Woodpeckers honing system

[Will Blick]

> if I offended you with my previous responses please accept my apologies.

Accepted, TY Rafael...


I will mention, when I sharpen my scrub plane blades, often I just freehand it, cause its not critical for anything, its a scrub. The work it performs is rough, not precise.

However, I do a lot of planing on edges and ends, to get them square to my jointed faces and to each other. So I want the blade edges STRAIGHT and prefer them square. Straight is most critical, as I can adjust the plane blade in the plane for non squareness. However, when using the MKII, often the micro bevel pattern that is easily visible as it becomes mirror like, does not even touch one of the edges. It can fall out of square that far... now granted, the micro bevel has very small height to it so it only requires a little non squareness for this to happen, prob. less than 1 deg, without doing the math. I am not trying to maintain 90deg +/- .01 deg here... I am trying to re sharpen the micro bevel edge, from end to end. That is the amount of squareness I am seeking.

I will also mention, some eclipse honing guides I have had reasonably good luck with (not all). The WP is a sophisticated version of this, but with more precision and easy setting of blades in the honing guide. It is also easily repeatable. Granted, a similar set up block can be hand made using the particulars of your honing guide and some math. For me, I prefer to buy tools vs. build them, so I can dedicate the shop time I have towards projects.

Also, I am not knocking the MKII jig. Yes, I have had problems with it in this regard. But its a very well designed sharpening system at a very competitive price point. I also think the blade setting design is excellent, and repeatable.

While LV is putting time and energy into sharpening products now, maybe LV will offer an MKII optional clamp bar with a means to maintain squareness when setting and while in use. Possibly adding a material on the underside as well. Increasing the diam of the knurled nuts for added tightness without tools would also be helpful. This will allow existing MKII users who want more reliable squareness, a low cost optional add-on. Rob, thoughts?

[Charles Guest]

I read an article several years ago about the success of Starbucks. The article was accompanied by a very nifty, sort of cartoon illustration of two coffee cups: one had $.50 written on it (they used the "cents" mark) with a fat red slash through the price, the other cup had $3.50 written on it along with the Starbucks logo.

Choice in a range of price points it a good thing.

[Rob Lee]

(snip)

While LV is putting time and energy into sharpening products now, maybe LV will offer an MKII optional clamp bar with a means to maintain squareness when setting and while in use. Possibly adding a material on the underside as well. Increasing the diam of the knurled nuts for added tightness without tools would also be helpful. This will allow existing MKII users who want more reliable squareness, a low cost optional add-on. Rob, thoughts?

Hi Will -

Every honing guide out there is designed to handle a range of tools and conditions - and ours is no different. Understanding that designing a tool to hold products made by others is a bit of a challenge, as geometry and tolerances can vary substantially from tool to tool, tapers and irregular surfaces etc. The MKII is designed to register off of the back and RH side of a bevel up blade - and use a moving clamp bar to seat properly on a tapered or irregular surface. As the bar is floating, and has two tightenening knobs, users have to ensure they tighten the knobs evenly, to provide even clamping pressure across the blade being held. This is straight forward to do with wide blades, and becomes fiddly to do with narrow blades (which is why we also offer a narrow jaw attachment).

Application of more pressure on the clamp bar is not the answer here - though that's what some do - in order to flex the bar to make contact with both edges of a blade clamped unevenly. If you think about it - a jig really doesn't have to hold a blade any tighter than your hands would - if sharpening freehand. The goal of a jig is to maintain repeatability - and restraining movement is all that's necessary.

Something else to consider - grip, technique and force can all override geometry maintained by a jig. If you apply pressure unevenly, or continually sharpen with a feed bias - you will still sharpen on a skew - even if the blade is held perfectly square.

I use the original MKI guide (with the swivel pad). I can put a blade in it 5 degrees or more off of square - and still sharpen an edge bang on square. To do this - I am counting on even finger pressure across the blade to register the bevel on the store - and the roller of the guide to maintain the angle - "squareness" doesn't enter into it. Now - for a narrow blade - that approach is less effective - as there's less bevel to register the blade - though the jig still maintains the angle. I thing of the jig I use as "training wheels" for honing - my hand position, grip, and application of force still trumps the jig's expression of geometry - though if I am careful setting it up - the jig will control what goes on. I just don't use it that way.....

The MKII is designed to express more geometry than the MKI, but it is still not user agnostic. It adds the removable projection/squaring jig – but still allows users to use technique to override the set geometry – though a bit more difficult to do. It can still handle skewed blades as well as straight. There is also a limit to how “immobile” a blade can be clamped – as it is not grabbing the blade – just restraining it through applied pressure. (the difference between holding something by pressing your palms together versus grasping it fully using your fingers too). It is an important part of the design – but then relies on the user to set/maintain squarenes.

I could keep going – but will pause here for additional comments/questions (and head into a long meeting….!)

Cheers –

Rob

[James Pallas]

I’ve owned and used a Mark II for several years. I have never had problems described by many. Properly set up and used it works fine. I guess you could have problems if a chisel or iron is not parallel front to back or is tapered. The jig is hand manipulated so that affects outcomes. If you want better you need machine grinder where everything but the grinding wheel is fixed. And yes it’s easy to see a thousandth of an inch if on a beveled edge. In a hand operation that can have you chasing your tail.

