Kell III, perhaps the ultimate honing guide...

[woodbloke]

Rob - do you know if Matthew has access to adhesive backed abrasive paper in the ranges 200-2000 grit?

Damian - not sure, I'd suggest you send Matthew a PM - Rob

 

[yetloh]

Only two things as far as I can see:

1. The brass clamping screws don't give enough purchase to securely clamp the blade. Solution; pliers.

2. Square reference surface is a bit short; potential for out of square sharpening. Solutions; care in setting up and check with a small square.

Doesn't seem much trouble to me although bigger brass screws would be nice.

Jim

 

[Jake]

sandpaper it definitely ain't..if you want to polish the mirrors in the Hubble telescope then this might be the stuff you're looking for - Rob

What's the code on the back? Some of it seems to be plain old AlOx - fine grit size, of course, and no doubt well graded etc.

It is also available in Chrome Oxide which is a bit more unusual.

I hope you manage to avoid the need to send up a shuttle with corrective optics for your blades.

 

[woodbloke]

I hope you manage to avoid the need to send up a shuttle with corrective optics for your blades.

:lol: :lol: - Rob

 

[Doctor]

These jigs are fascinating, I have had a pair of jigs for a few years now, I can't remember the name of them but I'll call them leftie and righty, they have five long bendy things on the end which can be manipulated to hold the chisel or blade.
The major problem it would appear is that I'm the only one with them? even mr grim needs a twig, having said that it was a cracking stick, very shapely :lol:

 

[Derek Cohen (Perth Oz)]

For me it's clunky...physically too big. You also need to buy extras to do other things (cambered blades, skewed blades and small blades) but the worst reason for me is that the roller runs on the honing material and there's not really a way round that (you can build a runway behind but this doesn't really solve the problem as the blade edge to roller distance is too small, hence you can't use the full length of the honing medium). The blade registers from the wrong side and it clamps from the top, which logically to me seems wrong.

I'm sorry Rob, but none of this flies for me. Maybe for you, but your statement has all the properties of a general critique, which demands a response in the name of objectivity.

Note that I have the Kell #1, which I use for my oval bolstered chisels as it is side-clamping, a preference for such thick blades. Also note that I prefer to freehand my blades - chisels and plane blades - that do not require a secondary bevel. For the latter I use the Veritas mk II. And also note that I was involved in the pre-production testing of the Veritas, which may bias me. Still, I have a number of guides and I see them all having specific strengths and weaknesses (which is why I have them all).

Could the Veritas Mk II be less clunky? Sure. But what you have in the Kell #3 is the most clunky set up I have ever seen! The reason the Veritas appears clunky is that it is made of two parts, the angle setter and the guide. The guide alone is quite compact - and it is comfortable to use. The Kell #1 is the most uncomfortable guide ever. I only use it because it can take the depth. Is the #3 the same as the #1 in this regard?

You criticise that the Veritas for the add-ons. This is to keep the price down of the basic unit. Buy what you need. This way you can have maximum flexibility. Still, are you aware that the basic Kell #3 is 20% more expensive than the basic Veritas mk II? http://www.fine-tools.com/hilf.htm

You don't like the fact that "the roller runs on the honing material"? A news flash - the Kell also does when I use waterstones.

"The blade registers from the wrong side" ...!!!! Do you have any idea how important this design feature is? You could not have an integral angle setter without the blade this way round. Blades come in different thicknesses and this is the only way to accurately set the bevel angle using an integral angle setter. The integral angle setter is part of a bigger picture - the guide is also designed to use the skew setter in a similar way.

Can the Veritas be improved? Absolutely. Would I swap it for the Kell #3 which will require a drawer of bits-and-pieces. Not on your Nelly!

Regards from Perth

Derek

 

[woodbloke]

For me it's clunky...physically too big. You also need to buy extras to do other things (cambered blades, skewed blades and small blades) but the worst reason for me is that the roller runs on the honing material and there's not really a way round that (you can build a runway behind but this doesn't really solve the problem as the blade edge to roller distance is too small, hence you can't use the full length of the honing medium). The blade registers from the wrong side and it clamps from the top, which logically to me seems wrong.

I'm sorry Rob, but none of this flies for me. Maybe for you, but your statement has all the properties of a general critique, which demands a response in the name of objectivity.

