WTB - Eclipse 36 honing guide

[Handrubbed]

When Lie-Nielsen's jig is released, you will find it to be a much-improved Eclipse. Who knows when that will be?

We heard a little rumour at West Dean about this (and possibly a new saw set) so I'm looking forward to seeing what LN come up with - Rob

Well it appears that David's input back in '01 has got legs and maybe something is in the offing from L-N.

 

[bugbear]

I originally suggested / requested the honing guide modification to Thomas back in about 2001 when we were shooting the plane sharpening video.

The idea was to have plane blade holding jaws similar to the chisel holding jaws. This would mean that the honing angle would be the same for differing blade thicknesses at a particular projection.

David Charlesworth

Well...

it is clearly a mathematical fact that different blade thickness will result in different angles for a given projection, in an Eclipse style jig.

However, a thread a while ago actually tabulated the permutations, intended (I think) to allow accurate setting of bevel angles.

However, reading the table, I came to an almost opposite conclusion.

Given that the required projections for typical angles are large compared to the thickness variation in the blades, the table says that while the bevel angle for a given projection does indeed vary with blade thickness, it doesn't vary by much.

Further, minor variations in bevel angle are not a big deal; even when using a bevel up plane, where the EP controls tearout, I've not heard anyone claim that angle changes of 1-2 degrees are significant; angular changes are normally quoted in multiples of 5.

Consistency between sharpenings is (IMHO) super important, since it has a direct influence on the amount of honing work to be done, and amount of precious tool steel ground away. A constant projection gives this, even if the angle is more nominal than accurate.

(thread referenced:
https://www.ukworkshop.co.uk/forums/view ... ess#309130
)

There is sometimes another reason for wanting to clamp the "back face" though; I've had some mortise chisels where the front face was cambered, and even the apex wasn't symmetrical w.r.t. the back. Clamping w.r.t. the back was the only way to clamp at all.

BugBear

 

[dunbarhamlin]

BB - you've missed the point. Were plane blades held the same way as chisels are in David's modified eclipse, the reference surface would always be the same height above the pivot point, and so blade thickness would not be a factor.

 

[woodbloke]

I originally suggested / requested the honing guide modification to Thomas back in about 2001 when we were shooting the plane sharpening video.

The idea was to have plane blade holding jaws similar to the chisel holding jaws. This would mean that the honing angle would be the same for differing blade thicknesses at a particular projection.

David Charlesworth

David - nice to see you back on the forum...welcome - Rob

 

[David C]

Thank you Rob,

David

 

[bugbear]

BB - you've missed the point. Were plane blades held the same way as chisels are in David's modified eclipse, the reference surface would always be the same height above the pivot point, and so blade thickness would not be a factor.

Yes - I understood all that, in detail, with the maths and everything.

What I'm saying is that this (avoiding angle changes due to blade thickness) is not an important design goal, wether it's achieved or not.

BugBear

 

[David C]

Whilst agreeing that consistency of sharpening is one of the most important issues, plane blade thickness does have an effect in the Eclipse type jigs.

I just did a simple experiment and came up with these results.

Thin Stanley blade (2mm thick), 38mm projection, 30 degrees
L-N No. 9 blade (4.3mm thick), 43mm projection, 30 degrees

Stanley 50mm projection, 25 degrees
L-N No 9 57mm projection, 25 degrees

Clearly the most extreme difference of thickness was selected!
best wishes,
David

 

[Vann]

Clearly the most extreme difference of thickness was selected!

Not quite. I have several Stanley (and 1 Record) irons around 1.9mm thick so...

...Thin Stanley blade (2mm thick)...

...I would call 2mm a thick Stanley blade. :lol:

Cheers, Vann

 

[bugbear]

Whilst agreeing that consistency of sharpening is one of the most important issues, plane blade thickness does have an effect in the Eclipse type jigs.

Yes - that was never in dispute.

