Veritas MK II POWER Sharpening System

[Jim Barrett]

I know there are many ways to sharpen planes and chisels. I have been investigating purchasing the Veritas POWER sharperning system. I know similar systems are out there: Worksharp, Lapsharp, etc. but I like Lee Valley and their price point is between the two above mentioned power systems.
I am looking for some feedback on the Veritas...if you have one what do you like, dislike, etc...would you buy again?
Warm regards,
Jim

[Jason Tuinstra]

Jim, I have this system and have liked it very much. It produces a razor sharp edge in a short time. I've got the bald wrist to prove it (thankfully I have a big watch to cover it up most of the time ;) ). It's the only system that I've ever used so I can't comment on wet stones etc. It's quick, easy, and produces a sharp edge. You will need to buy extra abrasive disks from time to time. I've had mine on for quite awhile and I still get a good polished edge.

Below are some pics of the edge treatment you get. This chisels a bit war weary from my latest table and needs to be cleaned up, but you get the idea.

Hope this helps!

[Steve Clardy]

I have it.

Only gripe is the in-line switch in the cord.
Thought those were discarded in the 50's :confused::D


I put a switch box on the side of the housing.


I use it for plane irons and chisels, then finish up with a stone sometimes.

[Jim Barrett]

I have it.

I use it for plane irons and chisels, then finish up with a stone sometimes.

Steve,
You said "sometimes"....is there a specific task that you do that would require the chisel or plane to be finished on a stone?

Jim

[Steve Clardy]

My good set of Buck chisels, I will run them across a stone when doing fine work.

My beater Stanleys, I use them right off of the MKII

[Jim Koepke]

This is my only power sharpening set up. There is no grinder in my shop.

It produces a very well honed blade.

The finest grit on the papers LV carries is 6 micron if my memory is working. My water stones are a bit finer, thus making for a slightly sharper blade.

My advice is to buy at least five tool holders. The blades do get warm while sharpening. Doing a batch of blades at one time allows for cooling cycles for the heated blades. I also bought extra disks. My set up has two each of the thin and thick disks.

My only minor critique is the disk holding bolt should have been a left hand thread. Though, it is kind of neat when the tool is turned off and slowing down to be able to grab the bolt to unscrew it. I put a small o-ring on this for a while.

Next time I change abrasives, my plan is to try some soapy water to see if this will help to eliminate bubbles between the abrasive sheet and the disk.

FWW did a test of powered sharpening systems two or three years ago. Their picking this as the top choice and being able to produce a better edge than the other systems tested was my main incentive to buy the MK II Power Sharpening System.

I feel it was money well spent. One can use the blade straight from the machine to the plane, though it may need a slight hone to get rid of a wire edge, and produce very fine shavings.

jim

[Mark Roderick]

I did own one but returned it.

My problem with these kinds of systems has to do with geometry: the fact that the outside of the wheel is moving faster than the inside. When you're sharpening a plane blade that's two inches wide, that means the abrasive is moving twice as fast at one edge of the blade than at the other (circumfrance = 2 * pi * radius). The different speed results in a very noticeable difference in how quickly metal is being removed. Then you find yourself (or I did) adjusting for it by putting more more pressure on the inside edge of skewing the edge, but that completely defeats the concept of repeatability.

Anyway, that was my experience. I use waterstones.

[Michael Panis]

I have this system and have gotten great results.
My one gripe (and it's minor) is that the holder clamps down with a 2 1/2 to 3 inch bar which is controlled by two thumb screws. With a 1/4" chisel, the chisel is almost under one screw, while the other screw is not so close. To get enough pressure, the clamping bar bends, so it does not lie flat against the chisel. I'm not sure if it makes a difference.

One reason I like this better than the workshop is that you can move the piece to be sharpened back and forth against the abrasive. Any imperfections in the abrasive get averaged out. With the workshop, your workpiece stays in the same spot relative to the abrasive, so any imperfections hit the same spot on your piece each time the wheel goes round.

Also, as you'd expect from Veritas, it is wonderfully made. There are no vibrations, shifting, locks coming loose, etc.

[Bruce Page]

I love mine. It's perfect for someone that doesn’t have the patience for wetstones (me).

[Jim Koepke]

I did own one but returned it.

My problem with these kinds of systems has to do with geometry: the fact that the outside of the wheel is moving faster than the inside. When you're sharpening a plane blade that's two inches wide, that means the abrasive is moving twice as fast at one edge of the blade than at the other (circumfrance = 2 * pi * radius). The different speed results in a very noticeable difference in how quickly metal is being removed. Then you find yourself (or I did) adjusting for it by putting more more pressure on the inside edge of skewing the edge, but that completely defeats the concept of repeatability.

Anyway, that was my experience. I use waterstones.

I think there are a few things to compensate for this. The angle of the tool rest and the moving the blade back and forth while sharpening. Of course, not being a mechanical engineer, I just go with the results. For me, the results are great.

jim

[Bruce Page]

I did own one but returned it.

