Bevels

[ken hatch]

I asked this question on another thread. What's with the multiple bevels, over the last couple or three weeks I keep seeing mention of primary, secondary, and even tertiary bevels. Most of the time Rob Cosman is also given credit as in "sharpened as Rob Cosman does". Why?

Is it a honing guide thing? Although if I remember correctly Cosman free hands.

I know, get the popcorn out but I'm curious as to the reason or reasons.

ken

[Tony Wilkins]

It’s what helps him make the large jump from 500/1000 to 16,000. He grinds, lifts up a little on the coarse stone/diamond plate, and then a little more on the polishing stone.

FWIW, Charlesworth (who uses a guide) also uses a tertiary bevel. I know he did in his articles a decade or so ago and I believe he does in his latest videos.

[mike stenson]

Yea, Rob does. Working from home, it's given me some ..ummm free time?? while waiting for jobs to run. So, he's running a primary and a secondary as I would. Then on his finest stone, he'll run a third bevel angle. Then the ruler trick. With that said, here's a link to a video where he's talking about doing exactly this. The first 3 minutes or so https://youtu.be/okLIEoz00v0

[David Bassett]

I'm not sure it's anything all that new in general. (Probably you have time on your hands these days and just noticed.) Perhaps some are coining new terms to distinguish specific variations?

To me, the concept seems sound & well known, though maybe not worth the trouble. If you reduce your primary bevel you can reduce wedging, but possibly create an edge that is too fragile in practice. With the secondary bevel you can strengthen the very edge, but keep the relief from wedging. (Rinse, repeat, you're at tertiary bevels. Or more.)

(It is also, to me, the same concept of knife sharpeners when they talk about thinning behind the edge. Different words, same basic concept. Possibly different details.)

On another forum David Weaver is going on about using a buffer with polishing compound to give a "micro-convex" edge. It seems, in his experiments, to improve edge longevity at very shallow bevel angles significantly. I'm have trouble imagining this is significantly different than the strop sharpeners get. Too much you dub the edge. Not enough you don't have any practical effect. It's conceptually close enough I won't get it figured out without hours of experimentation using equipment I don't have. (Probably won't, but....) BTW- I don't doubt their results. David's honest in his reporting, other's have tried and agree, plus a number of microscope photos show the different cutting edge profiles and different types of damage pretty well. I do doubt extra equipment, steps, and skills, is cost effective for me right now.

[ken hatch]

Yea, Rob does. Working from home, it's given me some ..ummm free time?? while waiting for jobs to run. So, he's running a primary and a secondary as I would. Then on his finest stone, he'll run a third bevel angle. Then the ruler trick. With that said, here's a link to a video where he's talking about doing exactly this. The first 3 minutes or so https://youtu.be/okLIEoz00v0


Mike,

I watched the video. Cosman is a good instructor and if you follow what he is selling you will have sharp cutters. That said, I think there are better ways to get there and there were a couple or three times he made statements that were like fingernails on a blackboard to me.

ken

[Steve Mathews]

Mike,

I watched the video. Cosman is a good instructor and if you follow what he is selling you will have sharp cutters. That said, I think there are better ways to get there and there were a couple or three times he made statements that were like fingernails on a blackboard to me.

ken

Inquiring minds want to know. Please elaborate.

[ken hatch]

Inquiring minds want to know. Please elaborate.

Steve,

Without watching again, his statements about cap irons, thick irons, and not letting the cutter over the edges of the stone. I'm sure there were several others but I'm old and forgetful. Bottom line, while doing it his way will result in a sharp cutter, as stated, I think there are better ways to get there.

ken

[ken hatch]

Steve,

I just wanted to add.

I've spent a good part of my adult life instructing. Even when "instructor' was not part of my job title I still did a lot of teaching. Cosman is very good at it, he is quite impressive having developed and broken down his method of getting to a working sharp cutter so that the average guy or gal can come off the street and learn to sharpen freehand in an hour or two. That part is pretty impressive. My hat is off to him.

ken

[Steve Mathews]

Steve,

I just wanted to add.

I've spent a good part of my adult life instructing. Even when "instructor' was not part of my job title I still did a lot of teaching. Cosman is very good at it, he is quite impressive having developed and broken down his method of getting to a working sharp cutter so that the average guy or gal can come off the street and learn to sharpen freehand in an hour or two. That part is pretty impressive. My hat is off to him.

ken

I agree Ken. His techniques may not be perfect and he has confessed to that but they work. As a relative beginner to woodworking I could do worse following someone with lesser experience. Besides, Rob is a charismatic sort of guy and entertaining to watch on YouTube. His efforts with the Purple Heart Project is a big plus for me.

[ken hatch]

I agree Ken. His techniques may not be perfect and he has confessed to that but they work. As a relative beginner to woodworking I could do worse following someone with lesser experience. Besides, Rob is a charismatic sort of guy and entertaining to watch on YouTube. His efforts with the Purple Heart Project is a big plus for me.

Steve,

Once you know what sharp is, loose the bevels. Learn to use the whole stone, I think it is Stan Covington that calls it "hang ten", and while you can get away with making that big jump in grits you will find it works better to put something in the middle. The problem with doing that using Cosman's technique you would need four bevels and pretty soon you would end up with a convex bevel and what you really want is a single flat bevel. Remember the process is grind (if needed and it almost always is), hone, and then polish. Most folks do not spend enough time on their polishing stone.

Just one more thought, shiny is not necessarily sharp. Some of the most prized finish stones will leave a hazy finish. That Shapton 16000 grit stone Cosman uses will shine so bright it can be blinding but when you look at the scratch pattern, it sucks.

Good luck,

ken

[Bob Jones 5443]

Rob Cosman rightly credits David Charlesworth for the ruler trick. It’s essentially a time-saving step to polish just the edge of the back of the iron.

The rest of David Charlesworth’s technique is basically identical to the one Rob Cosman teaches engagingly on YouTube. The key difference is that David uses an Elipse-type guide, while Ron does it freehand.

In my view, the Charlesworth method is a bit more exacting, and therefore more repeatable. To get Rob Cosman’s results it helps if you’re Rob Cosman. In contrast, anyone can learn, copy, and master the Charlesworth method of a secondary hone on the 800 or 1000 stone and tertiary polish on the 8000 stone. Once you do, you discover that this method is also devised to save time.

Three bevels on the front, ruler trick on the back. $15 honing guide. Fast and reliable.

[Jim Matthews]

Dogma plays an important role in training.

When starting out, you need *a method* that can be reproduced in your own shop.

Simple approaches are easy to remember.

[Tom M King]

I use single bevels, and flat backs, nothing else. My two helpers, that can almost read a tape measure when they work together, and anyone else, can get a super sharp edge. None of my plane irons, and few of my chisels, have seen a grinder in years.

[steven c newman]

+1

Same with me. a single bevel, and a flat back...back to work.

Too many bevels in such a small area....soon turns into just a single, dull, curve....

Even a Butter knife can be polished up nice and shiny....and still barely cut warm butter.....

[ken hatch]

Rob Cosman rightly credits David Charlesworth for the ruler trick. It’s essentially a time-saving step to polish just the edge of the back of the iron.

The rest of David Charlesworth’s technique is basically identical to the one Rob Cosman teaches engagingly on YouTube. The key difference is that David uses an Elipse-type guide, while Ron does it freehand.

In my view, the Charlesworth method is a bit more exacting, and therefore more repeatable. To get Rob Cosman’s results it helps if you’re Rob Cosman. In contrast, anyone can learn, copy, and master the Charlesworth method of a secondary hone on the 800 or 1000 stone and tertiary polish on the 8000 stone. Once you do, you discover that this method is also devised to save time.

Three bevels on the front, ruler trick on the back. $15 honing guide. Fast and reliable.

Bob,

I'm glad you have found a method that works for you.

None do I find fast and reliable with each there is a yes-but factor. Of course as with all things wood YMMV.

ken

[Clifford McGuire]

Rob Cosman rightly credits David Charlesworth for the ruler trick. It’s essentially a time-saving step to polish just the edge of the back of the iron.



Does this replace the need to flatten the back of the plane/chisel?

[Steve Mathews]

Does this replace the need to flatten the back of the plane/chisel?

Yes on the handplane blade. You should not use the ruler trick on the chisel. That has to be flat.

[Mike Allen1010]

I use single bevels, and flat backs, nothing else. My two helpers, that can almost read a tape measure when they work together, and anyone else, can get a super sharp edge. None of my plane irons, and few of my chisels, have seen a grinder in years.


Tom, I respect your experience and I'm interested in your single bevel techinque. Personally I've always use the primary (25°) and secondary bevel (30°) technique. Admittedly having to periodically re-grind the primary bevel isn't desirable and I can see how your approach might have advantages. The simplicity and repeatability of your approach are appealing. Anatomically and technically, maintaining a single bevel angle seems pretty easily doable freehand.

Conceptually I would think the drawback of this approach is you have to remove a lot more steel off – the entire bevel of the cutting iron versus the much smaller secondary bevel. If you don't mind me asking, what are the stones/grits you use and how long does it take you to achieve a sharp edge?

I hope my questions doesn't, cross as pushy. I'm sincerely interested in learning from your experience and appreciate you taking the time to share your insights.

All the best, Mike

[Tom M King]

I made a video a few years ago, using a kitchen sink in a house we were working on. I have a dedicated sharpening sink, but if there is a sink to use, and some counter space, I'll use that. In that video, I took a chisel that had been used for scraping paint off of brick, to super sharp, in a little over four minutes. That included talking, flattening every stone, and fumbling with the camera. Without having to think about talking, or fumbling with the camera, time would be about half that. For that one, it started with 400, then to 1,000, 3k, 6k, 10k, 13k, and finished on diamond lapping film on a granite surface plate.

There was much gnashing of teeth, and chest thumping about how stupid I was, and how much water I was wasting (I sharpen under running water, but here, water runs out of the ground every few hundred yards). There is no stone soaking, and with the synthetic Sigma stones, no need to bother to raise a slurry. A stone goes under a small stream of water, and goes to work. If I'm in the middle of a planing session, typically, I'll start at 6k, and go up.

These days, there are a few other stones between some of those. I'll use a grinder is there has been damage to an edge, but not for any other reason.

There is not much steel to remove. It only takes a half dozen strokes on each stone, and the stones are right there, in a rack behind the stone holder on the drainboard. The stone holder does not get tightened on each stone. It's set large enough that the largest stone goes right in.

I sharpen by feel, and never look, or feel for a burr. You just push a little harder on a full bevel, than a microbevel, but it's not something that I even think about. I don't think the total number of strokes varies much. With a guide, you're not really dropping the level of the whole bevel evenly. The cutting edge gets microscopically more taken off at it rotates down through the radius from the roller to the edge.

Time saved is not having to regrind, and I don't grind in the old houses I work on anyway, so that would require a trip outside.

The only sharpening I do are the plane irons that have cambers. I hire people that no one else will, and those guys do all the other sharpening.

I made jigs that are quick and easy to set the exact angle with, and use a guide. I had to cut the number of steps in the system to an absolute minimum, and eliminate any skill required.

I sharpened freehand for probably 30 years, after using a guide for maybe 10, before I went back to a guide, so the guys could do it. They're hopeless freehanded.

I'm not saying the system is best for everyone, or even anyone. It suits me just fine though. We probably hand plane more square feet of wood, and use sharp chisels for many more things than any hobbiest woodworker, and probably the vast majority of pros too. I don't do woodworking for a hobby. We work on 18th, and 19th Century museum houses, and match old work surfaces as closely as I can.

I have never used the ruler trick, and never will. It always seemed like something needed if you couldn't get the edge sharp without it.

