently use a slurry stone from a different thurry, (harder stone) and start with a fairly thick slurry, diluting it as I go, until I finish with just water.

I guess you could say I'm using some bastard version of the "unicot" method, I tend to use about three stages; thick, thinner and no slurry.

I've done a couple of searches, and found reference to using no slurry, and talk of thurry's being no good for setting bevels as they don't function the way coti's do.

I'm curious to hear about other's methods or thoughts or experiments, particularly in regards to slurry and how it functions or is different from other types of stones.

To clarify: how do I get the most from this stone?

I use thin slurry then water. I can't even imagine how long it would take to bevel on a thuringian. They're nothing like Coti's. Theyre ~13-15k+ range finishing hones that get slightly faster (at the cost of a little edge smoothness) with slurry.

 

[wdwrx]

Great responses.

So I should consider the Thurry as a med to fine polisher? Thicker slurry makes it coarser, but only to an extent? I guess that's where it is in my progression. I recently have touched up a couple of razors using this stone, but didn't find the edges smooth enough on arm hair so I went to N12k and Spd. UF as usual.

I should proof-read what I write: in hind-sight I didn't really mean "setting a bevel" so much as "re-storing a bevel". I've got a 1k for that

By-the-by... anyone know the composition of a typical Thuringian? IIRC it's a quartz particle in some type of clay matrix. I do love factoids, so if anyone knows anything about how these stones are formed or occur, or any technical info or interesting links, feel free to chime in.

 

[mainaman]

thicker slurry does not make it coarser it makes it cut faster, the slurry breaks down with use to w/e the final possible size for the hone is.
If this hone does not give you smooth edges no matter what type of honing you do e.g slurry/ dilution/ no slurry then its a safe bet its not good polisher.
If the edge after this hone can be improved by your 12k hone then its definitely not good for the task.

 

[Kees]

AFAIK Thuringian hones are very fine slate hones. They were a by-product of the slate quarries in Thuringia.

 

[Disburden]

I have an Escher that I use for finishing my razors, it's the same "Type" of hone. I use slurry and then hone for about 50 laps or a little more. I then I diluted with water and test the edge.

 

[Scotchhound1969]

Imo, setting a bevel with a slurried Thuringian, would not only take a long time, but also be a waste of a rare, good hone.
I have used Thurries and Eschers, with slurries, progressively, 'after,' setting a bevel....number of laps depend on the steel, slurry as well and the quality of bevel initially set.
They are fun hones, certainly, but i would use something else for the bevel.

Thanks.

 

[wdwrx]

OK! no bevel setting!


Please forgive my choice of words in an earlier post: coarser is not the same as faster. (I know I know; words mean something)

So I was thinking about this at work all day yesterday, and what I think the slurry might be good for is consolidating the edge. By this I mean it removes the deep scratch marks left from other hones. That sandblasted edge created with a thick slurry is very homogenous, shows no signs of any scratches, just that smeary looking surface. It leaves a very even, though not very smooth, surface.

What I've noticed in the past is that there are often random scratch marks that lead to very fine serration in the edge. Particularly from my 8K. I've had a hard time polishing these out; often new ones appear as I'm trying to work out the already existing ones. What I noticed was that the slurry doesn't leave these scratches. When I've moved up, instead of trying to polish out scratches, I'm just trying to polish out that "sandblasting".
Just thinkin'.....

I have been getting the smoothest edges I've ever gotten, using this Thurry as a medium polisher, and I think it's because of that "sandblast" leaving an edges with no scratches.

Thoughts?

 

[mainaman]

I think, the sandblast is also scratches you just do not have the right magnification to see them.

 

[wdwrx]

good point, but now we're talking semantics....
The scratches left by the slurry are all very consistent; even, short, and not very deep, in comparison to the random, long (bevel width) scratches left by my 8K. Much easier to polish out. The slurry seems to leave a very even edge, with serration occurring below the optical resolution of my microscope, as opposed to the other type of scratches, which can be followed down to the edge, and a corresponding serration.

 

[mainaman]

good point, but now we're talking semantics....
The scratches left by the slurry are all very consistent; even, short, and not very deep, in comparison to the random, long (bevel width) scratches left by my 8K. Much easier to polish out. The slurry seems to leave a very even edge, with serration occurring below the optical resolution of my microscope, as opposed to the other type of scratches, which can be followed down to the edge, and a corresponding serration.

exactly.