Note that I have the Kell #1, which I use for my oval bolstered chisels as it is side-clamping, a preference for such thick blades. Also note that I prefer to freehand my blades - chisels and plane blades - that do not require a secondary bevel. For the latter I use the Veritas mk II. And also note that I was involved in the pre-production testing of the Veritas, which may bias me. Still, I have a number of guides and I see them all having specific strengths and weaknesses (which is why I have them all).

Could the Veritas Mk II be less clunky? Sure. But what you have in the Kell #3 is the most clunky set up I have ever seen! The reason the Veritas appears clunky is that it is made of two parts, the angle setter and the guide. The guide alone is quite compact - and it is comfortable to use. The Kell #1 is the most uncomfortable guide ever. I only use it because it can take the depth. Is the #3 the same as the #1 in this regard?

You criticise that the Veritas for the add-ons. This is to keep the price down of the basic unit. Buy what you need. This way you can have maximum flexibility. Still, are you aware that the basic Kell #3 is 20% more expensive than the basic Veritas mk II? http://www.fine-tools.com/hilf.htm

You don't like the fact that "the roller runs on the honing material"? A news flash - the Kell also does when I use waterstones.

"The blade registers from the wrong side" ...!!!! Do you have any idea how important this design feature is? You could not have an integral angle setter without the blade this way round. Blades come in different thicknesses and this is the only way to accurately set the bevel angle using an integral angle setter. The integral angle setter is part of a bigger picture - the guide is also designed to use the skew setter in a similar way.

Can the Veritas be improved? Absolutely. Would I swap it for the Kell #3 which will require a drawer of bits-and-pieces. Not on your Nelly!

Regards from Perth

Derek

Derek - without getting into a slanging match regarding the merits of the KIII vs the VMkII, the KIII for me, personally, is infinitely preferable to the Veritas. You mention the KI...I'm discussing here the KIII which is a totally different animal and will doesn't run on the honing material, something that I specifically required in a gauge...however you slice it, any gauge with a trailing roller has to run on the stone and if its a waterstone :shock:
I've used the KI and KII and they are both awkward...if you try and push them, when used on the pull stroke they're as easy to use as any other.
The registration of the chisel or plane blade is from the reverse of the brass plate and the back of the tool in question, which is the correct and logical place for it to be...simple.
The KIII will hone almost anything (bar thick mortise chisels) In my view the KIII is a very elegant way to achieve what I require in a honing gauge and it's very easy to make any fittings from oddments of hardwood and acrylic in the offcuts box, so I don't have to buy expensive add ons for specific tasks.
All Veritas stuff is well constructed, nobody in their right mind would deny that, but the Kell's are individually hand made by a bloke in a shed in the Lake District and are exquisite...does your VII have some engraving on the plate made by a Holtzapffel ornamental lathe? No?...thought so :wink: so I'm very happy to spend a little more dosh.
I'ts clear that you're biased towards the VII and fair play, but it's also clear that you probably haven't used the KIII...I suggest you do so (I've used both :wink: ) and in the mean time, keep on necking the Fosters :lol: - Rob

 

[matthewwh]

Absolutely textbook rant Derek, I haven't seen one that good for a long time!

You have deftly misunderstood every element of what Rob is saying, carefully and eloquently defended the Veritas Mk2 against everything except the Kell No.3 Mk2 that the thread is about, and arrived firmly and with notable indignation back at the party line!

Truly magnificent! (ever considered a career in politics?)

Failing that, you could grab a cold one, roll up your Veritas banner and come back and join us when you've got your thinking head back on. As you are a man who's opinion Rob Lee and many others - myself included hold in high regard, I think you could serve him better as a learned advisor than a stoic but boneheaded rottweiler.

Cheers,


Matthew



P.S
Kell No.3 Mk2 = £44.95
Veritas Mk 2 Basic Model = £46.95
Veritas Mk2 + Goodies = £85.60

 

[Derek Cohen (Perth Oz)]

a stoic but boneheaded rottweiler

Now now Matthew ... no name calling. That's rude :lol: ... hee .. hee ... a rottweiler ... Gee I've never thought of myself as a rottweiler... I have a Golden Retriever, if that means anything ..

You have deftly misunderstood every element of what Rob is saying

Let's see, Rob said ..

I've been after a single honing guide (note Paul ) that will hone almost (pig stickers excepted) anything, simply and easily.

Matthew went on ...

and eloquently defended the Veritas Mk2 against everything except the Kell No.3 Mk2 that the thread is about, and arrived firmly and with notable indignation back at the party line!

