Member
It looks like a good tool, but it had better be a whole new ball game for the price I'm sure LN will charge. I have no doubt it will be worth it, but I will need to think long and hard given the price point I'm sure it will arrive at.
That being said, it looks like it solves problems that the eclipse has, like short, fat blades, or skews.
Damnit. Looks like I'll be buying a new tool.
Last edited by paul cottingham; 03-22-2015 at 11:27 AM.
Paul
Member
I'd picked up a rumour too Mike, but only that. One of difficulties in designing honing guides to deliver precision and repeatability must be that there are tools like say a Japanese chisel where many of the surfaces are not precisely aligned/dimensioned/parallel/flat as a result of hand forging and similar processes. For a tool like that there's probably not much option but to locate off the (flat) back as the Lee Valley clamp does, and as Derek it adds the option to skew. Which is perhaps what's missing from the Eclipse type guides.
The consequence then though is that in absence of mechanical sideways location in use the clamp then has to grip the tools really well - which as it stands it's bit marginal at....
Last edited by ian maybury; 03-22-2015 at 12:12 PM.
Contributor
Jim - time for a "yeahbut"..........Originally Posted by Jim Koepke
Yeah, but - the slotted heads on their planes are not std sizes. To get a tight, solid fit, you need the correct driver from LN.
Wonder if the guide will require one of those special sizes?
When I started woodworking, I didn't know squat. I have progressed in 30 years - now I do know squat.
Member
A narrow roller is a source of pain for those who aren't good at freehand sharpening. If someone is already good at freehand sharpening, this high-end jig is of less use in most, not all, sharpening situations. I learned and opted for freehand sharpening, exactly because I wasn't happy with the narrow roller of the Eclipse jig. This jig is designed for high-end users and from that perspective, the narrow roller feature is understandable.
It is taking so long for this new jig to be brought to the market suggests one thing: trying to meet all your sharpening needs with one jig is quite, if not completely, impossible.
The slotted screw is perfectly fine with me as the lever cap screws are also slotted anyway.
Simon
Last edited by Simon MacGowen; 03-22-2015 at 12:37 PM.
Contributor
All good points being discussed here. As for the slotted screws, there are specific torque ratings for different screw sizes and heads. I suspect that plays a part in the decision to use one over the other. As for Phillips screws, they are designed to torque out at a specific torque range. I would prefer a (properly made) slotted screw on a tool where I wanted to be able to put a bit (small bit) more torque. I am sure they will design it to fit their lovely screwdriver set.
Contributor
As long as people buy them, they will still make them. Some prefer slotted screws.
Maybe if they do go obsolete all of my old screw drivers will be worth something.
jtk
"A pessimist sees the difficulty in every opportunity; an optimist sees the opportunity in every difficulty."
- Sir Winston Churchill (1874-1965)
Contributor
I prefer slotted screws. I can't stand phillips; it's bad at everything.
This looks pretty solid, I'm fine with the $15 job at the moment, but I may pickup one of these once they finally arrive.
I'm loosing patience for the plow plane, by the time it actually arrives it's likely I'll already own a center wheel plow.
Last edited by Brian Holcombe; 03-22-2015 at 2:23 PM.
Bumbling forward into the unknown.
Moderator
A lot of machining went into that honing guide and SS isn't the easiest material to machine. Expect it to be expensive.
Please help support the Creek.
"It's paradoxical that the idea of living a long life appeals to everyone, but the idea of getting old doesn't appeal to anyone."
Andy Rooney
Contributor
Actually, the Elipse-style guide does register on the flat back. The bevels in the holding notches force the flat back into buttresses (supposedly) in line and parallel to the roller. In the more cheaply-made copies, that's not always the case, so the cutting edge is not square. I have seen some gauges where the roller is the only precision-made part.
Member
Tom, your comment is correct on the lower v-notches of the guide, meant for chisels, but the main area on top for plane blades registers the bevel side. On the LN guide the blades, regardless of type all register in the jig from the non-bevelled side of the blade. An Eclipse jig may or may not hold your chisels. Your comment as regards chisels is correct.
[OP]
Member
I must agree with Mr. Charlesworth on both counts.
In my opinion, the incremental/theoretical benefit of a PH2 or PosiDriv, Torx T-n etc is outweighed by the convenience of using the straight blade screwdriver you just used to disassemble your plane, shave, etc..
Note that in THIS particular application, screwdriver alignment is a non-issue. The LN jig is designed such that the screwdriver blade can not slide off-axis due to the fact that it is completely captive within the countersink/recess in the jaws. This design element is visible in the pictures.
In any case, anyone bothered by it can swap out the captive jaw screws with screws of choice (Fastenal, McMaster etc.). I think those kinds of modifications can be very rewarding. If I were re-working this jig, I'd attempt to use a thumbscrew for a tool-free setup.
With regard to the debate about narrow/wide rollers; even with cambering issues put to the side for a moment, the Kell guide/jig is a good illustration issues that arise with 'wide' rollers. The Kell guide has perhaps widest roller configuration available. It's a very clever guide in many ways, but when a blade is clamped into it, care must be taken to get the angle JUST right or you won't be able to hone the entire edge without removing excess metal. That's not to say it's inherently worse, but I can say that it takes more time and attention to use the Kell guide than the Eclipse guide, even for narrow blades. The Kell is currently the best guide I have for certain things, but at this point I think the LN guide will replace it. I'll keep my Veritas MK.II for skew sharpening. Especially since I modified it to make the angle settings 100.0% bang-on repeatable. As I said, rewarding. Viscerally even.
Cheers all! Thanks for a lively discussion!
Last edited by Karl Fife; 03-22-2015 at 6:32 PM.
Member
Pardon me Tom - for sure the LN version addresses the issue although it (?) doesn't include the means to skew. The cheap ones don't really, which was what was in my mind - you see people modifying them (as David C) to create a reference surface for the flat back of a chisel to pick up on. As in here: http://www.woodworkuk.co.uk/forum/vi...php?f=5&t=1593 The top surface seems often to need flattening to get a decnt registration on a plane iron too: http://www.popularwoodworking.com/wo...p-honing-guide
Member
I didn't get any further thanNot disparaging you Karl but the presentation at the show and the literature with the tool must both be pretty lame if you have such basic questions about the tools capabilities and use."I think and maybe".
OK back to your post . . .
Sharpening is Facetating.Good enough is good enoughButBetter is Better.
[OP]
Member
I think the Veritas MK.II will be a better performer for skew sharpening. Obviously this is coming from a place of ignorance about the LN having never sharpened with it. The potential problem with the LN is that it places blade/stone contact point off-axis with the wheel. That may produce some adverse 'yaw' when moving the assembly back and forth on the stone. This may require the user to compensate. Just speculation, but I have a strong hunch.
By contrast, the Veritas MK.II allows the BLADE to be placed off-center so the that the blade/stone contact point is exactly in line with the roller. In practice the MK.II works very well for skew sharpening, especially after modifying the skew angle fence to have 100% repeatable settings. The MK.II also allows for honing at any angle, unlike the LN guide which would require different jaws, one for each sharpening angle.
Last edited by Karl Fife; 03-22-2015 at 8:22 PM.
[OP]
Member
At the show, there was no presentation and no literature. I just saw the tool off in the corner. It was definitely not being 'featured'. Naturally I quickly whipped out my camera to document it for my fellow enthusiasts. Thus, precisely 100% of what's written there is my seat-of-the-pants speculation.
With regard to "Maybe" and "I think", I'm a proponent of qualifying any statement about which I am not 100% confident. I think. ;-)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote