Sharpening: what am I doing wrong

[Dan Gaylin]

Hi all,

I have become really discouraged with my latest attempts at sharpening, and would appreciate your advice.

I have a full set of diasharp diamond sharpening plates (extra-extra coarse to extra fine) and then float glass with 3M PSA lapping films from 5 microns to .3 microns. I use the Lee Valley Vertias MK2 sharpening jig/guide. Yesterday I tried to sharpen two plane blades, one for my Lee Valley low angle block plane, and one for my Number 4 Lie Nielsen. The Lie Nielsen sort of worked: it took me forever, but I eventually got an edge that would produce thin shavings in both hardwood and softwood. But it was not scary sharp. Couldn't make it cut through a sheet of paper like everyone does in the videos. Sort of did, but sort of tore the paper.

The Lee Valley blade was less successful: what I kept getting was an even scratch pattern for about 2/3rds of the height of the bevel, but the bottom third seemed to have a slightly different angle (even though I never set this blade up with a microbevel), and wasn't getting honed. I tried for a very long time on the extra-extra course plate, and no luck. I even tried 60 grit sandpaper, and same result. I am being very careful to try to keep even pressure on the blade, but maybe there is some trick to it that I am missing.

I am almost positive I am using the jig properly. I did notice that to get the even scratch pattern across the full height of bevel on the Lie Nielsen blade, I had to back the blade off a bit from the stop on the angle setter of the Veritas Mk2. Which means, I believe, that in effect, instead of using a 25 degree angle, I ended up with something closer to 27.5 degrees. I tried the same thing with the Lee Valley blade but it did not work. Maybe I am having trouble with it and I just have to work it longer because it is made with their harder grade of steel (PMV-11)? But it is taking forever with what seems like very minimal progress on the extra-extra course stone.

As a general question, how long does it take using hand sharpening methods for someone skilled at this to get a dull (but not uselessly so) but undamaged blade back to sharp?

Thanks for any advice/suggestions.

-dan

[Jason Buresh]

How were your results on wood? Did you have a surface ready for finish?

Thickness of shavings and being able to cut paper don't mean squat if you leave a bad surface on wood.

I sharpen freehand, and I have a double sided India stone and a leather strip with compound and this is all I need to get satisfactory results on pine, mahogany, and maple that I normally work.

If you enjoy sharpening, all the more power to you. There are guys that chase a perfect edge and there is nothing wrong with that. But I truly believe it's not 100% necessary to work wood. Guys like Paul sellers, Chris Schoenberg, and James Wright I have all all seen Sharpen free hand, and they build some amazing things.

It seems there are two camps in the sharpening world. Those who use jigs and fancy equipment to get a surgically sharp edge that will last, and those that sharpen free hand and do it fast and often, sacrificing edge retention for speed in resharpening.

And please don't take this as me saying you have been doing it wrong, but if you are judging your edge based on ability to cut paper and the thickness of shaving, maybe you try grading your edge on the surface it leaves on wood. That's what the tool is intended to do! It's a hand plane, not a scissors.

Best regards.

[Warren Mickley]

It takes me 85 seconds to sharpen a plane iron. I have been doing this a long time.

I have never used sandpaper, diamond stones, jigs, grinders, secondary bevels, micro bevels, back bevels or ruler tricks.

I think what you have been doing is sharpening the bevel at a shallower angle than it was sharpened before, so that your sharpening never reaches the edge. I would sharpen at 30 degrees and make sure the scratch pattern goes all the way to the edge. You will feel a burr on the back side when you have sharpened to the edge with your coarse stone. Then you can use finer stones to refine and polish the edge.

[Luke Dupont]

It can take a very long time to regrind the bevel on a plane iron, especially a thick one made of high end steel.

I agree with Warren. Learn to sharpen free hand, and start simple.

A crystolon stone is fast cutting and will quickly allow you to fix / set the bevel. Work on geometry first before you think about polishing the edge. Just pick an angle somewhere around 30, and be careful not to exceed that angle. Then grind away until you have that angle the whole way along the edge. Diamond stones can be a tad slow for this. Practice will give you an extremely steady hand and a sense for angle.

Next two stones I would go to are an India, and a Hard Arkansas. This is where you can hone the blade and flatten the back. First get the back dead flat, and then proceed to polish both the bevel and the back. Aim to get a burr first, and then work back and forth between the bevel and the back to remove the burr. When you have that down, congratulations, you can sharpen anything!

If you want to make finishing easier, instead of a hard arkansas you can go to a leather strop loaded with green stropping compound. It will take a lot of stropping (say, 40-50 strokes) to get the scratches from the India out without an Arkansas (Soft or "Hard" but not true hard), but you can do it. This will conform to the shape of the bevel and any bad geometry you have, and will still leave you with a polished edge, whereas a stone, especially a hard stone, will not, making it a little more difficult to get that final sharp edge when you're just starting out and haven't taken the time to really establish good, dead-flat (ie, on the back) geometry first. Your bevel can be concave, convex, or any wonky shape you like, but you must be able to reliably hit the entire edge evenly on the stone in order to get a truly sharp edge.

Sharpening a tool without proper geometry can be a perplexing thing. It'll look like it's polished all the way down to the edge sometimes even, and it will seem sorta kinda sharp, but off. That's a sign that something is off, and you're not actually making good contact with the stone all the way along the edge, on one surface or the other or both. Go back to your India stone and sort it out (and check the stone for flat too maybe, but they tend to stay flat for a good long while). Be patient and insist on getting that geometry fixed nomatter how long it takes. I've had to spend a very long time in some cases, such as badly made or abused / damaged / very badly sharpened tools, and even some tools that came straight from the factory.

I find guides can be finicky, and you still need to know how to sharpen and troubleshoot problems like this, so better just to learn to free hand from the start and develop sensitivity / tactile feedback and muscle memory, IMO. Both of those things do wonders, whereas you're kind of just flying blind without them.

[Tyler Bancroft]

I expect Warren has the right of it. If you're going to use the Veritas guide, you also want to make sure that the entire blade edge is seating evenly on the stone. That guide is not great for it (in my experience – I know many people like it), and I no longer use mine very much because I find it's too finicky to get it to sharpen evenly across the edge.