Careful here .. I tried to make it clear that I was trying to be objective and post responses to the points that Rob raised ... after all he was the one to cite the Veritas (otherwise I would just have made the comments about the #3, which no only still stand, but I could add more!).

My apologies if my post sounded like a rant or other. It was dashed off as I wandered in from the workshop while I waited for glue to dry. I must say that I read the original post and almost wet myself with laughter. I think that Richard Kell makes beautiful tools. I truly admire the workmanship in the #1 I have, and the workmanship of the #3 is no doubt as inspiring. And yes, I would rather own a guide in brass than one in black anodised aluminium (well I do, the #1). But for Rob to claim that the #3 does it all .... and then trot out all the jigs he uses to make the #3 work (such as the piece of paper - DC style - for the cambering), well please, the material writes itself :lol:

Rob, I did not write that because the #1 is uncomfortable therefore I assumed the #3 would also be uncomfortable - I asked a question if this was so. Have another look.

I accept that you like the #3. And it is unfortunate that you raised the Veritas as a point of comparison, because that then became the reference for my criticism. As much as Matthew argues that I did not understand your rationale, I argued that you did not understand the design of the Veritas. I repeat, I was simply responding to the points you raised. This is not about my being an advocate for Rob Lee ... Matthew, that is poor debate - stay above the belt please.

Regards from Perth

Derek

 

[Doctor]

Found my jigs, bit grubby but took a picture of them anyway.

 

[studders]

Cue Harry Hill...

"So, which is better, Veritas or Kell? "

"Only one way to find out..... "

"FIGHT"

 

[matthewwh]

Fair enough Derek, I didn't think it sounded like your usual measured and considered tone. Apologies for tearing a strip off you. OK, now that we've all put our handbags away and agreed to play nicely.......

I think there are some elements of Richard's design that are both simple and very clever. Some of which could have been incorporated into the Veritas, or could be incorporated into a third generation if they ever decide to do one.

The wedge squeezes against a bar - in effect a fulcrum, so the wedged side is free to rotate about this axis, allowing the guide to accommodate tapered blades whilst always maintaing the back as a referance face. I think Veritas could incorporate this principle by allowing the surface that grips the face to pivot in some way.

Having a pair of rollers running outside the blade was originally intended to maximise stability. A pair of wheels set broader than the blade will dictate squareness to the edge rather than following a pre-existing condition. This guide was always intended to function as a fixture, rather than merely an angle stop for freehand honing.

The Kell No.3 Mk.2 is a facilitator of imaginitive use rather than a prescriptive solution - as Rob has demonstrated, the application of a little lateral thinking goes a long way. In three weeks he has developed all sorts of new ways of using it and covered his individual needs. I was happy with two wedges, one for plane irons, a smaller one for chisels down to about 3/4", and four lines cut into the top of my front vice for setting projections. Whilst Rob and I were chatting he suggested that a narrow wedge would work better for narrow chisels, so I chopped a bit off the end of the smaller one and we tried it, so I now have three wedges and can hone chisels down to 1/4" width.

With my retailers hat on, I'd love to see a range of accessories, a pack of assorted wedges and shims for different applications, but I know if I did get them manufactured and put them on the market a lot of people would say 'sod that, I can make my own' and with my woodworking hat on I'd be one of them. Catch 22, but who knows, if the mood takes me I might do it anyway, possibly another reason to get a few boards of Kauri impregnated with resin....?

For the benefit of anyone who is confused, the original No.3 had a sprung pin that would provide the right setting for LN skew blades. This made it difficult and expensive to produce and was only of benefit to a small number of users. It was omitted on the Mk.2 version, which brought the price down and as Rob's explanation demonstrates, you can still hone skewed blades of any angle you like.

 

[wizer]

Look at this thread, flying over my head...

I'll stick with my LV MKII. It works and I already own it. That makes sense to me. Maybe one day I'll invest in a pair of Doctor's jigs, but not his actual ones, I've heard he uses them to pick his nose. :shock: :lol:

 

[woodbloke]

Fair enough Derek, I didn't think it sounded like your usual measured and considered tone. Apologies for tearing a strip off you. OK, now that we've all put our handbags away and agreed to play nicely.......

I think there are some elements of Richard's design that are both simple and very clever. Some of which could have been incorporated into the Veritas, or could be incorporated into a third generation if they ever decide to do one.

The wedge squeezes against a bar - in effect a fulcrum, so the wedged side is free to rotate about this axis, allowing the guide to accommodate tapered blades whilst always maintaing the back as a referance face. I think Veritas could incorporate this principle by allowing the surface that grips the face to pivot in some way.