[Tony Wilkins]

I am far from a sharpening expert but I think I have something to add here. I started with microbevels and the ruler trick because that was the first info I found when I started. Once you start down that road it’s hard to go back, especially since I did have a grinder*. If I wanted to move to a flat bevel or a flat back to a plane blade it would take a lot of work on a diamond plate. Just never wanted to do that.

Also, I spent a lot of money on premium tools (don’t have much else to spend on) and they almost universally came with a microbevels — can’t think of any off hand that didn’t. Even if I had wanted to flat bevel it, I would have had to address the microbevels that came on them.

*with more shop space I have finally ordered an 8” grinder.

[Bob Jones 5443]

Clifford, the ruler trick does NOT replace flattening the back of plane irons. You still need the last inch flat (maybe half-inch with premium irons), to remove machine marks, take out any belly or bow, and get to a little mirror finish. Then, the ruler trick allows you to only repolish the last mm or so. Eventually, though, when you regrind, you're going to need the back to be flat.

[Steve Mathews]

David Charlesworth will be making an appearance tomorrow (Saturday) during the first 30 minutes of Rob Cosman's Q & A Session on YouTube. I'm sure the topic of sharpening and his "ruler trick" will come up.

[steven c newman]

Makes one wonder....how many bevels are in the razor one shaves with in the morning has......

Question was more about "Why" 3-4 bevels, than "How"...wasn't it?

[Kevin Smira]

Edited** - didn’t realize this was posted last night...

Just in case anyone wants to know first hand, tune in tonight to Rob Cosman’s YouTube live at 6pm Eastern. David Charlesworth will be his special guest. He intends to talk about how the “ruler trick” was developed and the why behind it.

[lowell holmes]

My plane irons are hollow ground and honed on a diamond hone. You only hollow grind one time.

[ken hatch]

I am far from a sharpening expert but I think I have something to add here. I started with microbevels and the ruler trick because that was the first info I found when I started. Once you start down that road it’s hard to go back, especially since I did have a grinder*. If I wanted to move to a flat bevel or a flat back to a plane blade it would take a lot of work on a diamond plate. Just never wanted to do that.

Also, I spent a lot of money on premium tools (don’t have much else to spend on) and they almost universally came with a microbevels — can’t think of any off hand that didn’t. Even if I had wanted to flat bevel it, I would have had to address the microbevels that came on them.

*with more shop space I have finally ordered an 8” grinder.

Tony,

Having attended Texas Tech many years ago, I can understand :). I was once stopped while driving back to Lubbock because they thought I was bootlegging.

ken

[Jim Koepke]

Conceptually I would think the drawback of this approach is you have to remove a lot more steel off – the entire bevel of the cutting iron versus the much smaller secondary bevel.

The amount of steel removal is often stated as an advantage of using secondary (and multiple) bevels.

While the area of the surface worked is larger on a flat bevel, isn't more metal removed when the primary bevel needs to be reestablished when using secondary bevels?


Then, the ruler trick allows you to only repolish the last mm or so. Eventually, though, when you regrind, you're going to need the back to be flat.

Wouldn't this much of a bevel on the back of the blade cause problems with a chip breaker.

Then if regrinding requires a flat back isn't it making more work in the future to save a little time today?

What comes to mind is the desire for quicker blade sharpening may actually be leading to more time needed later when a blade needs its primary bevel reestablished or the back flattened.

During my work doing machine maintenance much of my time was spent cleaning up problems left by others taking short cuts to save a minute or two. It seems a lot of the 'tricks' to make blade maintenance quicker may be a false economy in the long run.

jtk

[ken hatch]

The amount of steel removal is often stated as an advantage of using secondary (and multiple) bevels.

While the area of the surface worked is larger on a flat bevel, isn't more metal removed when the primary bevel needs to be reestablished when using secondary bevels?



Wouldn't this much of a bevel on the back of the blade cause problems with a chip breaker.

Then if regrinding requires a flat back isn't it making more work in the future to save a little time today?

What comes to mind is the desire for quicker blade sharpening may actually be leading to more time needed later when a blade needs its primary bevel reestablished or the back flattened.

During my work doing machine maintenance much of my time was spent cleaning up problems left by others taking short cuts to save a minute or two. It seems a lot of the 'tricks' to make blade maintenance quicker may be a false economy in the long run.

jtk


Jim,

This is a quote from a recent email from Stan Covington about multiple bevels and the "ruler trick": "...It certainly makes the teacher selling classes and books and videos look like a genius (and make money), but it cripples their students from becoming truly proficient..." I couldn't agree more.

ken

[ken hatch]

Makes one wonder....how many bevels are in the razor one shaves with in the morning has......

Question was more about "Why" 3-4 bevels, than "How"...wasn't it?

Steven,

Nothing like cutting to the chase :D,

ken

[steven c newman]

Was starting to be just another "Sharpening Thread"....

[Jim Koepke]

Is there a standard as to how many angels can dance on a tertiary bevel before a blade needs to be reground or is it when the tertiary bevel fully overlaps the secondary?

These are the kinds of pondering that might keep me up at night if it weren't for being satisfied with a flat as possible bevel, as long as it cuts as well as possible or needed with my skills.

jtk

[Kevin Smira]

As for the ruler trick and causing issues, I have never experienced any. The small amount that you are polishing/sharpening/etc on the back will be eliminated once you go back to grind the primary again. So, when I sharpen, the Rob Cosman way, the primary bevel doesn’t get touched. You find the primary, lift up a little and polish just the leading edge. Then, on a finer grit stone, you make an even smaller bevel by lifting up just a bit higher than the first time. Once that secondary bevel gets “too wide”, you go back and regrind that secondary out. This in turn, eliminates the bevel on the back of the blade that you made with the ruler trick.

Just my two cents and the way I was taught by Rob. Not the only way to sharpen at all, just what I use.

[mike stenson]

Was starting to be just another "Sharpening Thread"....

You mean where everything is black and white, there can be nothing in the middle? Yep. Always happens here.

[Tony Wilkins]

You mean where everything is black and white, there can be nothing in the middle? Yep. Always happens here.

there can be only one (in voice of the Kurgan)

[steven c newman]

"My Sensei will beat your Sensei..as only mine follows the One True Path...Hahahah"

We have work to do....
437581
(iron still has the Factory Grind...can't have that, can we?)

[J. Greg Jones]

The purpose of sharpening anything by any method is to get a tool ready to do work. Rob Cosman is an extraordinary craftsman, and I don’t think he owns a ROS-the final tool to touch his work is his hand planes. Is his method of sharpening for everyone? Perhaps not, especially if one is producing period pieces and/or restoration work. But for those of us who do woodworking for a hobby, and are looking for creating the best quality work that we can... If you have a process that works for you, perfect, but unless one is already producing work with the same level of quality as he does, perhaps we should also respect his process and not mock it.

[Jim Koepke]

The purpose of sharpening anything by any method is to get a tool ready to do work.

One of my reasons for often advising folks to work with what works for you.

jtk

[ken hatch]

The purpose of sharpening anything by any method is to get a tool ready to do work. Rob Cosman is an extraordinary craftsman, and I don’t think he owns a ROS-the final tool to touch his work is his hand planes. Is his method of sharpening for everyone? Perhaps not, especially if one is producing period pieces and/or restoration work. But for those of us who do woodworking for a hobby, and are looking for creating the best quality work that we can... If you have a process that works for you, perfect, but unless one is already producing work with the same level of quality as he does, perhaps we should also respect his process and not mock it.

So much wrong it is hard to unpack. Yes he is a good craftsman but he is also a salesman selling tools, classes, and videos. I do not have to produce work at the same level as Cosman to recognize BS when I see and hear it. As a good friend put it, folks like Cosman, he is not the only one, advocate shortcuts not because they are better but are easy to teach and can help sell whatever they are selling. On the video in question there were several statements by Cosman that were wrong, I haven't the time or interest to go back and make notes but they are there and if you watch carefully you should be able to spot them as well. And no I do not have to respect his process and yes I can mock it where wrong.

ken

[J. Greg Jones]

So much wrong it is hard to unpack. Yes he is a good craftsman but he is also a salesman selling tools, classes, and videos. I do not have to produce work at the same level as Cosman to recognize BS when I see and hear it. As a good friend put it, folks like Cosman, he is not the only one, advocate shortcuts not because they are better but are easy to teach and can help sell whatever they are selling. On the video in question there were several statements by Cosman that were wrong, I haven't the time or interest to go back and make notes but they are there and if you watch carefully you should be able to spot them as well. And no I do not have to respect his process and yes I can mock it where wrong.

ken
Help me understand, if he gets better results than you with the methods that he uses, then how are his statements and his process wrong? What is it about your process that is superior if your results are, by your own admission, not as good as his? BS meter tripped here also.

[Jim Koepke]

Mike,

I watched the video. Cosman is a good instructor and if you follow what he is selling you will have sharp cutters. That said, I think there are better ways to get there and there were a couple or three times he made statements that were like fingernails on a blackboard to me.

ken


Inquiring minds want to know. Please elaborate.

For me it is where he is demonstrating the ruler trick. At around 15 minutes in he states it saves one the trouble of having to flatten the whole back. What is wrong with holding only the 1/4 - 1/2" from the edge flat on one side of the stone and polishing it without a ruler?

Wouldn't this be the same as the ruler trick without the ruler?

Also like fingernails to me is recommending removing the burr only on the finest stone. Maybe this is fine with a very light burr when one is only using two stones. A heavy burr can leave some nasty scratches on a fine stone.

Maybe for folks who really hate spending time sharpening all of the different tricks to speed up a process are a God send. For me sharpening is a pleasant few moments of listening to music and restoring the edge on a tool for working wood.

Even when working on a project for commission or to sell, sharpening is not a big consumer of my time.

jtk

[Jim Koepke]

Help me understand, if he gets better results than you with the methods that he uses, then how are his statements and his process wrong? What is it about your process that is superior if your results are, by your own admission, not as good as his? BS meter tripped here also.

Do you feel the final result is all due to a sharpening method?

In the video he is showing off a fine shaving which he claims is about a half a thousandth of an inch. My sharpening method has been able to produce a shaving of a quarter of a thousandth of an inch:

437682

This only means my sharpening process is able to create a keen edge. It in no way elevates me to a better woodworker than anyone else.

jtk

[James Pallas]

I’ve been around this work for a while. The ruler “trick” has been around longer than I am old. Maybe not with a ruler but similar things. When I learned to sharpen it was very common for a craftsman to take the last stroke across the edge of his carborundum stone. Some raised the back of the iron a small amount “ruler trick” some kept it flat but because the stone was dished a bit there was a sharp edge on the stone. I was taught to raise the handle a bit for the bevel side of the chisel for the last few strokes. Some used a strop after, others used their hand (most were leathery). I never saw a plane iron with the back shiny more than an inch or so. The same with chisels. Don’t know how they ever accomplished a thing with those dull tools😀. Nothing new under the sun, just reworded some. Just how many plane irons and chisels have you found used with backs completely flattened?

[J. Greg Jones]

For me it is where he is demonstrating the ruler trick. At around 15 minutes in he states it saves one the trouble of having to flatten the whole back. What is wrong with holding only the 1/4 - 1/2" from the edge flat on one side of the stone and polishing it without a ruler?

Wouldn't this be the same as the ruler trick without the ruler?
Seems like that could present a challenge as the blade wears. If you are moving it back ¼” on each sharpening, eventually there will be a bump to deal with. The ruler trick is so minuscule, less than a 1* bevel on the blade, and it maintains that 1* bevel with each sharpening.


Also like fingernails to me is recommending removing the burr only on the finest stone. Maybe this is fine with a very light burr when one is only using two stones. A heavy burr can leave some nasty scratches on a fine stone.
He is only using two stones, and with the ruler when the burr is removed, the edge of the blade is off the stone. The burr peels away as soon as it hits the edge of the stone.

[J. Greg Jones]

Do you feel the final result is all due to a sharpening method?
I believe the final result is because he is an excellent craftsman, and part of that is due to his willingness to explore different methods and apply the results to his process. Certainly there are other parts of his process that people are calling out in this thread, such as his process of dealing with tear-out by closing the mouth of the plane rather than adjusting the cap iron. The cap iron the prevalent means to deal with that problem today, but there is no question that he gets excellent results adjusting the frog.

Again, I’m not saying the Cosman way is the right way or the only way, but I do believe he has proven in his videos that his methods produce excellent results. Why do people feel it necessary to give him crap for that, just because it’s not the method that they use?

[Bob Jones 5443]

So, to each his own then, right?

[Jim Koepke]

I’ve been around this work for a while. The ruler “trick” has been around longer than I am old. Maybe not with a ruler but similar things. When I learned to sharpen it was very common for a craftsman to take the last stroke across the edge of his carborundum stone. Some raised the back of the iron a small amount “ruler trick” some kept it flat but because the stone was dished a bit there was a sharp edge on the stone. I was taught to raise the handle a bit for the bevel side of the chisel for the last few strokes. Some used a strop after, others used their hand (most were leathery). I never saw a plane iron with the back shiny more than an inch or so. The same with chisels. Don’t know how they ever accomplished a thing with those dull tools��. Nothing new under the sun, just reworded some. Just how many plane irons and chisels have you found used with backs completely flattened?

Many of the used planes that have passed through my shop came with bevels on the back. Many came with blades straight off a grinder on both sides. Some planes came with little ever done to the blade, especially the back. It seems for many the factory grind on the back of the blade was fine.

Blade sharpening threads often bring back memories of General Shop class back in 1963. The rough work was done with a plane and then we would use sandpaper to achieve a smooth surface. Maybe in the Wood Shop class they got better use from hand planes. The Industrial Arts wasn't my major.


Seems like that could present a challenge as the blade wears. If you are moving it back ¼” on each sharpening, eventually there will be a bump to deal with. The ruler trick is so minuscule, less than a 1* bevel on the blade, and it maintains that 1* bevel with each sharpening.


He is only using two stones, and with the ruler when the burr is removed, the edge of the blade is off the stone. The burr peels away as soon as it hits the edge of the stone.

Once the back has been worked the only time it is on the stone is to remove the burr. That is done by pulling the length of the blade across the stone. Any hypothetical bump would liley be in the low ten thousandths of an inch of that much.


I believe the final result is because he is an excellent craftsman, and part of that is due to his willingness to explore different methods and apply the results to his process. Certainly there are other parts of his process that people are calling out in this thread, such as his process of dealing with tear-out by closing the mouth of the plane rather than adjusting the cap iron. The cap iron the prevalent means to deal with that problem today, but there is no question that he gets excellent results adjusting the frog.

Again, I’m not saying the Cosman way is the right way or the only way, but I do believe he has proven in his videos that his methods produce excellent results. Why do people feel it necessary to give him crap for that, just because it’s not the method that they use?

My recollection of Rob Cosman's history is that as a woodworker he couldn't earn a living and decided to enter teaching woodworking. He has also been involved in marketing products for others and himself.

Maybe my interaction with Rob when he was promoting his blade and video with him claiming people could turn an old Stanley/Bailey plane into a Lie-Nielsen simply by purchasing his blades left me a little cold to his ways.

My intent is not "give him crap." My intent is to keep it simple.

More than once a person has posted on this site (and others) about a problem with getting a plane to work. It is often someone new who after researching everything has not only added a secondary bevel but a back bevel and cambered the blade and now they want to know, "what is wrong?"

With good steel there is nothing wrong with a single flat bevel within a range of angles depending on the steel and the work it will be doing. The same goes for a hollow grind. In fact a hollow grind is wonderful for freehanding a single bevel. A hollow grind would make life easier for me. Not enough easier for me to bother buying an electric grinder to produce a hollow grind on my tools.

jtk

[J. Greg Jones]

So, to each his own then, right?
Alas, it would appear not.

[Erich Weidner]

there can be only one (in voice of the Kurgan)

Well until Highlander II (Sorry couldn't resist). ;)

[Erich Weidner]

Also like fingernails to me is recommending removing the burr only on the finest stone. Maybe this is fine with a very light burr when one is only using two stones. A heavy burr can leave some nasty scratches on a fine stone.
jtk

Hi Jim,
This comment made me take notice. Can you elaborate what you are doing/mean by this? I feel like I might be missing something important. :) (Since this thread has gotten a little "edgy" I want to point out there is no sarcasm here, genuine question).

I never tried the ruler trick/back bevel. I sharpen by first (new to me blade) flattening/polishing 2-3" of the back from the edge of the blade.
When sharpening the bevel, I progress up through the grits, feeling for a wire edge before progressing to next grit. (I use forward and back strokes). I can't really feel a wire edge after I get up to 6000 or so. But I can see the polish improve. My last grit is 10,000 water stone. After I get the polish from the stone on my micro bevel I pull the iron out of the honing guide and do 3-6 strokes flat on the back only keeping 2-3" on the stone. This last step I'm doing to remove the wire edge. (I'm just following a method that I read).

Are you doing something different between changing grits?

[steven c newman]

Sometimes, you can get a wire edge at EACH stone....and it is usually a good idea not to bring that wire edge to the next stone.

[Tony Wilkins]

Well until Highlander II (Sorry couldn't resist). ;)
We shan’t speak of that abomination!

[ken hatch]

Sometimes, you can get a wire edge at EACH stone....and it is usually a good idea not to bring that wire edge to the next stone.

Steven,

How true.

Learning to sharpen free hand is not that difficult but it does take a little time on the stones to develop a feel for what is happening. That time is well spent, much more so than that spent on all the jigs, gadgets, and short cuts folks are selling.

ken

[Jim Koepke]

Hi Jim,
This comment made me take notice. Can you elaborate what you are doing/mean by this? I feel like I might be missing something important. :) (Since this thread has gotten a little "edgy" I want to point out there is no sarcasm here, genuine question).

I never tried the ruler trick/back bevel. I sharpen by first (new to me blade) flattening/polishing 2-3" of the back from the edge of the blade.
When sharpening the bevel, I progress up through the grits, feeling for a wire edge before progressing to next grit. (I use forward and back strokes). I can't really feel a wire edge after I get up to 6000 or so. But I can see the polish improve. My last grit is 10,000 water stone. After I get the polish from the stone on my micro bevel I pull the iron out of the honing guide and do 3-6 strokes flat on the back only keeping 2-3" on the stone. This last step I'm doing to remove the wire edge. (I'm just following a method that I read).

Are you doing something different between changing grits?


Sometimes, you can get a wire edge at EACH stone....and it is usually a good idea not to bring that wire edge to the next stone.


Steven,

How true.

Learning to sharpen free hand is not that difficult but it does take a little time on the stones to develop a feel for what is happening. That time is well spent, much more so than that spent on all the jigs, gadgets, and short cuts folks are selling.

ken

Erich, Steven and Ken pretty much explain it. My only addition is when using more than a couple of stones or on a blade in need of a lot of honing due to a nick or two a burr can become rather large. It is still attached to the bevel. In my early days of sharpening this was explained as a bit of metal that was being worked one way then the other at the edge to break off or be diminished by pulling the blade across the stone first on one side then the other until the burr or wire edge wore off.

Not every piece of steel acts the same way. A few of my chisels have a very thin metal foil that trails the edge as it is being worked with pull strokes back to bevel and back again.

With the fine stones it is usually possible to feel the burr against a fingernail. Most of the time the edge of my nail being run on the back of the blade at the edge can feel a light roughness.

My oilstones are not as susceptible to scratching as are my water stones.

jtk

[Christopher L Everett]

If you can afford Lie Nielsen and Veritas tools, you can probably afford a Tormek to regrind your primary bevel and a fleet of fancy water stones.

Shouldn’t need more than a couple of oil stones and a strop, if you keep to pre WWII planes and chisels made with O1 steel. An extra coarse diamond plate would be nice.

[Robert Hazelwood]

I'm confused as to what the gripe is about secondary bevels. They are extremely common not only in woodworking tools, but on almost every knife ever made. Reducing the area to be honed makes a lot of sense.

It really seems like the gripe is more about gadgetry and fussiness, especially setting a honing guide two or three times during a sharpening. Which I agree with, but there's no need for that. You can freehand a tiny secondary bevel on a chisel or whatever, just like you freehand a pocket knife. In fact the chisel is much easier since the edge is short and straight.

On most of my tools I grind a flat 20 degree primary and then freehand hone at whatever angle I need. On the finish stone I'll raise a couple degrees as I'm chasing the burr off- basically a tertiary bevel. On the first honing after grinding the secondary bevel will be tiny, maybe 1/64". At this stage sharpening is lightning fast and its very easy to get extreme sharpness. If I let the bevel grow to 1/16" wide then sharpening is noticeably slower and it's a little more difficult to chase the last bit of sharpness. Full flat bevel would be like honing something 1/8" wide or more. If there's much wear or any damage to remove, doesn't sound like fun. I understand it can be done but can't see what the benefit is, provided you have a means of grinding the primary bevel.

I understand that on some tools a flat bevel is important to the way it's used, like mortise chisels. So I do sharpen those on the full bevel. I also sharpen my Japanese tools with a flat bevel, because they look cool that way (and I am sketchy about grinding them). Being laminated makes them pretty easy to deal with even on Arkansas stones. Though honestly they require more skill to sharpen that way than if I were to grind a primary and hone them like the rest of my tools, due to the way you have to constantly bias the pressure towards the hard steel to avoid laying the bevel back with each sharpening.


Re: the ruler trick, never done it for some reason but it always seemed to me like a good way to deal with the wear bevel on plane irons. It can take quite a bit of honing on the bevel side to completely remove it, and if you don't get completely remove it it's hard to truly get rid of the burr.

[Jim Koepke]

If you can afford Lie Nielsen and Veritas tools, you can probably afford a Tormek to regrind your primary bevel and a fleet of fancy water stones.
[edited]


Only a few of my tools are Lie Nielsen or Veritas. When first starting in woodworking buying a plane at a yard sale or flea market was something that required a commitment to saving up some money.

The other side of this is a lot of my tools that need sharpening are non-woodworking tools. They may not play well with a Tormek or other grinder.



I'm confused as to what the gripe is about secondary bevels. They are extremely common not only in woodworking tools, but on almost every knife ever made. Reducing the area to be honed makes a lot of sense.

It really seems like the gripe is more about gadgetry and fussiness, especially setting a honing guide two or three times during a sharpening. Which I agree with, but there's no need for that. You can freehand a tiny secondary bevel on a chisel or whatever, just like you freehand a pocket knife. In fact the chisel is much easier since the edge is short and straight.

My gripe is so many people seems to be insisting there is something wrong with those of us who like the simplicity of a hollow grind or flat bevel.



On most of my tools I grind a flat 20 degree primary and then freehand hone at whatever angle I need. On the finish stone I'll raise a couple degrees as I'm chasing the burr off- basically a tertiary bevel. On the first honing after grinding the secondary bevel will be tiny, maybe 1/64". At this stage sharpening is lightning fast and its very easy to get extreme sharpness. If I let the bevel grow to 1/16" wide then sharpening is noticeably slower and it's a little more difficult to chase the last bit of sharpness. Full flat bevel would be like honing something 1/8" wide or more. If there's much wear or any damage to remove, doesn't sound like fun. I understand it can be done but can't see what the benefit is, provided you have a means of grinding the primary bevel.

For a few years in my early days of woodworking there wasn't a means of grinding a primary bevel available to me.

Grinding metal off of my blades doesn't appeal to me. It takes more time and removes more metal than desired.

Usually my blades are sharpened well before there is much wear damage. This was my initial gripe with Hock Blades. They wear smoothly without visible degradation to the shavings.

The main indicator of my Hock O1 blades wearing is the inability to take super thin shavings. Until this was figured out they would have more of a wear bevel than most of my other blades.

Sharpening before acquiring a significant wear bevel saves time in the long run.



I understand that on some tools a flat bevel is important to the way it's used, like mortise chisels. So I do sharpen those on the full bevel. I also sharpen my Japanese tools with a flat bevel, because they look cool that way (and I am sketchy about grinding them). Being laminated makes them pretty easy to deal with even on Arkansas stones. Though honestly they require more skill to sharpen that way than if I were to grind a primary and hone them like the rest of my tools, due to the way you have to constantly bias the pressure towards the hard steel to avoid laying the bevel back with each sharpening.

That is funny about mortise chisels, some suggest they are one of the places where a secondary or a convex bevel can be advantageous.
(Oooh Nooo Mister Bill here comes another sharpening thread! :eek:)

Stanley proudly claimed their plane blades, being laminated, made them easier to sharpen.


Re: the ruler trick, never done it for some reason but it always seemed to me like a good way to deal with the wear bevel on plane irons. It can take quite a bit of honing on the bevel side to completely remove it, and if you don't get completely remove it it's hard to truly get rid of the burr.

Except when first using my Hock blades a major wear bevel hasn't been a problem. Rob Cosman uses the ruler trick on a blade fresh out of the package. There wasn't likely a wear bevel to be removed on that blade.

jtk

[Andrew Pitonyak]

I used the ruler trick on a plane blade from an otherwise decent plane made in India. The back was horrible and one corner was really out of wack. I needed to remove a bunch of metal to fix that problem, but the ruler trick just made it work. Took a while for me to e willing to do it, but when I finally decided to give it a try, I was very grateful at how well it worked.

[Tony Wilkins]

To me, that’s the time when it’s most beneficial. I’m still trying to decide personally if it worth it on the super prepared blades from “premium” new makers - especially ones I’ve already done it to.

[mike stenson]

We shan’t speak of that abomination!
I watched that in a theatre with a friend of mine. We were literally the only people in the theatre, we were in Europe so beer was available.. it was the most fun time I've ever had at a movie.

[harold schmonz]

I watched that in a theatre with a friend of mine. We were literally the only people in the theatre, we were in Europe so beer was available.. it was the most fun time I've ever had at a movie.


They didn't have drive-in movie theaters when you were young?:)

[mike stenson]

They didn't have drive-in movie theaters when you were young?:)

Not very common in Europe ;)

[steven c newman]

Hmmm..go for it...
437750
Made by Sargent Co. never been sharpened since it was sold....

[Erich Weidner]

Erich, Steven and Ken pretty much explain it.

Actually, I'm still not following. How are your removing the wire edge before progressing to the next grit?
I mean, what technique? I have been only doing this as a final step after working on the 10,000 grit then I pull the blade from the sharpening jig and rub the flat back for 6 or so strokes on the 10,000 grit waterstone.

[ken hatch]

Actually, I'm still not following. How are your removing the wire edge before progressing to the next grit?
I mean, what technique? I have been only doing this as a final step after working on the 10,000 grit then I pull the blade from the sharpening jig and rub the flat back for 6 or so strokes on the 10,000 grit waterstone.


Erich,

Through a process known as "chasing the burr". When you are finished with a stone the last process is to chase the burr by pulling the cutter back side then bevel side, repeating as needed until the burr is removed. It is kinda hard to do with the cutter attached to a jig. Jigs are pretty limiting, about the only good use of one is if your freehand skills are not that good, you do not have a grinder and you need to reestablish the bevel. It takes a little time and some effort but one of the best things you can do to improve your wood working is learning how to sharpen free hand.

ken

[Erich Weidner]

...the last process is to chase the burr by pulling the cutter back side then bevel side,

Can you explain in more detail? The iron is in what orientation? Bevel flat on stone, then back flat? Or...?


It takes a little time and some effort but one of the best things you can do to improve your wood working is learning how to sharpen free hand.


I've picked up that you are an advocate of free-handing. I'll admit it just feels too imprecise for me. I do understand that this is what wood workers did for ages. Just don't see how the edge can be as precise. I do free hand sharpen my kitchen knives, and they cut just fine. But I feel like I'm not able to keep a consistent enough angle moving up grits.

[ken hatch]

Can you explain in more detail? The iron is in what orientation? Bevel flat on stone, then back flat? Or...?



I've picked up that you are an advocate of free-handing. I'll admit it just feels too imprecise for me. I do understand that this is what wood workers did for ages. Just don't see how the edge can be as precise. I do free hand sharpen my kitchen knives, and they cut just fine. But I feel like I'm not able to keep a consistent enough angle moving up grits.

Erich,

Yes, just as if you were working the back and the bevel only now you are using light pressure and only pulling the iron.

Free hand sharpening is a matter of a grip that lets you keep even pressure on the bevel so the stone is cutting the bevel evenly. When you start learning, a hollow grind on a thick iron can help you get the feel.

ken

[David Bassett]

Can you explain in more detail? The iron is in what orientation? Bevel flat on stone, then back flat? ....

Yes. Bevel flat, back flat. Rinse, repeat. Repeat. Repeat, etc.... There are nuances. (And variations.) Typically, less pressure each iteration. (One variation is edge leading strokes, with extremely light pressure.) Basically you don't want to carry a large burr forward to a stone that won't deal with it well. (Many argue a small burr is OK. I've probably done it both ways, 'cuz I'm not that good at this! :) )



... I've picked up that you are an advocate of free-handing. I'll admit it just feels too imprecise for me. I do understand that this is what wood workers did for ages. Just don't see how the edge can be as precise. I do free hand sharpen my kitchen knives, and they cut just fine. But I feel like I'm not able to keep a consistent enough angle moving up grits.

For me the key is a jig limits degrees of freedom. Cutting edges come in all forms. What works for chisels might not work for a cambered plane iron. Something that "rocks" to do the cambered iron can screw up the chisel. Then you get to a carving gouge or hook knife (or most kitchen knives) where the curves are more complex. It's a tradeoff. It seems to me you're either mastering a difficult task (I'm told it easy, but...) or you are chasing an increasing list of jigs. Or doing some of both. No one way is wrong, only not best for you. Or for me.

[Jim Koepke]

Actually, I'm still not following. How are your removing the wire edge before progressing to the next grit?

When a burr has been created across the full width of a blade, The back of the blade is pressed lightly across the stone and pulled. Depending on the size of the burr or wire edge it will either be worn away by the stone or more likely have some wear and some bending to the bevel side of the blade. For the second stroke the blade is turned over, set on the bevel and then pulled across the stone.

This is repeated until no burr (wire edge) can be detected on either the bevel or the back of the blade.

For me, this is mostly done on the stone that created the burr in the first place. With softer water stones a heavy burr from a coarse stone my inflict scratches on a finer stone. This so far hasn't been a problem with oilstones.

Note: Across the short side of the stone instead of the length.

Here is something to possibly help those who want to try to learn freehand sharpening. If you have a video camera set it up to record your sharpening from the side. You will see if you are keeping your blade at a constant angle or not. This should help to detect and correct any unwanted variations in honing angles..

jtk

[Andrew Pitonyak]

Yes, just as if you were working the back and the bevel only now you are using light pressure and only pulling the iron.

Free hand sharpening is a matter of a grip that lets you keep even pressure on the bevel so the stone is cutting the bevel evenly. When you start learning, a hollow grind on a thick iron can help you get the feel.

When Ken described this to me, it dramatically improved my results with my Arkansas stones. It also helped me with my water stones, but it was more obvious with the Arkansas stones.

I just keep switching sides and going lighter and lighter. I had not previously done that on any stone.

[Tom M King]

Actually, I'm still not following. How are your removing the wire edge before progressing to the next grit?
I mean, what technique? I have been only doing this as a final step after working on the 10,000 grit then I pull the blade from the sharpening jig and rub the flat back for 6 or so strokes on the 10,000 grit waterstone.

You don't have to take it out of the jig. Lay the back of the blade flat on the stone, with the jig hanging off to the side. You can even set the stone up on edge.

[Robert Hazelwood]

I've picked up that you are an advocate of free-handing. I'll admit it just feels too imprecise for me. I do understand that this is what wood workers did for ages. Just don't see how the edge can be as precise. I do free hand sharpen my kitchen knives, and they cut just fine. But I feel like I'm not able to keep a consistent enough angle moving up grits.

If you can sharpen kitchen knives successfully then chisels and plane irons are cake. You don't have to draw a long edge across the stone or follow any curve- just hold it in one position and rub. And sure, the jig is more precise technically, but that isn't adding anything in terms of sharpness.

[lowell holmes]

Like I said earlier, my plane irons are hollow ground, but I sharpen on a diamond hone and will lift the iron to put a micro bevel on it and it works.
When the iron need it, I will simply re-hone the bevel.

[steven c newman]

Hmmm..go for it...
437750
Made by Sargent Co. never been sharpened since it was sold....


And the "after"..
438663
Chipbreaker was tuned up, and polished, along with making the fit gap-free...test drive?
438664
25 degree, flat bevel, flat back, chipbreaker set 1mm back from the edge of the iron....not too bad, for a Jack plane?

[Bob Jones 5443]

Wouldn't this much of a bevel [I (Bob) had said a millimeter] on the back of the blade cause problems with a chip breaker.

Then if regrinding requires a flat back isn't it making more work in the future to save a little time today?


jtk

Jim, I meant to respond to this a couple of weeks ago. I had tossed off that the amount of the back affected by the ruler trick is "about a millimeter." It's actually about half of that. But your question about the chipbreaker is important. A chipbreaker usually has a bend of about 1º or even more, to allow its edge to contact the iron's back firmly. The angle created by the ruler trick is about 0.5º, so the chipbreaker can make contact regardless of how close to edge it's placed. does it contact the true flat area or the little ruler trick sliver? If the back is shiny flat to begin with, it won't matter. Either way, the ruler trick is an ingenious notion, designed to save time.

Then you asked if periodic regrinding makes more back-flattening work. I don't think it does. The other question that was raised here is whether the ruler trick takes away the need to flatten the back. It doesn't, exactly because it only affects such a thin sliver of the back. So we want a good half-inch of mirror-flat to work with, to last through many resharpenings and even regrindings.

But that half-inch regenerates itself as you go. Every time you finish honing, you rework the back to take off the wire edge, using the ruler trick over the 8000 stone, maybe fifty short strokes, to reestablish the little ruler trick sliver as the last step. All this takes seconds to do and minutes to write down. The reestablishd sliver makes contact with the mirror-flat back you established when you first bought the iron.

When you need to regrind because the secondary (800 grit) bevel is getting wider than you want, it's true you'll grind away a bit on the half-inch of flat back, but it will take many regrindings to run out of this surface. So yes, eventually you will need to reflatten the last half-inch or inch on your well-used iron (mirror-polish off the machining marks). But that was always going to happen if you use an iron so much that you grind it down significantly. It's an argument in favor of polishing an entire inch in the first place.