Also, there is zero reason to start sharpening a dull edge on anything coarser than a DMT fine unless it's damaged. I have a DMT coarse that I only use when I need to repair or restore a bevel. I recently bought an extra-coarse to use in lieu of a grinder. I do most of my sharpening freehand on DMT plates and go fine, extra-fine, and (sometimes) extra-extra-fine. That's all. Takes a couple of minutes. I don't think there's much of a reason for lapping film and float glass. You'll lose that extra tiny bit of sharpness after the first few cuts anyway.

[Andrew Seemann]

I don't do hand sharpening with an angle guide (it isn't compatible with my patience level), but here are some general guidelines. It sounds like you are having an issue with getting the guide to cut consistency across the grits. It isn't an issue of whether the angle is set at 25 vs 27.5 degrees, that won't really have a noticeable effect on your edge (unless you have a steel like A2 that needs a steeper angle). Whether you can cut paper or not doesn't matter; it's how it works on wood that matters. I have no idea whether I can shave with my plane blades or cut paper with them, and I don't really care either way.

For now, don't worry about lapping with compound, just get that angle guide figured out. Do one grit and get it nice and even. I'm not a big fan of the "progressing through the grits" thing. The risk of doing individual grits and trying to do the whole blade is that if you don't have the angle exactly right, you can end up rounding over the bevel slightly, which will result in an edge that cuts poorly or not at all. After getting the primary angle set, bump up the angle a degree or two and put a slight secondary bevel on it with your finest grit. Try that and see how it cuts. If you get that to work consistently well, you can try lapping. That may take a while to get used to. If you don't have the right angle when you lap, you will actually dull the edge, not sharpen it.

Myself I do a primary bevel (with a Tormek, but again it's a patience thing) and put a secondary bevel on with a stone free hand and then hit the edge on a the lapping wheel on the Tormek. There are others that insist there is no need for a secondary bevel and successfully go through all the grits and produce beautiful looking edges. They have more skill (and patience) than me. That said, I haven't been held back by my cutting edges; they work for me. The fact is I hate sharpening and just want to get back to work as fast and efficiently as possible:)

Adding to what Warren said, after I get a blade set up for the first time, I maybe spend 40 seconds touching it up: about 20-30 on the stone redoing the secondary bevel, and maybe 10 seconds on the lapping wheel. Any longer and you are just wasting time and steel. A pro like Warren can probably do the whole blade start to finish in a minute and a half by hand, mortals like me use grinders for the hard part:)

My other recommendation is to find some one who knows how to sharpen, and have them show you in person. Most people are flattered if you ask them (it makes us feel like we actually know something valuable and that someone wants to learn it). Seeing what happens live and being able to ask questions makes a world of difference.

[Sam Goldsmith]

If you're only ending up with around 27 degrees, that may be why its seeming to take so long. Lie Nielsen blades come factory ground at 25 degree bevel (real sharp when you get them) and the back of the iron needs no work. If you sharpen at close to the primary bevel angle, you end up having to "grind" that whole 5/8" or whatever it is every time to get that burr on the back. Upping it to say 30 degrees usually means less than a dozen or so passes and you'll feel a burr on the back of the iron, since you're only now having 1/8" or so at the very end, depending on how many times you've sharpened. This creates the micro-bevel or secondary bevel that you do want for easy sharpening.

Another thing you may be experiencing, is from using an extra coarse stone. If you use an extra coarse stone or paper, you'll get that scratching you see, and the coarser the stone the deeper those scratches are. You have to keep working at the next grit to get those out or you won't get the polished edge that equals sharp, just like sandpaper, 200 grit sandpaper won't get out the marks from 80 grit If you don't need the coarse stones, I would skip them. I use water stones, but only an 800 and a 2000 (I think). 800 is like a medium, medium fine, plenty enough to create the burr and then a few laps on the higher stone I've polished off the roughness from the 800. I have extra coarse stones but those are for re grinding that primary 25 degree bevel after a lot of sharpening, or fixing an iron I've damaged (but I have a hand crank grinding wheel I use now). One last thing on coarse, extra coarse, and depending on who you're asking, after some grinding, the grit in the stone is "bottoming out" in the scratches in the iron, and you'll have to switch between grits to work out some of those deeper scratches to get any continued progress.

I didn't see you mention it, but just make sure when you get the polished edge you want, you have to turn your attention to the back of the iron and remove that burr since sharp is really just two polished edges meeting. That angle you make them meet at is what says how "sharp" it feels, and how long the blade lasts.

-Sam

[Luke Dupont]

Also, there is zero reason to start sharpening a dull edge on anything coarser than a DMT fine unless it's damaged.

Or if the geometry is off. I highly recommend beginners learn on the coarsest flattest stone they can find (which stays flat) because they can more quickly establish proper geometry (which often is off from the factory even) or fix mistakes that they made.

Once you can get a super coarse but sharp edge on such a stone, you can go on to finer stones, and then go primarily to finer stones when your tool is dull but not damaged, as you suggest. But for a beginner, or a new tool, I think a quick cutting, coarse stone is a good place to spend considerable time and sort out the geometry.

I say all this because when I first started sharpening, I started with too fine a stone, which everyone said was a good all around stone (somewhere around 1000-1200 grit if I recall). Way too fine to establish the geometry I needed on new, factory ground tools that had never touched a stone before. Took me forever and I thought I was doing everything wrong until, after hours of just pure determination, I finally got it. That process would have been much easier if I'd started on something around 300-400 grit at least, if not coarser even.

[Dan Gaylin]

Folks,

Thank you, each of you, for your helpful replies. I really appreciate it. During my lunch break I had about 10 minutes to try freehand sharpening. While I am not done yet, I am definitely getting more consistent results -- the scratch pattern extends the full length of the bevel. Obviously that is not the end of the story, and I need to finish, hopefully tonight, but this has already lifted my gloomy mood. I am so enamored of Lee Valley and their products, tools and customer service, that I assumed it couldn't be the sharpening guide. And to be clear, I am sure it is the combination of the guide and the user, because some people get great results with the guide. But it certainly appears that for me, free hand works better. I will report back when I get the blade finished.

To answer the some of the other questions, with the Lee Nielsen blade that mostly worked, I did get a burr, and I did gently remove it with a very fine stone. That is when the blade became sharp (stupidly cut my finger on it). With that blade in the Number 4 plane, I was getting good results on wood -- smooth even surfaces. Although much better on pine than on cherry -- still good results, but it was a bit touch and go (the blade is clearly sharp but not really sharp).

I love the idea of getting some mentoring and it's a good suggestion I will need to ask around. If there's anyone who lives in Baltimore-Washington area who would be willing, please let me know.

Thanks,

-dan

[Jason Buresh]

I don't think there is necessarily an issue with your honing guide, but it sounds like it may not have been necessary in this case.

For what it's worth, I have a honing guide, but I use it primarily for regrinding primary bevels on old irons and chisels or if I have an edge go out of whack from freehand sharpening. It happens. I have had more than one chisel or plane iron on an antique tool that is slightly skewed, and I have to imagine it's from the old owner who held it not quite perfect while sharpening. While the lateral adjustment usually takes care of this I generally like to start with a fresh edge anyways.

But it sounds like you had some success freehand sharpening. Keep at it!

[Tom M King]

Good, repeatable results can be had with a guide. I went back to using one so my helpers, who can almost read a tape measure if they work together, can sharpen. They can get chisels, and plane irons almost as sharp as I can, and certainly useable.

I never use a grinder unless an edge has chunks taken out of it. To answer the time question, a few minutes on stones alone to take one that was used for getting paint off of bricks to super sharp (that chisel didn't have any nicks in it, but was completely dull).

[Scott Clausen]

I have gone all over he map trying to find what works the best "for me". I was out in the shop last night and decided I was tired of a cherry board with a crack getting in my way. I placed a dowel under the split and stepped on both side to sperate the halves. I thought "I am going to make a S4S board out of this and put it on the rack". I was having trouble jointing the edge with a Stanley No. 7 and saw that even with the lever all the way to one side the blade was off. Out came the iron and when checked with a square it was sharp but badly out of square. I placed it in my Eclipse style jig and went at it on my 300 grit diamond plate at 25 deg. and it took a while but was able to get it corrected and place a mild camber on it. Since it was in the jig I continued up to the 1200 plate. Then (maybe this is your missing step) stropped on my horse butt strop 30 times with firm pressure. It was able to slice the paper. This was a correction but have switched to freehand to touchup and sometimes use just the strop to touch up but as said unless disaster happens you should only need the finest plate. If doing freehand you will likely place a micro bevel of sorts on it naturally. I don't try for a micro bevel any more as over time the bevel will grow to the point that it will need correction again. This is what works for me so give all these ideas a shot to see what fits your style. The reason I like freehand is it is quicker without fooling with a jig and I get a better feel for the mild camber I prefer on the iron.

[Jim Koepke]

Most of my sharpening is freehand. Most of the time all that is required to bring a blade back to working sharpness is a hard Arkansas and a black or translucent Arkansas.

My preference is a plain flat bevel.

Sharpening skill is one of those things that seems to keep improving over time.

Sometimes a nick occurs or a secondary bevel can form. That is when the blade is taken to a soft Arkansas or to my power sharpening system to return to a simple flat bevel.

jtk

[Ralph Boumenot]

Hi Dan
I read your post and it didn't mention the back flatness or getting a burr. A shiny bevel doesn't mean it is sharp. If you not raising a burr on the back of the bevel you will never get a sharp tool. I would start again at square one and ensure the backs are flat and start sharpening the bevel on the first stone. Do not go to the next stone until you have a consistent burr from one side to the other. Wash, rinse, and repeat on each successive stone.
I used the Mk2 from Lee Valley and I initially loved it. I switched to the LN honing guide because the tools kept slipping in the MK2.

[Tyler Bancroft]

Or if the geometry is off. I highly recommend beginners learn on the coarsest flattest stone they can find (which stays flat) because they can more quickly establish proper geometry (which often is off from the factory even) or fix mistakes that they made.

Once you can get a super coarse but sharp edge on such a stone, you can go on to finer stones, and then go primarily to finer stones when your tool is dull but not damaged, as you suggest. But for a beginner, or a new tool, I think a quick cutting, coarse stone is a good place to spend considerable time and sort out the geometry.

I say all this because when I first started sharpening, I started with too fine a stone, which everyone said was a good all around stone (somewhere around 1000-1200 grit if I recall). Way too fine to establish the geometry I needed on new, factory ground tools that had never touched a stone before. Took me forever and I thought I was doing everything wrong until, after hours of just pure determination, I finally got it. That process would have been much easier if I'd started on something around 300-400 grit at least, if not coarser even.

DMT Fine (despite the name) is 600 grit, and it'll produce a burr on PM-V11 in ten strokes or less. I am far from an expert sharpener, but I can pull a plane iron out, go through two or three diamond plates, and have it back in the plane in two minutes. About ten strokes or so on each of fine and extra-fine, maybe also on extra-extra-fine, and then run the back over the EEF stone a couple of times to remove the burr. The DMT stones cut ludicrously fast.

[Eric Rathhaus]

Hi Dan - I'm going to give you the perspective of someone who has just left the "discouraged stage." I tried free hand and jigs on different media all the while feeling discouraged. I found that trying to sharpen in a vacuum and not as part of some woodworking project didn't work for me. I became fixed on some abstract ideal of sharpness rather than sharp enough to use the tool for the job at hand. I found that using a simple method that didn't stress me out meant I would sharpen/touch up often which lead to better results. And I got better with the frequent, short sharpening sessions. Here's what I do with no claim other than it helped me. I try to sharpen everything free-hand to 30 degrees. After using an angle indicator to practice at 30 degrees, it's become almost my automatic. I don't put a micro-bevel because the full bevel helps me register the correct angle I'm honing. I use a soft washita, then a black hard Ark, and then I use a buffer. Check out David Weaver's youtube channel for the buffer. It's actually simple, quick and I've yet to get a blade as sharpe freehand with a strop as I do with the buffer. Unless the blade is chipped or I've put the bevel out of whack, I can get a blade back working well w/ maybe 15 strokes per stone and two full passes on the buffer. So all together less than 3 minutes. Another thing I learned that I don't see people mention much is the importance paying attention to feeling the blade contacting the stone. Now I found I can feel right away when I've got the right angle and stroke and when I'm messing up. I also found I had to learn to feel the correct burr. In the beginning I tried to get a large burr, almost like a moraine. Now I swipe until I feel a very small burr that's even across the back of the edge.

This is just my journey, and even if you find something else more helpful, I want you to know that you'll get past being discouraged and then wonder why you worried so much.

Eric

[Chris Tolbert]

Thank you! I’m fairly new to wood working and very new to planes and I’m chasing ‘scary sharp’…which now sounds unnecessary.

[Andrew Seemann]

Thank you! I’m fairly new to wood working and very new to planes and I’m chasing ‘scary sharp’…which now sounds unnecessary.

With all the internet videos and companies hawking their wares and people hawking their DVDs and people promoting their classes so you can buy their books and jigs, it's easy to get caught up in sharpening as an end in and of itself, and forget that you are sharpening your tools to do woodworking with them.

Videos are great, but in some ways it was easier for folks like me who learned back in the pre-internet-dark-ages out of books and magazines from people who did woodworking for a living (Frid, Klausz, etc). They tended to sharpen using as few tools as possible and as quickly as possible so they could get back to work. For them, time was money; they got paid to make stuff, not sharpen their tools endlessly.

[Luke Dupont]

Hi Dan - I'm going to give you the perspective of someone who has just left the "discouraged stage." I tried free hand and jigs on different media all the while feeling discouraged. I found that trying to sharpen in a vacuum and not as part of some woodworking project didn't work for me. I became fixed on some abstract ideal of sharpness rather than sharp enough to use the tool for the job at hand. I found that using a simple method that didn't stress me out meant I would sharpen/touch up often which lead to better results. And I got better with the frequent, short sharpening sessions. Here's what I do with no claim other than it helped me. I try to sharpen everything free-hand to 30 degrees. After using an angle indicator to practice at 30 degrees, it's become almost my automatic. I don't put a micro-bevel because the full bevel helps me register the correct angle I'm honing. I use a soft washita, then a black hard Ark, and then I use a buffer. Check out David Weaver's youtube channel for the buffer. It's actually simple, quick and I've yet to get a blade as sharpe freehand with a strop as I do with the buffer. Unless the blade is chipped or I've put the bevel out of whack, I can get a blade back working well w/ maybe 15 strokes per stone and two full passes on the buffer. So all together less than 3 minutes. Another thing I learned that I don't see people mention much is the importance paying attention to feeling the blade contacting the stone. Now I found I can feel right away when I've got the right angle and stroke and when I'm messing up. I also found I had to learn to feel the correct burr. In the beginning I tried to get a large burr, almost like a moraine. Now I swipe until I feel a very small burr that's even across the back of the edge.

This is just my journey, and even if you find something else more helpful, I want you to know that you'll get past being discouraged and then wonder why you worried so much.

Eric


I second pretty much everything here, including the recommendation to look at David W.'s stuff on youtube. I learned a lot about oilstones and sharpening from his channel.

And I totally agree with practicing sharpening as a means to an end, rather than an end of itself. I never had a problem with this rabbit hole at the time I learned because I just wanted to get my tools "sharp enough" to do the job and pretty quickly realized how unnecessary a lot of the really intricate methods are. Separating the wheat from the chaff and finding a simple and efficient method that works is what it's all about, and that goes for pretty much any skill.

[Kevin Jenness]

If you want to learn to sharpen freehand perhaps the easiest way is to maintain a hollow grind, which allows you to establish the correct angle by locating the toe and heel of the bevel on the stone. You don't need to grind up to the edge, in fact that's the best way to overheat the blade, but grind often and deep enough to keep the toe and heel distinct and set the grinding platform to produce a consistent bevel angle. The finer the stones used the sharper and longer lasting the edge will be, but you can get a useable edge with a 1,000 grit stone and a shaving edge with 4,000 grit plus buffing or stropping. It shouldn't take more than a couple of minutes to resharpen. Keep it simple until you can get a sharp edge consistently.

Jigs are fine if they give you a truly consistent angle, otherwise you will be fighting every time. It is easy to get a blade out of square on that Veritas jig if you are not meticulous about tightening down the clamp evenly, and care has to be taken in setting the blade projection and making sure the roller cam is set where you want it.

There are as many sharpening techniques as woodworkers, as evidenced by this and myriad other threads. Pick one, the simpler the better, and stick with it until you can get consistent results quickly.

[George Yetka]

I dont use hand tools as often as Id like but. I started with the Diasharp stuff and found it to be too aggressive even at the fine level. I rarely go lower than 1000 on a stone. Once the bevel is established I found a dull chisel or blade can go down to 1000 and quickly sharpen up. I usualy set up and drop to 3000 then up to 10k on all chisels and plane blades in one go every 6 months or so unless unused then I just oil it.

I had less than satisfactory results with film.
The sharpening guide teaches me the angles once everything is established it is waste of time except for maybe super thin chisels(1/8-1/4).

[Michael Bulatowicz]

Another point I didn’t see mentioned above is something often called “chasing the burr.” I had previously underestimated how tenacious the burr can be on a number of different steels, and had issues with edge sharpness that turned out to be remnants of the burr.

To “chase the burr,” after working the bevel on your finest stone, flip back and forth between the bevel and back, lightly working each. At first, it may take a number of flips, but after you get more practiced at it, you’ll be able to chase the burr quickly. I have seen people suggest chasing the burr on every stone, but what works best for me is to establish the burr on the coarsest stone (which will be a hard ark or 3000 grit waterstone unless there are chips in the edge), hit the back briefly on the finest stone to move the burr to the bevel side, then move up to a finer grit on the bevel until the burr is felt on the back again, and so on. I only actually “chase the burr” after working the bevel on the finest stone.

If I’ve done everything right (which is happening more often these days, but still not even half the time) the burr will fall off as a solid wire with the first stroke on the back after working the bevel on the finest stone.

[Dan Gaylin]

All,

This is all so helpful, and encouraging, and I greatly appreciate it. Lots of great tips here and A LOT to think about. But I think the key message is clear: don't get too complicated, remember that ultimately sharpening is about being able to work wood (although it's fine to see it as something to be passionate about), find the things that work for you, and then practice, practice, practice.

I am happy to report that my results last night were definitely way better. Instead of "unsatisfactory" I would say "good". I sharpened 4 plane blades in about an hour freehand. In every case I had a consistent burr, a shiny bevel, and ended up with a sharp tool. The results on wood were much better with each blade -- consistent, clean, smooth, and able to dial in the amount of material I want to remove. I should also note that I am still very much a beginner when it comes to using hand planes so the blade sharpness is only one important variable.:rolleyes:

I am interested in trying waterstones, oilstones, and stropping. (and the unicorn method at some point). Should I stick with the Diasharp plates for now and get my technique better and faster, or should I try to experiment with some of the other approaches...? That is the question for me right now. Seems like trying a strop is kind of obvious since it's cheap and straightforward.

Thanks everyone!

[Brian Hale]

In my opinion, each sharpening media has it's own learning curve so jumping form one to another may slow your overall progress so i suggest you work with what you have for now. I've tried most every medium, both powered and manual but have used DMT and Eze-Laps plates for the last 10+ years with a Spyderco in the mix. Everything gets stropped. Chisels get stropped constantly during long use times without going to a stone.

I've been using the LV honing guide since it was first launched and get repeatable results but usually touch up an edge freehand and strop.

I'm about an hour north of you if you want to make the trip. I've also got 20-30 planes, many specialized, if you want to give them a push

Brian :)

[Kevin Jenness]

All,


I am interested in trying waterstones, oilstones, and stropping. (and the unicorn method at some point). Should I stick with the Diasharp plates for now and get my technique better and faster, or should I try to experiment with some of the other approaches...? That is the question for me right now. Seems like trying a strop is kind of obvious since it's cheap and straightforward.

Thanks everyone!

I would recommend sticking with what you have for the moment. A strop and honing compound are an inexpensive upgrade. There is no end to getting and spending on sharpening gear if you are determined to find the "best".

If you have an uncontrollable urge to buy more stones, Lee Valley has a useful comparison chart that will help you choose the needful https://www.leevalley.com/en-us/tools/grit-charts

For reference I have two grinders, one with 180# and 600# cbn wheels and the other with an 80# aluminum oxide wheel for reshaping plus a felt buffing wheel. I have Duo sharp diamond stones from black(220#) to green (1200#) similar to what you have, plus an "extra-extra fine" (nominal 8000#) DMT stone and a leather faced strop with green honing compound. I used to use waterstones but got tired of maintaining them. The cbn wheels I bought for turning but they do well with my bench tools as well.

For normal resharpening I start with the 1200# stone, go to the 8000# and finish by buffing the bevel on the wheel (for speed) and stropping the back (to keep the blade flat). Sometimes I may need to drop back to the 600# if I ground up to the edge and didn't get it perfectly straight. For carving or other work that requires a really keen edge I will strop frequently and sharpen rarely. This works for me. Someone else will have a more exotic or more minimal kit.

[Tyler Bancroft]

I am interested in trying waterstones, oilstones, and stropping. (and the unicorn method at some point). Should I stick with the Diasharp plates for now and get my technique better and faster, or should I try to experiment with some of the other approaches...? That is the question for me right now. Seems like trying a strop is kind of obvious since it's cheap and straightforward.

Thanks everyone!

You already have a wider variety of sharpening stones than virtually all woodworkers in the history of the human species – do you really want to spend your money on even more, or would you rather buy more wood to work with? ;) Diamond plates are (IMHO) the best sharpening media you can get. They stay flat, cut fast, and have very low maintenance requirements. If I were you, I'd go sharpen up a tool and use it until it needs to be sharpened, and repeat until I ran out of lumber. Nothing I've bought has improved my sharpening performance more than simply doing it a lot.

[Jim Koepke]

I would recommend sticking with what you have for the moment. A strop and honing compound are an inexpensive upgrade. There is no end to getting and spending on sharpening gear if you are determined to find the "best".


You already have a wider variety of sharpening stones than virtually all woodworkers in the history of the human species – do you really want to spend your money on even more, or would you rather buy more wood to work with? ;)

There is some wisdom in the above words. For some reason my sharpening was mediocre in the beginning on Arkansas stones. As my woodworking enthusiasm built up, some water stones were purchased and used. It was amazing how much better they worked for me.

After a few years of using water stones for some reason my Arkansas stones were given another try. Turns out there was nothing wrong with the stones. It was me, the user, having learned the technique required to keep the bevel on the stone to properly sharpen. Now most of my sharpening is done using Arkansas oilstones.

So my suggestion is work with what you have until you can get your blades sharp consistently before you venture into something different.

When you get your sharpening down pat, you my want to try a translucent Arkansas or an 8000 grit water stone to take your blade a step above what the diamond plate can achieve.

jtk

[Warren Mickley]

You already have a wider variety of sharpening stones than virtually all woodworkers in the history of the human species

It sounds like you have no idea what we were using in historic times. The Romans had novaculite oil stones (Turkey stones), and coticules (Belgian water stones) either of which does a nice job with a razor. Barbers were still using coticules in my memory, but they are expensive. Woodworkers were still using Turkey stones into the 19th century before being replaced with Arkansas stones. My guess is you haven't tried to shave with diamond sharpened razors, which makes for ragged edges.

I could use either of these historic stones, but not diamond for my work.

[Tyler Bancroft]

It sounds like you have no idea what we were using in historic times. The Romans had novaculite oil stones (Turkey stones), and coticules (Belgian water stones) either of which does a nice job with a razor. Barbers were still using coticules in my memory, but they are expensive. Woodworkers were still using Turkey stones into the 19th century before being replaced with Arkansas stones. My guess is you haven't tried to shave with diamond sharpened razors, which makes for ragged edges.

I could use either of these historic stones, but not diamond for my work.

If he has extra-extra-coarse through to extra-fine in DMT diamond plates, that's five grit levels – plus at least two types of lapping films. I don't think many woodworkers throughout history have had daily access to seven distinct levels of sharpening media. The historical documents I've read have generally been more along the lines of one or two stones and a grinding wheel. If you have a source to the contrary, I'd be happy to hear about it.

[Warren Mickley]

You can have all the grit levels you want, but if they all are harsh abrasives, then they will not polish to a fine edge.

[Kevin Jenness]

From the first post,

"I have a full set of diasharp diamond sharpening plates (extra-extra coarse to extra fine) and then float glass with 3M PSA lapping films from 5 microns to .3 microns."

.3 microns is finer than froghair (I checked). The op can probably get a decent edge with what he has on hand.

[Mel Fulks]

Beginners will sometimes just not recognize their own just made sharp edge ,so they put aside the stone they used and go for something
that will tear open their finger …..maybe a cinder block hone ! Test your new edge on WOOD before just guessing if it’s sharp. Sadly….a
sharp good edge usually doesn’t feel like it’s any good. Learn to discern ,don’t hold on to your beginner judgement.

[Luke Dupont]

From the first post,

"I have a full set of diasharp diamond sharpening plates (extra-extra coarse to extra fine) and then float glass with 3M PSA lapping films from 5 microns to .3 microns."

.3 microns is finer than froghair (I checked). The op can probably get a decent edge with what he has on hand.

The issue with diamonds is that they cut really deep scratches.

People are a bit too focused on "grit" as a measure of edge fineness. Something like an Arkansas stone for example, is only like 600 grit technically, and maybe up to 1000-2000 "grit" for the very finest transluscent / blacks. But the thing is, the height difference between the peaks and vallies are so much closer together that they leave a screaming sharp edge, despite having way fewer cutting pores than, say, a fine or extra fine DMT. With Arks you also get a slight burnishing effect in addition to subtle cutting action, and in the end, the edge you get is of a totally different nature. Other natural and synthetic stones will leave very different edges with different characteristics, too, and may be more or less suitable for different tasks / cutting different things.

I've used diamonds and other kinds of stones extensively, and I even like diamond plates and consider them a good all around option, but Warren is right in that they will never leave a truly fine edge like many other stones can, regardless of the grit rating. The scratches they leave are just too deep.

You can indeed confirm this by doing as Warren suggests and sharpening a razor on diamond plates. Use any diamond plate you like, but I don't think you'll get a comfortable edge like you can off of a Jnat or Arkansas stone, or even (to a less noticeable degree) a synthetic finishing stone in the same ballpark grit.

[Tyler Bancroft]

The issue with diamonds is that they cut really deep scratches.

People are a bit too focused on "grit" as a measure of edge fineness. Something like an Arkansas stone for example, is only like 600 grit technically, and maybe up to 1000-2000 "grit" for the very finest transluscent / blacks. But the thing is, the height difference between the peaks and vallies are so much closer together that they leave a screaming sharp edge, despite having way fewer cutting pores than, say, a fine or extra fine DMT. With Arks you also get a slight burnishing effect in addition to subtle cutting action, and in the end, the edge you get is of a totally different nature. Other natural and synthetic stones will leave very different edges with different characteristics, too, and may be more or less suitable for different tasks / cutting different things.

I've used diamonds and other kinds of stones extensively, and I even like diamond plates and consider them a good all around option, but Warren is right in that they will never leave a truly fine edge like many other stones can, regardless of the grit rating. The scratches they leave are just too deep.

You can indeed confirm this by doing as Warren suggests and sharpening a razor on diamond plates. Use any diamond plate you like, but I don't think you'll get a comfortable edge like you can off of a Jnat or Arkansas stone, or even (to a less noticeable degree) a synthetic finishing stone in the same ballpark grit.

I agree that "grit" isn't particularly useful when comparing between stone types. 8000 grit diamond equals 3 microns, while 8000 grit waterstones may be half that. I don't see any reason why a 3 micron diamond plate would leave a deeper scratch than a 3 micron abrasive particle of some other mineral, unless we're assuming that the other mineral particles are fracturing upon abrasion (in which case we're not comparing apples to apples). I wonder whether there's any hard data (e.g., micrographs) comparing the finish off Arkansas stones versus diamond plates (for example), given that the finest Arkansas stones are ~6 microns (at least, Dan's are) and the finest DMT Diasharps are 3 microns. You're not the first person I've seen who prefers the finish off an Arkansas stone after diamond plates, but it seems to run in the face of the numbers, so I'm curious whether there's something subtle going on.

[Tyler Bancroft]

There is some wisdom in the above words.

Jim, I am rarely accused of wisdom in any quantity. Would you be so kind as to send me a dated and notarized copy of your post for use in future arguments? :D

[Luke Dupont]

I agree that "grit" isn't particularly useful when comparing between stone types. 8000 grit diamond equals 3 microns, while 8000 grit waterstones may be half that. I don't see any reason why a 3 micron diamond plate would leave a deeper scratch than a 3 micron abrasive particle of some other mineral, unless we're assuming that the other mineral particles are fracturing upon abrasion (in which case we're not comparing apples to apples). I wonder whether there's any hard data (e.g., micrographs) comparing the finish off Arkansas stones versus diamond plates (for example), given that the finest Arkansas stones are ~6 microns (at least, Dan's are) and the finest DMT Diasharps are 3 microns. You're not the first person I've seen who prefers the finish off an Arkansas stone after diamond plates, but it seems to run in the face of the numbers, so I'm curious whether there's something subtle going on.

Is micron a measure of height variation, or width variation? Does it assume that height and width are equal when discussing "particle size"? You can have particles spread further apart with less differentiation between peaks and vallies, and you can also have particles that wear and become duller and rounder as opposed to remaining sharp and pointy. And in the case of Arks, you have particles that are so tightly fused together that you have something of a more solid surface with pores rather than extruding bumps / crystals.

There are a ton of variables that go into it which some measure of "particle size" doesn't capture, I think. The shape of the particles, the way that they wear or don't wear (how sharp or rounded they become) and the nature of the surface (pores versus protruding particles, and how even or far apart they are spread), as well as things like friability or lack thereof (Jnats and waterstones, for example, with their abrasive particles that are suspended in a slurry).

All these factors and many more produce different sorts of cutting actions, and impart different edges. I'd love to know, too, if anyone has a measure of all these different factors and can explain how they work.

It's also worth noting that difference in the hardness of the stone versus the steel affect the finished edge as well. Sharpen an O1 tool on an Ark, and then Japanese steel, and then A2, and you will find different results and cutting action on each one. The O1 chisel will have a slightly coarser edge than the Japanese chisel, which because of the narrow hardness gap between the steel and the stone, will be more polished and burnished on the Arkansas stone, making a Soft Ark cut produce a finish somewhat finer and closer to a Hard Ark.

If the difference in hardness is further apart, you will get less polishing and more grinding - you will cut quicker but coarser. Sharpen those three steel types on diamonds and you will notice very little difference in the finished edge.

[Tyler Bancroft]

Is micron a measure of height variation, or width variation? Does it assume that height and width are equal when discussing "particle size"? You can have particles spread further apart with less differentiation between peaks and vallies, and you can also have particles that wear and become duller and rounder as opposed to remaining sharp and pointy. And in the case of Arks, you have particles that are so tightly fused together that you have something of a more solid surface with pores rather than extruding bumps / crystals.

There are a ton of variables that go into it which some measure of "particle size" doesn't capture, I think. The shape of the particles, the way that they wear or don't wear (how sharp or rounded they become) and the nature of the surface (pores versus protruding particles, and how even or far apart they are spread), as well as things like friability or lack thereof (Jnats and waterstones, for example, with their abrasive particles that are suspended in a slurry).

All these factors and many more produce different sorts of cutting actions, and impart different edges. I'd love to know, too, if anyone has a measure of all these different factors and can explain how they work.

It's also worth noting that difference in the hardness of the stone versus the steel affect the finished edge as well. Sharpen an O1 tool on an Ark, and then Japanese steel, and then A2, and you will find different results and cutting action on each one. The O1 chisel will have a slightly coarser edge than the Japanese chisel, which because of the narrow hardness gap between the steel and the stone, will be more polished and burnished on the Arkansas stone, making a Soft Ark cut produce a finish somewhat finer and closer to a Hard Ark.

If the difference in hardness is further apart, you will get less polishing and more grinding - you will cut quicker but coarser. Sharpen those three steel types on diamonds and you will notice very little difference in the finished edge.

That's a good point. Ultimately, I think performance is the most important measure. I can get a nice glassy surface on my usual woods (maple and cherry) with planes sharpened to DMT extra-extra-fine, and that's what matters to me – obviously, different people have different standards. I have a King 8000x left over from my waterstone days that I may try using after the EEF to see if it makes a difference. (I also have some olivewood with rather wild grain that I should do some test planing on.)

Someone out there must have some micrographs, though.

[Kevin Jenness]

The issue with diamonds is that they cut really deep scratches.


The op is not finishing with diamond, but with (I believe) aluminum oxide on a film backer. In any case, his problem seemed to be in getting an edge that was useable, let alone "truly sharp", so the fix was in technique rather than the abrasive type.

Those interested in pursuing the "best" sharpening technique might find this interesting https://brentbeach.ca/Sharpen/jig%20faq%2002.html

Also this https://inthewoodshop.com/WoodworkTechniques/DecidingwhichSharpeningStrategy.html

[Warren Mickley]

I got an email from Brent Beach in 2007 asking for my sharping regimen. I wrote seven paragraphs and sent it to him. He then told me I sharpened backwards! He thought an Arkansas stone was coarser than an 800 King water stone!! I don't think he had much experience sharpening or woodworking.

[Kevin Jenness]

I got an email from Brent Beach in 2007 asking for my sharping regimen. I wrote seven paragraphs and sent it to him. He then told me I sharpened backwards! He thought an Arkansas stone was coarser than an 800 King water stone!! I don't think he had much experience sharpening or woodworking.

And I know even less than he does. Sad! It's amazing that any woodwork actually gets done considering the weakness of my sharpening regimen.

Seriously though, I thought his remarks about deformation caused by grinding to the edge were interesting- perhaps correct- and quite contradictory to the method described here http://www.inthewoodshop.com/WoodworkTechniques/UltimateGrindingSharpeningSetUp.html by Derek Cohen, who also said "The problem with sharpening threads on forums is that they all end up the same way - a million different methods and recommendations ... proving that everyone is wrong and I am the only one with the secret to the right way to do this!"

[Dan Gaylin]

Didn't meant to start any arguments folks. I should have clarified my question a bit -- I am generally interested in other approaches/types of sharpening media, but particularly (as Jim notes, per his earlier comments) in the idea that the finer diamond stones are limited. Which is why I have the lapping paper. I just haven't been too impressed with the paper. And in my own defense, the diasharp plates came in a discounted set of three, but I bought the coarser stones because I knew I had some old damaged blades to restore. A piece of float glass and a sampler pack of lapping papers was very cheap. To Mel's point, I have been trying all of the blades on wood. Great results on pine and cherry. Maple is touch and go. But again, some of the issue is that I need to get better at using hand planes. The chisels I sharpened last night seem to be doing a fine job, not that I'm any kind of master with using chisels either...

Brian, thanks for that kind offer, I will PM you separately.

[Eric Rathhaus]

If you want pictures, you should go over to wood central and David Weaver's youtube channel. He upload lots of pictures of blades after honing on various stones as do other contributors.

[Jim Koepke]

More important than how nice a blade's edge may look under magnification is what it does to the surface being worked.

This image shows an indication of a blade in need of a little honing:

466730

The light lines (follow the arrows) are caused by small nicks or wear spots on the blade's edge. The socket to the left is what it looked like after a little touch up of the blade.

If a plane blade is cutting ribbons it likely could use a few passes on a stone.

You might need a microscope camera to see these defects. Without such equipment your shavings or surface will let you know what you have.

jtk

[Robert Hazelwood]

Didn't meant to start any arguments folks. I should have clarified my question a bit -- I am generally interested in other approaches/types of sharpening media, but particularly (as Jim notes, per his earlier comments) in the idea that the finer diamond stones are limited. Which is why I have the lapping paper. I just haven't been too impressed with the paper. And in my own defense, the diasharp plates came in a discounted set of three, but I bought the coarser stones because I knew I had some old damaged blades to restore. A piece of float glass and a sampler pack of lapping papers was very cheap. To Mel's point, I have been trying all of the blades on wood. Great results on pine and cherry. Maple is touch and go. But again, some of the issue is that I need to get better at using hand planes. The chisels I sharpened last night seem to be doing a fine job, not that I'm any kind of master with using chisels either...

Brian, thanks for that kind offer, I will PM you separately.

Your current equipment is not what I would prefer to use for day to day sharpening, but it is totally capable of getting the job done. I would stick with it until you can consistently get very good edges with minimal effort (say less than 5 minutes instead of 15-20). At this point introducing new equipment would just slow down your progress.

The basic idea of sharpening is to remove any wear or damage at the very edge, and establish a new edge with correct geometry. The level of polish is much less important than getting the geometry right at the very edge. Beginners tend to get wrapped up in scratch patterns and finer and finer grits, but most of their problems are because they don't "finish the job" all the way out to the very edge, though they may have a mirror polish on the rest of the bevel.

It sounds to me like you have a thick iron with a large bevel, and you were trying to work the whole bevel at around 25 degrees to match the factory grind. That is going to take a long time regardless of sharpening media, meaning there's a high likelihood that the very edge is not quite reached. One way or another you need to reduce the surface area being honed, and you'll find that things go much faster and the edges you get are better.

Basically you can reduce the surface area by hollow-grinding with a wheel grinder, or by sharpening a small secondary bevel at a higher angle than the main grind. You didn't mention having a grinder, so I recommend the second approach. If the factory grind is 25 degrees, hone at 30 or even 35. Now you are working the tip only, and much less surface area, so the job gets done many times faster. Hone on a fairly coarse stone until you get a very obvious burr - this is the main indication that you "finished" the job and established a new edge.

Eventually with more sharpenings the secondary bevel will get wider and wider and things slow down again. At this point you can get your float glass with your coarsest paper (nothing finer than 100 grit) and work the factory 25 degree bevel until the secondary bevel is very small again. (Pro-tip: change the sandpaper every few minutes of use, it cuts dramatically faster when fresh than after even a modest amount of use).

Eventually you will probably want a grinder if you are going to work with modern, thick blades and steels like PMV11. But what I described above is feasible.

[Andrew Pitonyak]

I have seen a lot of really good advice.


Step 1: make sure that your back is flat up to the edge. You do not need the entire blade, even the lat 1/4" will do, but i usually have closer to 1".

Now, you need to get a nice edge up to the "end" so that it is sharp. One thing that usually helps, is to use a black marker to cover the blade bevel. If you are sharpening, you can then see what you scraped off. If it does not go to the edge, well, that is why it is not sharp. If it does go to the edge, then the problem is probably a burr / wire edge.

Often a magnifier helps here. I use an 8x or 10x loop to take a look. Doing this with knives really improved my sharpening by a big margin.

Someone mentioned a "hollow grind". I do this, and it helps me seat the blade onto the stone AND it is faster to deal with. One draw back is that eventually I need to re-establish the hollow grind. It does help to free-hand when I want to do a touch up.

If you really want to give that a try, ship me a blade and let me put a hollow grind on it and I will ship it back to you. Try the marker thing first to see what you are really doing.

Andrew Pitonyak.

[Andrew Pitonyak]

And I know even less than he does. Sad! It's amazing that any woodwork actually gets done considering the weakness of my sharpening regimen.

Seriously though, I thought his remarks about deformation caused by grinding to the edge were interesting- perhaps correct- and quite contradictory to the method described here http://www.inthewoodshop.com/WoodworkTechniques/UltimateGrindingSharpeningSetUp.html by Derek Cohen, who also said "The problem with sharpening threads on forums is that they all end up the same way - a million different methods and recommendations ... proving that everyone is wrong and I am the only one with the secret to the right way to do this!"

I would take it to mean that you can use almost any method and get usable results, the real question is, which works best for you based on your abilities and what you either own or can afford to buy.

I really struggle with free hand sharpening on its own, but have no problem if I have concave bevel, which I find fast so I use it.

Is my method the best? Well, it works for me, but there are disadvantages to it. Advantages and disadvantages to all methods.

Andrew

[Kevin Jenness]

I would take it to mean that you can use almost any method and get usable results, the real question is, which works best for you based on your abilities and what you either own or can afford to buy.

I really struggle with free hand sharpening on its own, but have no problem if I have concave bevel, which I find fast so I use it.

Is my method the best? Well, it works for me, but there are disadvantages to it. Advantages and disadvantages to all methods.




Andrew

Yes, I guess one can get a "useable" edge with almost anything, then it gets down to how much force is needed to push an edge through wood, how clean the results are and how often the process needs to be repeated.

Sitting around with a damaged foot and too much time on my hands, I have been diving down the rabbit hole. I used to think that the ultimate goal was a perfectly formed and polished acute angle made by two planes of steel meeting in a line. Now after watching David Weaver's youtube videos and looking at the science of sharp website https://scienceofsharp.com/home/ I am not so sure. I still like the fact that my diamond stones remain flat but I am starting to lose the conviction that the finer grits are actually giving me a smoother surface. I am still pretty sure that stropping is a good thing, but maybe buffing with a soft wheel to get a (microscopically) more rounded edge is even better in some circumstances.

Do I need a new stone, buffing wheel or stropping compound? Probably not. The perfect may be the enemy of the good, and as someone who has been primarily a wood machinist using hand tools at the margins I have been able to get sufficiently sharp edges for my purposes. Still, and yet... there's more to learn.

[Dan Gaylin]

Thanks again everyone for all of the helpful additional advice. I will probably split the difference and in the near term and get one additional stone of a finer grit (~8000) that is other than a diamond plate. Meantime I will keep working with what I have. I might try hollow grind, and I appreciate the offer, Andrew, to ship you a blade. But for now I am going to focus on getting better and faster at freehand and really understanding the geometry. This has been very, very helpful. Thank you alll!

[Jim Koepke]

But for now I am going to focus on getting better and faster at freehand and really understanding the geometry. This has been very, very helpful. Thank you alll!

One thing that may help with improving your freehand sharpening is if you can take a video from the side to see your hand movement. This will let you see any wavering in your motion and blade holding.

jtk

[Luke Dupont]

At some point, you'll hone a perfectly flat face (if that's what you're going for, as is how it's done on Japanese tools traditionally) and you'll suddenly find the face of the bevel grip the stone via suction.

This can actually be really annoying, and the sudden "stiction" (sticking to the stone via suction, as I call it) can cause you to mess up, as the bevel gets stuck and the rest / top of the tool continues on forward.

This may or may not happen on diamond stones, I don't know. But it's happened to me any and every time I achieved perfectly flat geometry, and it's annoying, so I actually like to have just the slightest bit of convexity.

Even a lot of convexity isn't a bad thing as long as you can keep a consistent "maximum" angle, but that may or may not be more difficult than just keeping a consistent angle.