# Back bevel sharpening



## Karl (28 Mar 2008)

Ok, so this may be a thick question. But i'll ask it anyway :lol: :lol: 

When honing a blade with a back bevel, is it better to keep the primary grind angle low (say 20 degrees), with a honing angle a couple of degrees higher (giving a 22 degree honed edge). If a back bevel is introduced of 15 degrees, this would then give an overall sharpening angle of 37 degrees, and an effective pitch of 60 degrees. 

I only ask as I am going to prepare a blade specifically for planing some difficult timber I am working with. My normal routine gives a 35 degree honed edge. If I am then to add a 15 degree back bevel, this would give an overall angle of 50 degrees.

Surely a sharper edge can be obtained at the lower angle?

I have had similair thoughts regarding the preparation of high angle BU blades - is it possible to achieve a "sharp" 50 degree blade?

All thoughts are welcome.

Cheers

Karl


----------



## woodbloke (28 Mar 2008)

karl wrote:


> I have had similair thoughts regarding the preparation of high angle BU blades - is it possible to achieve a "sharp" 50 degree blade


I haven't used a back bevel much on my normal BD planes and when I have used a steeper effective pitch at about 60deg it hasn't worked very well on trickier timber. However all my BD blades are honed so that the effective pitch, including the 12deg bed angle, is 50deg and they are *very* sharp. Final micro bevel is at 38deg on a Spyderco 10000g stone ceramic stone with Mr C's ruler trick used on the back - Rob


----------



## Karl (29 Mar 2008)

woodbloke":1gsfi404 said:


> However all my BD blades are honed so that the effective pitch, including the 12deg bed angle, is 50deg and they are *very* sharp. Final micro bevel is at 38deg on a Spyderco 10000g stone ceramic stone with Mr C's ruler trick used on the back - Rob



Rob - I presume you mean the BU blades? 12 deg bed. 

Cheers

Karl


----------



## Chris Knight (29 Mar 2008)

Karl,
I think you'd need to consider the clearance angle under the blade with your suggested example. At a bed angle of 15 degrees, your clearance angle is zero, so your bed angle is going to need to be a good bit more to give you an effective angle.


----------



## woodbloke (29 Mar 2008)

karl":19ve9ms5 said:


> woodbloke":19ve9ms5 said:
> 
> 
> > However all my BD blades are honed so that the effective pitch, including the 12deg bed angle, is 50deg and they are *very* sharp. Final micro bevel is at 38deg on a Spyderco 10000g stone ceramic stone with Mr C's ruler trick used on the back - Rob
> ...



Karl - correct, typing too late at night  - Rob


----------



## PaulO (29 Mar 2008)

waterhead37":2nly15vf said:


> Karl,
> I think you'd need to consider the clearance angle under the blade with your suggested example. At a bed angle of 15 degrees, your clearance angle is zero, so your bed angle is going to need to be a good bit more to give you an effective angle.



I think the original post was regarding a BD plane, with a 45 degree bed, the 15 degree back bevel giving an EP of 60 degrees. So by grinding and honing the front bevel at 20/22 degrees, he is actually increasing the clearance angle, to 45-22= 23 degrees.


----------



## Chris Knight (29 Mar 2008)

Paul,
Yes, you are right if Karl did indeed mean BD - I wasn't sure.


----------



## Jeff Gorman (29 Mar 2008)

If you start the stroke partway along the length of a piece, the greater angle will make it more difficult for the edge to get under the surface.


----------



## David C (29 Mar 2008)

Karl,

Which difficult timber are you working with?

David


----------



## Karl (29 Mar 2008)

Thanks for the replies folks. Sorry for the delay in replying - just got in from work.

I am working with a BD plane - Clifton 7. I mentioned the point about BU blades as it seemed equally relevant.

David - the timber is Oak, but in long lengths (7'). The grain changes direction, and I am getting tearout with a standard 45deg blade, even when set for a fine cut. I was therefore planning on trying a 60deg EP, introducing more of a scraping cut. 

This is my first foray into back bevels, and i'm feeling my way a bit.

Cheers

Karl


----------



## David C (29 Mar 2008)

Karl,

I would have thought that 60 degree Effective Pitch should do it. If this does not then increase EP 5 degrees at a time, till tearout ceases.

Steeper EPs only work with fine shavings, (Hoadley).

I find I only need a very narrow BB, 0.2 to 0.3mm is plenty. This is simple to hone at 15degrees, with a few strokes on a 1200 waterstone, followed by polishing at the same angle.

I leave the bevel configuration as normal. There may be some advantage in the edge being rather obtuse as steep EPs create more heat and blunt quicker than a normal blade.

please report on results
David


----------



## ivan (2 Apr 2008)

Back bevels (on a bevel down blade) look like a spiffing wheeze, but I wonder if they are just the result of armchair day dreams. If you think you need a back bevel, then you also certainly need a close set capiron.
By close set, the best eveidence appears to be just a few thou (about 4) from the blade edge. Once you've put on a 15 deg backbevel, how do you get the capiron 4 thou close?


----------



## Philly (2 Apr 2008)

Ivan
When you start raising the pitch above a certain point (say 60 degrees) the blade takes a different type of shaving where the shaving breaks at the actual cutting edge, making chipbreakers un-necessary. So you can set the chipbreaker (or back irons as I prefer to call them :wink: ) safely back away from the cutting edge.
Hope this helps
Philly


----------



## David C (3 Apr 2008)

Ivan,

I can assure you that steep back bevels are nothing whatever to do with "armchair dreams".

This technique allows me to plane any 'unplaneable' timber.

Cocobolo, rosewoods, interlocked Santos, rippled Tasmanian Blackwood, the list is endless.

This is one of the topics on my next dvd from L-N.

David Charlesworth


----------



## ivan (3 Apr 2008)

I use a back bevel on the LN No9, but confess I have not tried it on a bevel down plane. A 50 deg frog + very close set capiron is as far as I usually get; looks like I'll have to add another blade to my shopping list and give it a try!


----------



## Karl (3 Apr 2008)

Apologies for the delay in responding - been tied up with the day job.

I left the blade configuration as normal (25 deg primary grind, 35deg hone), then honed a narrow 15 deg back bevel. Was surprised to see the sharpness achieved - I thought such a significant range (50 deg) wouldn't produce a sharp edge, but it did.

Anyway, planing ensued, and I am v. pleased with the results. Tearout significantly reduced, but at the expense of an increased work rate! That back bevel does make the plane more difficult to push - even with a fine (1thou) shaving and a nicely waxed sole. Also, taking such fine shavings meant that it took quite some time to remove the deep tearout which had been caused by my thicknesser.

David - I will be very interested to see the next DVD - any idea on when it is likely to be out?

Cheers

Karl


----------



## Jeff Gorman (4 Apr 2008)

Karl wrote:

I left the blade configuration as normal (25 deg primary grind, 35deg hone), then honed a narrow 15 deg back bevel. ........................

Anyway, planing ensued, and I am v. pleased with the results. ..........................

I think Karl would also benefit from an extremely fine shaving aperture. When working with a back bevel, the cap iron setting is immaterial.


----------



## bugbear (4 Apr 2008)

ivan":2moz9zux said:


> Back bevels (on a bevel down blade) look like a spiffing wheeze, but I wonder if they are just the result of armchair day dreams. If you think you need a back bevel, then you also certainly need a close set capiron.



I don't quite follow that; high effective pitch and a close cap-iron are separate concepts. Further, since high EP blades remove a different sort of shaving, the effect of close cap-irons is massively reduced.



> By close set, the best eveidence appears to be just a few thou (about 4) from the blade edge. Once you've put on a 15 deg backbevel, how do you get the capiron 4 thou close?



I assume you're referring to the famous (and _only_ AFAIK) japanese reasearch into cap-iron effectiveness, done in the context of a "super surfacer". IMHO all that reserearch proved is that cap-irons on hand-planes (almost) never perform as chip-breakers.

This is not to say they don't do anything; in a Bailey plane the capiron ensures that the blade is pressed firmly down onto the bedding.

(as an aside, the other purpose they they often serve is to jam shavings, but I don't think that's intentional  )

BugBear


----------



## Philly (4 Apr 2008)

So just to confirm - a "back bevel" is applied to the flat, non-bevelled side of the blade. 
A back-bevel applied to the bevelled side is actually a "micro-bevel", a very different thing.
Philly


----------



## Jeff Gorman (4 Apr 2008)

Philly wrote:

>So just to confirm - a "back bevel" is applied to the flat, non-bevelled side of the blade. 
A back-bevel applied to the bevelled side is actually a "micro-bevel", a very different thing.<

With respect, and to split hairs, as far as I recall, in the quarters (either rec.woodworking or the OldTools group) where the term 'micro-bevel' appears to have first been used, it was used to indicate a third very narrow, usually highly polished bevel applied to a honing bevel, making three bevels on one side of the blade ie a 'grinding bevel' (conventionally 25deg), 'honing bevel' (usually 30deg) and 'microbevel' (32 deg or a bit greater).[


----------



## ivan (4 Apr 2008)

It's a pity that there is not more actual evidence relating to hand plane cutting action, but what there is does offer some useful clues. These suggest that, by and large, if you are taking 1 thou shavings, the cap iron must be set at this order of closeness to the cutting edge; 10 thou, say (which I used to call close set) is too far away to have any effect (on tear out, that is). If I remember correctly the photographed experiment (by Kato)had 4 thou as the 'close' setting. Interestingly enough, the actual cutting geometry produced by these very close settings mimics that of a scraper, but with the added advantage of a mouth, which hopefully can also be set very close too.

I have not so far tried a back bevel on a BD blade, as I felt it would be difficult to get proper contact between blade and very close set cap iron owing to the presence of the back bevel. I have noted DC's advice above that the higher angle works without the close set cap iron and _will_ give it a try next time I find 50 deg insufficient!


----------



## matthewwh (9 Apr 2008)

Last weekend I finally got time to break in (play with) the Clifton 4-1/2 that my wife gave me for my birthday last month. My intention for this plane was to tune it as a 'super-smoother' to take over from my old Norris A5 as my first choice for tricky grain and very hard timber. 







In answer to Karl's original question about angles, I used a 28 degree final angle on the primary side and a 10 degree back bevel, giving 38 degrees at the pointy end and an effective pitch of 55 degrees (cabinet pitch). As far as I understand it, the angle at which the two surfaces meet does have a bearing on how sharp the edge can be, but how smooth you get them is equally, if not more important. I would suggest that 60 degrees is going to make a No. 7 a real bear to push for surfacing work, have you tried taking thinner shavings at 50 or 55 before going up as far as 60?

Using my honing guide on the benchtop, with the blade resting on the lapping plate gave approximately the right angle for the back bevel and is easily repeatable without the need for measuring anything other than the projection in the honing guide. Working down through 60, 30 and 5 micron film soon brings the back bevel to a useable finish. 











Turning the blade over, I honed a 3 degree micro bevel on the tip of the primary bevel, again working down through the grades. One more pull stroke on back bevel, using the 5 micron film removed any trace of a burr and left me with a nice sharp cutting edge. 






The final step was to polish the first ¼” or so of the back of the blade to ensure a perfect seal against the leading edge of the chipbreaker so that shavings cannot force their way up between the two and cause a blockage. In order to save myself any unnecessary labour I slipped a piece of card under the other end of the blade to ensure that I was only polishing the last few millimetres (an adaptation of one of David Charlesworth’s ideas).







Although Clifton chipbreakers are sharpened at the factory, I like to polish the underside of the chipbreaker and lever cap to ensure a really perfect seal. The standard of polish on the top of both the chipbreaker and lever cap was already excellent - so no extra work needed there. 






With the plane reassembled, I set the mouth to a little under 1/32” ready for my first test; a small board of English Walnut. 











The plane was a fraction harder to push than usual, requiring a slightly more purposeful stroke, although this could probably be improved with a touch of wax on the sole. The finish on the timber however, was superb. After a few strokes going with the grain I turned the board around and planed it against the grain with no discernible difference in performance or finish. As you can see from the photograph below, the surface is as good as you would normally expect to achieve planing the board the right way around.






I was looking around the workshop for something a little more difficult, when a piece of loft matured Oak Burr scowled at me from the offcuts bin.






Having only ever successfully planed this kind of timber with an infill plane before, there was some trepidation as I butted it up against the planing stop on the bench. You can imagine my relief as the first smooth shaving flowed from the mouth. That tiny little back bevel on the very tip of the blade and the fine mouth setting had made all the difference in the world! 






Good luck with the oak Karl, let us know how you get on.


----------



## Paul Chapman (9 Apr 2008)

Hi Matthew,

That's very interesting. Have you been able to compare how a back bevel on an ordinary plane compares with using a scraper plane on woods with difficult grain?

Cheers :wink: 

Paul


----------



## bugbear (10 Apr 2008)

Paul Chapman":1hxp45qh said:


> Hi Matthew,
> 
> That's very interesting. Have you been able to compare how a back bevel on an ordinary plane compares with using a scraper plane on woods with difficult grain?
> Paul



On the assumption (which on all evidence here and elsewhere seems reasonable) that a back bevel has the same effect as high bedding angles (i.e. the only mechanism in play in effective pitch(EP)), Steve Knight did experiments a long way back; he concluded that planing with a "proper" blade always gives a superior finish to scraping.

BugBear


----------



## Paul Chapman (10 Apr 2008)

bugbear":1pfv5iw5 said:


> Steve Knight did experiments a long way back; he concluded that planing with a "proper" blade always gives a superior finish to scraping.



Hi BB,

Did Steve offer any explanation as to why that should be? It seems to me that the cutting action of a plane with a back bevel will always be different from a scraper plane because a scraper plane blade has a hook and a blade with a back bevel doesn't. In fact the terminology starts to get a bit confusing because the higher the effective pitch, the more the plane with a back bevel scrapes rather than cuts, whereas the scraper plane, because of the hook on the blade, will always tend to cut rather than scrape.

I have a spare blade for my Clifton 4-1/2 so I might do some comparisons with that and my Veritas scraper planes  :-k 

I suppose there are no absolutes in any of this because each piece of wood is different and the best result no doubt depends on matching the technique to the job in hand.

Interesting stuff :wink: 

Cheers :wink: 

Paul


----------



## bugbear (10 Apr 2008)

Paul Chapman":ubnp02qz said:


> bugbear":ubnp02qz said:
> 
> 
> > Steve Knight did experiments a long way back; he concluded that planing with a "proper" blade always gives a superior finish to scraping.
> ...



No. He just reported the results.

BugBear


----------



## bugbear (11 Apr 2008)

matthewwh":2sxnecf7 said:


> Using my honing guide on the benchtop, with the blade resting on the lapping plate gave approximately the right angle for the back bevel and is easily repeatable without the need for measuring anything other than the projection in the honing guide. Working down through 60, 30 and 5 micron film soon brings the back bevel to a useable finish.



Is that a shop-made honing guide? If so, I'd love to see more of it.

BugBear


----------



## ivan (13 Apr 2008)

The scraper's hook is emulated by the tip of the plane's blade and the leading edge of the cap iron - have a look here

Presumably at very high bedding angles the angle the shaving is turned by just the blade alone, is big enough that a close set cap iron is not needed (advice from DC, above). Unfortunately there seems to be a dearth of published research about this area.

The scraper, and the scraper plane lack a close mouth, so the plane will always do better if it has similar cutting geometry (I think!)


----------



## Jeff Gorman (13 Apr 2008)

Back Bevel Sharpening

Ivan wrote:

>Unfortunately there seems to be a dearth of published research about this area.< 

Issues 173, 183 and 184 of Good Woodworking magazine show close-up pics of the action of a plane blade when working against and with the grain.


----------



## ivan (14 Apr 2008)

Thanks WF, unfortunately I don't have acess to those copies. There are some picures from japanese research through the link above, and there's a precis of a thesis in the back of Lee's sharpening book. I'm pretty sure there's nothing showing the changes in shaving formation as bedding angle slowly increases - just at standard pitch and something like 70 deg - you have to guess at what's in between.


----------



## Chris Knight (14 Apr 2008)

BB,

I guess a No 3. Richard Kell guide

http://richardkell.co.uk/honingECom.htm


----------



## Digit (14 Apr 2008)

Having travelled this route I've ended up with a number of planes and a number of different irons sharpened to give different cutting angles. 
Fed up with changing irons back and forth, resetting the chip breaker, moving the frog, re-alighning the frog, then making test cuts, I've opted for doing it the 'old fashioned' way, a number of home made wooden planes built to give the various angles. 
Currently I'm part way through making a smoother with a 55 degree iron. It's taking some time as the wife insists that I stop for different non-essentials, like shopping and so on! 
Well, they don't understand do they? :roll: 

Roy.


----------



## Rich (14 Apr 2008)

No but they are better at multitasking, so I'm told at least once a day :?


----------



## Digit (14 Apr 2008)

Multi tasking? That's working and complaining at the same time is it? :lol: 

Roy.


----------



## Derek Cohen (Perth Oz) (15 Apr 2008)

Philly wrote,


> So just to confirm - a "back bevel" is applied to the flat, non-bevelled side of the blade.
> A back-bevel applied to the bevelled side is actually a "micro-bevel", a very different thing.



Then WFT wrote,


> With respect, and to split hairs, as far as I recall, in the quarters (either rec.woodworking or the OldTools group) where the term 'micro-bevel' appears to have first been used, it was used to indicate a third very narrow, usually highly polished bevel applied to a honing bevel, making three bevels on one side of the blade ie a 'grinding bevel' (conventionally 25deg), 'honing bevel' (usually 30deg) and 'microbevel' (32 deg or a bit greater).



To add no real value at all .. you are both incorrect. What you refer to as a microbevel is, in fact, _a secondary bevel_.

A microbevel is a _micro_ bevel, that is, it is about a hairs width. It is created when you (for example) grind a hollow to the very edge of the blade and then hone in just a couple of strokes. 

This is not a backbevel, but it is a microbevel:





The advantage of a true microbevel is that it can be removed completed with a couple of additional strokes, thereby allowing one to alter the angle of the cutting edge. The advantage of a true microbevel as a backbevel would be that it could be removed with a few swipes on the primary bvevel.

Regards from Perth

Derek


----------



## matthewwh (15 Apr 2008)

waterhead37":2tfcc9tm said:


> BB,
> 
> I guess a No 3. Richard Kell guide



It is indeed. 

The Mk2 version without the spring loaded pin, although you can still hone skewed blades with it by adding a shim between the edge of the blade and one of the locating pins.






The wedge is shopmade; they don't come with one but it's only a few minutes work to make one and you can do custom wedges for the different thicknesses of blade that you want to sharpen.

The main thing that I like about it is the accuracy, the two little steel pegs that the blade locates on keep everything square in the lateral plane; so as long as you get the projection right, it is very easy to get exactly the same setting time and again. Also the broad wheelbase means that the guide and the glass plate are dictating to the blade, not the other way around. 






Next project is a pair of identical opposing wedges that sit on either side of a sharpening stone, this will hopefully deliver the same degree of dictated accuracy for honing curved blades. It might take a few goes but if I can get it to work as well in practice as it does in theory It will be a really handy little accessory.


----------



## Derek Cohen (Perth Oz) (15 Apr 2008)

> Also the broad wheelbase means that the guide and the glass plate are dictating to the blade, not the other way around.



Matthew

I would consider this a weakness in the design.

How do you hone a camber using the Kell?

Further, the importance of the guide holding the blade rigidly is overrated.

It may be worth repeating something I have said on another occasion. One of the criticisms levelled at the Veritas Mk II honing guide is that the twin downscrews can cause the blade to skew.

Well I would consider this a strength as it reflects the ability of the user to adjust the degree of skew on-the-fly. Just twist a knob to adjust the skew in the other direction. This is similar to what you would do if honing freehand.

Regards from Perth

Derek


----------



## matthewwh (15 Apr 2008)

Hi Derek,

I understand exactly what you mean and felt the same way until I started using the Kell guide. 

The Veritas mark 2 is a cracking piece of kit, and as you say it is a guide in the true sense; i.e. you are freehand honing with a device that helps you to stay on track. In strict nomenclature, I guess the Kell is a fixture rather than a guide, precisely because it holds the blade in a fixed position and the user cannot influence the position in mid stroke. 

Perhaps a good analogy would be the fixed cut of a tablesaw versus the steerable cut of a bandsaw. As soon as you start thinking of it as an engineering fixture for which you plan setups rather than a guide that requires a 'knack' or feel for what you are doing, it all starts to make sense. It is also breathtakingly simple with only two moving parts, yet at the same time beautifully engineered and potentially very versatile, all qualities that pander to my instinct for elegant solutions.

As an example, to hone a cambered blade I currently use two little shims, one slightly wider than the other. Slip the thinner shim between the bottom pin and the blade to create a skewed facet on the blade. Swap the thin shim for the wider one to hone another slightly steeper facet on the outer fifth of the blade. Repeat the process, this time shimming behind the top pin to create an identical pair of facets on the other side of the blade, job done. And because it is so accurate, you are polishing the same facets each time, not cutting whole new ones, so although there are several steps, it is still quite quick. In use there is no noticeable difference between the five faceted blade and a smooth curve.

