Unicot v Dilucot

[mbrossar]

What are the relative advantages of the Dilucot method versus the Unicot method?

For me, I can get a great edge with the Unicot method and just can't get what I want out of the Dilucot. I know the Dilucot is considered an advanced method. For a while, I had a stigma against the double bevel of the Unicot but finally came to the conclusion that the Unicot is so much easier, what's wrong with a double bevel? Then I wondered, is there a big advantage of the Dilucot over the Unicot? Perhaps with the narrower bevel (i.e. the second bevel), a Unicot edge needs to be touched up sooner?

What are your thoughts? Do you prefer one to the other? Why?

 

[schatz]

My understanding from reading Bart's board is that, despite your conjecture, the edge on the unicot is actually stronger and should need to be touched up less often. The only disadvantage of which I am aware is keeping track of which razors have single versus double bevels. Other lesser considerations relate to the potential satisfaction of mastering the dilucot, or the modified dilucot with half strokes until the end, and to the need of having some tape handy with the unicot.

 

[gary haywood]

My understanding from reading Bart's board is that, despite your conjecture, the edge on the unicot is actually stronger and should need to be touched up less often. The only disadvantage of which I am aware is keeping track of which razors have single versus double bevels. Other lesser considerations relate to the potential satisfaction of mastering the dilucot, or the modified dilucot with half strokes until the end, and to the need of having some tape handy with the unicot.

plus one on what has been said . what ever works both edges will perform as well.

 

[SliceOfLife]

Explaining it would hurt my head so you'll have to take my word for it. Single bevels are easier to maintain. This is amplified on extremely small scales like razors. Unicot just moves the workload from Restoration back to Maintenance. The extremely succinct version is that damage to a double beveled blade is more noticeable and difficult to repair and normal wear from use is nothing more than damage on a level we don't generally think of as damage.

 

[Bart]

There is no noticeable difference between the shave of a Unicot and a Dilucot edge. Unicot is just easier, for the same reason as Dubl'Duck razors are so easy to sharpen. They are very thinly ground and thus carry a narrow bevel. Narrow bevels are quick to sharpen and take good keenness easily, because their is so little steel that needs to be removed. Hones are more efficient on narrow strips of steel because the action is concentrated on a smaller surface.
In the case of Dubl'Duck, the a lot of steel has been removed already at the factory, by grinding very thin. Hence, we don't have to remove it while sharpening.
In the case of Unicot, we actually do the same. First we "grind" away a primary bevel. Next we put on the layer of tape and work on a new,very narrow bevel. It's basically the same principle.

Whether a thinly grind blade or a lean primary bevel is located "below" the actual cutting bevel that carries the very edge, makes not a shred of difference for that edge. An edge does not know or care what's further down. If we were cutting cheese it would matter, because the whole blade must pass before the cheese is severed. But we are cutting hairs, not thicker than 200 micron. Hence only the first 200 micron (0.007874") of the edge must pass through. At that point, the hair is severed and of no further consequence for the cut.

Unicot can be very easily touched up, by putting the tape back on an performing 30-50 laps on water (depending on the size and properties of the Coticule). After a number of touch-ups the narrow bevel has completely replaced the initial bevel. There's a good chance that you will be able to keep touching up, certainly if you're in the habit of touching up at the earliest signs of edge deterioration. It would be no different than touching up a Dilucotted razor, with the only difference that you need to put on that layer of tape.

But you can also opt to do about 50 of untaped laps on a very thin slurry. This will widen the initial bevel again and at the same time reduces the actual cutting bevel. There is no need to start all over. Once the actual cutting bevel is sufficiently reduced, it becomes more responsive to a hone.

Dilucot just offers a more traditional, crafty approach to sharpening. And doesn't need tape for a touch-up. It's a bit more challenging to learn. One of the most important differences between both, is that the taped stages of Unicot require as little pressure as possible, while Dilucot demands considerably more pressure while honing.

Kind regards,
Bart.