The page I linked to tabulated the actual differences.

BugBear

 

[ydb1md]

I'm venturing (virtually) across the pond in search of an Eclipse #36 honing guide for a woodworking friend of mine. These are virtually non-existent here and I would like anyone's assistance in locating one in the UK. It would be much appreciated.

Be patient. LN is releasing their own (side clamp style) honing guides shortly.

 

[David C]

BugBear,

it was the "doesn't vary by much" that I was quibbling about in a no doubt over pedantic manner......

best wishes,

David Charlesworth

 

[woodbloke]

I'm venturing (virtually) across the pond in search of an Eclipse #36 honing guide for a woodworking friend of mine. These are virtually non-existent here and I would like anyone's assistance in locating one in the UK. It would be much appreciated.

Be patient. LN is releasing their own (side clamp style) honing guides shortly.

I've heard whisperings about this fabled beast...any idea when? - Rob

 

[PaulO]

Here is the diagram I did to show the trigonometry

We are trying to work out P (projection) to achieve a honing angle (alpha + beta). For plane blades H is a combination of honing guide design and blade thickness.

So based on a 2mm and 4.3mm blade I get the following results:

I have to admit I set all of my plane blades (except scrapers) to 37mm for primary and 35mm for secondary bevel. My range of blade thicknesses isn't as great as this, but even if it was I think the variation would only be of the order of 1.5 degrees. Probably not worth worrying about.

Despite that, I'll probably end up getting the LN guide if it looks like a better mousetrap.

 

[ydb1md]

I've heard whisperings about this fabled beast...any idea when? - Rob

According to TLN, they're "next." 8)

 

[bugbear]

BugBear,

it was the "doesn't vary by much" that I was quibbling about in a no doubt over pedantic manner......

best wishes,

David Charlesworth

I guess the key question here is what is an acceptable error (for want of a better word) in bevel angle.

The smallest designed change in bevel angle I know is 2 1/2 degrees, the increment between common and Norris pitch, and then Norris and York pitch.

So, as an initial suggestion;

Honing jig "quirks" that result in bevel changes less than 2 degrees should be considered negligible.

From the helpful graph PaulO supplies, if one builds a 40mm projection fixture, targeting a 30 degree angle with a 2mm (thin) blade, even changing to a 4.3mm (rather thick) blade only takes us to 31 1/2 degrees, nicely within my proposed definition of negligible.

BugBear

 

[woodbloke]

I've heard whisperings about this fabled beast...any idea when? - Rob

According to TLN, they're "next." 8)

Good stuff. I'll be very intrigued to see what the new gauge from TLN is like and how it differs from the original Eclipse. I just hope they haven't re-invented the wheel and it's simply another 'E'clone wrapped up in a LN sticker with an appropriate price tag - Rob

 

[PaulO]

and it's simply another 'E'clone wrapped up in a LN sticker with an appropriate price tag - Rob

The one on their website looks distinctly secondhand and they have the blade fitted the wrong way round:
http://www.lie-nielsen.com/catalog.php?sku=jig
(yes I know it isn't the new one)

 

[Ironballs]

I know I may sound like a stuck record, but I look at all these graphs and diagrams and calculations and I have to ask for the vast majority of our sharpening needs, how is that better than my Mk 2 Veritas? And does it compete for speed and accuracy when I can nip out to the garage now, pick any chisel/plane off the shelf, chuck it in and have it seriously sharp in no time at all.

I go into the garage to get away from all that as I have enough of it in the day job

 

[ydb1md]

and it's simply another 'E'clone wrapped up in a LN sticker with an appropriate price tag - Rob

The one on their website looks distinctly secondhand and they have the blade fitted the wrong way round:
http://www.lie-nielsen.com/catalog.php?sku=jig
(yes I know it isn't the new one)

The new one is not on their website.

Not many people inside LN know about this new guide.

 

[woodbloke]

[-( [-( (hammer) - Rob