My problem with these kinds of systems has to do with geometry: the fact that the outside of the wheel is moving faster than the inside. When you're sharpening a plane blade that's two inches wide, that means the abrasive is moving twice as fast at one edge of the blade than at the other (circumfrance = 2 * pi * radius). The different speed results in a very noticeable difference in how quickly metal is being removed. Then you find yourself (or I did) adjusting for it by putting more more pressure on the inside edge of skewing the edge, but that completely defeats the concept of repeatability.

Anyway, that was my experience. I use waterstones.

In addition to what Jim said, I’m not an ME either but it seems to me that on a wide plane blade, that the slower inner removal rate would limit the removal rate of the outer? It seems logical to me but so did my first marriage…

[Roger Bell]

I do not have the Mark 2 but I do have the Mark 1 (the earlier version). It is essentially the same except it has an additional shaft on the side for a grinder wheel, buffer or belt sander. It was more expensive and it didn't sell well on that account. It was discontinued in favor of the more basic Mark 2.

I have had the Mark 1 since 2000.

I am of the Tage Frid school of sharpening....i.e. get it "sharp enough as fast as possible and get back to work" rather than the more fastidious (not to name names) persuasion that seeks the elusive perfect edge with scant attention to the time and effort expended. The Mark 1/2 gets you a sharp-enough edge really quick that is more than good enough for most work. If you haven't seen Tage's famous FWW sharpening video, it's a hoot.

I haven't thrown out my stones and use the fine ones for when I want to have a more perfect edge for my infill smoother plane blades reserved for final finish. I will also strop some blades coming off the Mark 1.

I also have a mondo vintage Walker Turner 8" 220v grinder with $100 SG wheels for rough edge prep and for turning tools.

I have no complaints with the Mark 1 and would buy another tomorrow if a replacement were needed. I can afford and would have the other motorized systems if I really thought they were superior to the Mark 1/2.

I would also recommend having several (I have three) tool holders. This allows you to sharpen many edges quickly without having to stop the motor and change platters...... and allows the edges to cool during the rotation.

[Jim Koepke]

After posting in this thread and reading the replies, I was struck by an epiphany.

Epiphany:• a moment of sudden revelation or insight.

Not wishing to hijack this thread, I am going to start a new one after sending this post.

jim

[Mark Roderick]

Moving the blade back and forth changes the actual "linear" speed at which the abrasive is moving past the blade, but doesn't change the relative difference in speed between inside and outside edges.

In response to an earlier comment, if all the mechanisms had zero play this wouldn't matter. But they all have some play, enough to noticeably affect the amount of material removed from a plane blade.

[Jim Koepke]

Moving the blade back and forth changes the actual "linear" speed at which the abrasive is moving past the blade, but doesn't change the relative difference in speed between inside and outside edges.

In response to an earlier comment, if all the mechanisms had zero play this wouldn't matter. But they all have some play, enough to noticeably affect the amount of material removed from a plane blade.

As the blade on the fast moving side is ground down, wouldn't it lose contact with the abrasive due to the slower moving side holding it up in support until it also becomes ground down an equal amount?

There are as many ways, and powered systems, to sharpen a cutting tool as there are to skin a cat, maybe more. If there was one best way, all the others would likely fall by the wayside.

Jim, just noticed we are in the same state. If you ever get down to the southern border, I would be happy to let you try my system before you commit to buying. Send me a PM if you like. There is usually something that needs sharpening in my shop, or you would be welcome to bring your own blades.

jim

[Mark Singer]

I have it also and like it very much!

[Mark Roderick]

That's what I mean about "play" in the mechanisms. There's certainly enough play to allow one edge of the blade to be a few thousandths of an inch lower than the other, and that's a very meaningful amount on a plane blade.

When I mentioned this to a Veritas employee at a show, he said he compensates by pressing a little harder on the inside edge. But as I say, this seems to defeat the purpose of repeatability.

Don't get me wrong, it's a very cleverly-designed, well-built machine, and I'm sure it works for some people. I also think Veritas is a great company with tons of great products. I don't mean to be negative. But you can't get around the issue with geometry, and anyone who buys one should be aware of it and the need to compensate for it.

[Chuck Hamman]

In addition to what Jim said, I’m not an ME either but it seems to me that on a wide plane blade, that the slower inner removal rate would limit the removal rate of the outer? It seems logical to me but so did my first marriage…

Bruce,
I apologize for laughing :o

[patrick ramsey]

I know this is an old post. However, I have a question. You said there is a noticable difference in material removed from the blade because of the difference in grinding speed. How noticable?

[Danny Burns]

I like the approach that Derek Cohen used with a belt sander.

Maybe Derek can give us the link as I seem to be having a hard time finding it?

http://www.inthewoodshop.com/WoodworkTechniques/index.html

I thought that a great system would be to set up a slow speed wet belt sander with his system.