Having a pair of rollers running outside the blade was originally intended to maximise stability. A pair of wheels set broader than the blade will dictate squareness to the edge rather than following a pre-existing condition. This guide was always intended to function as a fixture, rather than merely an angle stop for freehand honing.

The Kell No.3 Mk.2 is a facilitator of imaginitive use rather than a prescriptive solution - as Rob has demonstrated, the application of a little lateral thinking goes a long way. In three weeks he has developed all sorts of new ways of using it and covered his individual needs. I was happy with two wedges, one for plane irons, a smaller one for chisels down to about 3/4", and four lines cut into the top of my front vice for setting projections. Whilst Rob and I were chatting he suggested that a narrow wedge would work better for narrow chisels, so I chopped a bit off the end of the smaller one and we tried it, so I now have three wedges and can hone chisels down to 1/4" width.

With my retailers hat on, I'd love to see a range of accessories, a pack of assorted wedges and shims for different applications, but I know if I did get them manufactured and put them on the market a lot of people would say 'sod that, I can make my own' and with my woodworking hat on I'd be one of them. Catch 22, but who knows, if the mood takes me I might do it anyway, possibly another reason to get a few boards of Kauri impregnated with resin....?

For the benefit of anyone who is confused, the original No.3 had a sprung pin that would provide the right setting for LN skew blades. This made it difficult and expensive to produce and was only of benefit to a small number of users. It was omitted on the Mk.2 version, which brought the price down and as Rob's explanation demonstrates, you can still hone skewed blades of any angle you like.

I'm able to hone even the smallest 3mm LN chisel quite easily with the narrowest of my wedges. One thing that I found out today is that the wheels on the gauge won't spin on the glass, rather they slide as there's no friction 'twixt the wheel surface and the dead smooth plate finish. The solution was to just tape (using d/s tape) some strips of printer paper between the lapping sheets so that the wheels now have a bit of grip. As I said earlier, the KIII works beautifully...it's the lapping papers you need to be really careful with - Rob

 

[Aled Dafis]

Rob / Matthew

What lubricant do you use with these papers? Does it matter? I currently use WD40 on diamonds, smells good and helps keep the dreaded rust at bay.

Also, will the Kell #3 Mk 2 accept a 6mm :shock: plane iron?

Cheers

Aled

 

[wizer]

The kits come with a Camelia Oil spritzer

 

[woodbloke]

Rob / Matthew

What lubricant do you use with these papers? Does it matter? I currently use WD40 on diamonds, smells good and helps keep the dreaded rust at bay.

Also, will the Kell #3 Mk 2 accept a 6mm :shock: plane iron?

Cheers

Aled

Aled - I use paraffin which is fine. The blade from 'Big Woddie' is a Phillyspecial and is 6mm thick...goes under the bar without a problem. If it didn't fit though, I'd just knock up a specific wedge for it - Rob

 

[studders]

Rob / Matthew

What lubricant do you use with these papers?

Aled

I've tried several but find water seems to give the best cutting rate and finish; at least on my bog standard chisels/blades.

 

[matthewwh]

Hi Aled,

I usually use camellia oil but I've recently been playing around with Honerite #1. I chose camellia because it is non-hardening, so it won't form a cakey layer on the surface, a couple more drops (literally) the next time you sharpen and you are back to a nicely lubed but free cutting surface.

The honerite is very clean, similar to parrafin I suppose, but if you are using the non psa backed sheets you have to be careful not to slop it onto the glass as it will work its way under the sheets and turn the spraymount to mush.

Doesn't seem to affect the PSA backed stuff though.

 

[bugbear]

but the worst reason for me is that the roller runs on the honing material and there's not really a way round that

Well, that's a biggy, and both approaches have pros and cons.

In the "wheel runs on the honing medium" type, the honing medium can be any thickness, and one can easily mix honing medium of different thicknesses (e.g. move from a coarse thick stone, to a fine thin stone). This is very helpful is you're using waterstones, which have to be flattened. Over time, waterstones end up at different thicknesses.

The downside is that the wheel might wear the abrasive (depending on wheel size and amount of pressure), or that the abrasive residue might get into the wheel and wear *it*.

The "wheel on the bench" type are almost the exact opposite. All your abrasives must be the same thickness (or are least be shimmed or inset to be the same effective thickness).

But the wheels stays clean, and can't wear the abrasive.

I can't say that one approach is clearly better than the other in all circumstances.

BugBear