I rather think I’ve committed a heinous crime; but, ‘tis a matter for the jury now. A while back (a good while back) I used a honing guide to correct an out of square blade from a Stanley #4, it was a mess. Anyway - distracted by a telephone conversation, I forgot to ‘tweek’ the end to the guru’s 30˚ razor edge. I finished it off at 25˚. Here’s the thing – that 1938 (ish) #4 blade has just finished off a truck load op rough sawn hardwood, the last bit just as smooth as the first – give or take- and; IMO, has no need of anything more than a few strokes on the 400, a couple on the 1200 and stropping to be back at it’s best. The workout I gave it was a serious all day event, and it still takes nice shavings, even now.
To the point, so to speak. Is there a need to create cutting edges ‘modified’ beyond the manufacturers recommended design specifications? I also sharpened a few (old) chisels to the same spec; all still cutting well and instead of sharpening after every time I use ‘em, I just put ‘em away and use ‘em again and again.
So, why is there this ‘myth’ about a blade to shave with, when all I need is a blade capable of taking timber, without it needing to be re – sharpened every 100 strokes? That blade, at 25˚has been serviceable longer, leaves a shine, smooth as the proverbial Baby’s bottom and needs less attention, with results as good as any other carefully tuned blade, if not better, for longer.
If Stanley, Bailey and many, many others decided that 25˚was the design angle, why do we keep messing about with that? The obsessive compulsive desire for the perfect ‘angle’ if ever attained. will only survive the first contact with the enemy; then it becomes a matter of endurance. 25˚ seems to last longer – on task. This obsession with shaving hair off arms and slicing through paper cannot compare (IMO) to a blade which can do a full day’s work and come back for more. Is this why makers send out a 25˚ blade to be sharpened, polished and then used with minimum down time and attention needed. Cut wood or fuss about the ‘shaving’?
Dunno – just saying.
To the point, so to speak. Is there a need to create cutting edges ‘modified’ beyond the manufacturers recommended design specifications? I also sharpened a few (old) chisels to the same spec; all still cutting well and instead of sharpening after every time I use ‘em, I just put ‘em away and use ‘em again and again.
So, why is there this ‘myth’ about a blade to shave with, when all I need is a blade capable of taking timber, without it needing to be re – sharpened every 100 strokes? That blade, at 25˚has been serviceable longer, leaves a shine, smooth as the proverbial Baby’s bottom and needs less attention, with results as good as any other carefully tuned blade, if not better, for longer.
If Stanley, Bailey and many, many others decided that 25˚was the design angle, why do we keep messing about with that? The obsessive compulsive desire for the perfect ‘angle’ if ever attained. will only survive the first contact with the enemy; then it becomes a matter of endurance. 25˚ seems to last longer – on task. This obsession with shaving hair off arms and slicing through paper cannot compare (IMO) to a blade which can do a full day’s work and come back for more. Is this why makers send out a 25˚ blade to be sharpened, polished and then used with minimum down time and attention needed. Cut wood or fuss about the ‘shaving’?
Dunno – just saying.