I am still mulling over possible alternatives to this method including the twin wedges for the wheels to ride on which would twist the blade as you pull it through the stroke. My concern with this though, is that the abrasive will not be worn efficiently, leaving an elongated s shaped scar and the remainder of the surface untouched. 

Having read David C's review of Toshio Odates concave honing surface idea in F&C, I'm thinking that this might be a better way to go, it seems to lend itself well to my currently preferred method of sheet abrasive sharpening. 

I love your new site by the way, read your recycled ladder bookshelves entry last night and thoroughly enjoyed it.


----------



## richard kell (17 Apr 2008)

Cambers are so very quick and easy on my Richard Kell honing guide no.3, very precise and controlled, a typical toolmaker solution. On my quirky handwritten instruction sheet I mention that by placing a shim (I have lots of various thin plastic sheet material at the workshop) placed as a strip I can lift each side roller in turn to produce the necessary barely perceptible camber. Works a treat. And very controlled/repeatable. Hope this helps. And of course being so 'in control' means that only the minimum material is removed each sharpening. Any probs e-mail.


----------



## Chris Knight (18 Apr 2008)

Richard,

Welcome to the forum. Your link was caught by our spam trap that affects a newcomer's first three posts.

Here it is http://richardkell.livejournal.com


----------



## Paul Chapman (18 Apr 2008)

Hi Richard,

Welcome to the forum.

Cheers :wink: 

Paul


----------



## Anonymous (18 Apr 2008)

ivan":26zbjwiy said:


> It's a pity that there is not more actual evidence relating to hand plane cutting action,



I think Rob Lee of Veritas fame has published quite a bit on this area


----------



## Anonymous (18 Apr 2008)

matthewwh":19r9mdh9 said:


> It is indeed.
> 
> The Mk2 version without the spring loaded pin, although you can still hone skewed blades with it by adding a shim between the edge of the blade and one of the locating pins.
> 
> ...



How do you keep everything so clean?????? I would love my sharpening kit to be that clean :shock:


----------



## Karl (18 Apr 2008)

I found this link on Terrry Gordons website which I thought provided some useful info on blade sharpening angles.

Cheers

Karl


----------



## matthewwh (21 Apr 2008)

Tony":3dhjua4e said:


> How do you keep everything so clean?????? I would love my sharpening kit to be that clean :shock:



Hi Tony,

That's one of the other things I like about this system. The honing guide wheels run on the plate, not the oily abrasive, so they don't get gunked up. 

The camellia oil is non hardening so as long as you pop the whole plate in a poly bag to keep the dust off, you can come back to it weeks later, add another drop, and carry on.

Once the sheets are used up you just peel them off, give the plate a wipe down with a white spirity rag to remove any remaining spray mount and then start afresh.


----------



## Alan Smith (22 Apr 2008)

Can I just suggest that anyone that hasn't done so have a read of Richard Kell's blog (see above). It is truly fascinating, although I am biased given that he is one of my metalworking heroes.


----------



## Benchwayze (26 Apr 2008)

I am lost too...

Is the discussion of a back-bevel referring to David's trick of lifting the rear of a blade with a rule, when flattening the back of the iron? (This would produce an edge like a 'cold-chisel, I think.) 

I have yet to try this but I am going to give 'er a go. If it is a means of tackling difficult grain, then at the moment, I have no real need, having little 'curly-grain' timber in my shop. 

I will try it tho' all the same. 

Regards John


----------



## Benchwayze (26 Apr 2008)

Rich":gu2p4unb said:


> No but they are better at multitasking, so I'm told at least once a day :?



Multi-tasking means a woman will slow down one job, so she can start another. What the ladies conveniently forget is that sooner or later they have to put the second job on the back-burner, so to speak, to finish the first. 

Although, they insist we men would forget that the soup had been left simmering, but they wouldn't. They are probably right. 

I don't argue about it any more. I just wait until my tea is ready, then eat it when it's plated up and put on the table. 

Sometimes I even cook Sunday lunch! 
 



Like I said, me Missus is great! \/ 
John


----------