[Will Blick]

Great post Rob.... thx.
Of course, very valid points on the universal nature of the honing guide... you are trying to clamp different makers plane blades, chisels, etc. As I mentioned, I do think the MKII was well thought out and very universal with all the attachments.

I have spent a lot of time with the MKII and have struggled to keep plane blades square. Others report the same. And you mention this should be an easy task (vs. thin chisel)
I do the left/right/left tightening method up n back, it never solves the problem completely, although it helps. Pliers help more, but I agree, this should not be required.

I do agree with others, its prob. easier to keep a plane blade square in the guide if its clamped by the sides vs. the top. This assumes the blade sides are parallel. If not, than that can be problematic. And even then, the sides of the clamp must also be parallel and straight.

Also, when you place the depth setting part on the guide, the way it sits / tightens, it also is not always square, so this is one of variables that can get the user off to a non square start. Just to be clear, I am realistic, these are not high precision machined parts, they are cast parts, which has much lower tolerances. At the price point you sell this guide at, I certainly don't expect machined precision parts. I have mentioned this several times throughout the thread.

I have also, "kinda" tried what you suggested, i.e. I look at the blade and see where the micro bevel is not getting enough on the stone, so I shift my finger weight to that side, but its of minimal benefit.

However, you present this in a different light....
you tend to use the guide like freehand honing, and let the wheel lightly ride the stone to assure the bevel angle is proper. That is "a difference with a distinction!" When I return to my shop, I will have to try that. I tend to ride the wheel with 30-40% of my finger force. Possibly 5-10% of finger force on the wheel will overcome the non squareness issue. I would think using the camber wheel will further enhance this technique as the camber wheel does not influence your finger pressure on the edge as the flat wheel would. The camber wheel will not resist the users front finger pressure.... I think.

But for the average person learning to hone plane blades, ideally the guide holding the blade square with minimal effort is still desirable. But as you mention, there is so many variables at play, maybe squareness is an unrealistic expectation for a universal guide. Compensating with finger pressure more at the blade edge could be a simple technique solution. Of course, as you mention, the smaller the blade width, like a 1/8" chisel, this becomes more difficult as you lose the feel of the blade edge to stone.

[Andrew Pitonyak]

I used pliers ALWAYS
I put some hard adhesive backed foam on top and bottom, that helps a little too...
I get it square, using the mini WP square (perfect for this task)
I gently use the guide on the stones, and when done, I re check square...
more than half the time, its no longer square. Super frustrating, hence why I thought I would start this post. I called LV tech, they were super helpful and courteous, as always... they even sent me another one to try, but, same issue.

You will notice that some people have problems and some people do not. My assumption is that either (1) those who do not have problems simply do not notice it OR (2) something about the way that you use it.

I used to own a worksharp with those spinning disks. I could not consistently get an edge that was perpendicular to the side of the blade. I assumed that it was me #2 above, especially since people who I think would notice the difference did not have a problem with it and loved it. So, I just assumed that the problem was technique and that I would not likely get it right, so, I gave it to a friend and I purchased a used Tormek that gave me great results from the start.

I don't remember having problems with my LV II system, but, it sees very little use now that I have a the Tormek and then I usually free hand what is left. Most of my other blades that don't work in the Tormek also will not work in the LV II system (too small) so I am stuck free handing those. I expect that if i was not getting things square with my LV II back when I used it very often, I would have fallen into (1) above and probably (2) above

I hope that you find something that works well for you. Would be nice if someone near by could share (in person) how they do it and you could collaborate. Next time you are in Columbus Ohio, bring something to sharpen!

[Will Blick]

> I hope that you find something that works well for you.

ahhh, the entire purpose of this thread was.... to share the good news.... the WP honing jig keeps things square! remember?


> My assumption is that either (1) those who do not have problems simply do not notice it OR (2) something about the way that you use it.

or, 3) some MKII jig attachments are cast better than others, making square easier to achiever for some? Dunno, I have not tested more than the two I have had... the fact that others report the same issue here, demonstrates it does happen. The fact that some users report not having the square problem leads me to think some have an MKII whereas the cast parts fit more square.

[Andrew Pitonyak]

ahhh, the entire purpose of this thread was.... to share the good news.... the WP honing jig keeps things square! remember?

Sharpening thread, surely you did not expect anyone to stay on topic!

or, 3) some MKII jig attachments are cast better than others, making square easier to achiever for some? Dunno, I have not tested more than the two I have had... the fact that others report the same issue here, demonstrates it does happen. The fact that some users report not having the square problem leads me to think some have an MKII whereas the cast parts fit more square.

Possible, but not typical for LV. I have a Montgomery Wards block plane that I spent hours trying to fix before I realized that the real issue was a casting problem in the plane. Nothing I did was ever going to make that thing work. I don't even remember if i did the sensible thing and pitched it or kept it because my Father gave it to me. Could even be (4) a design flaw.

If I remember correctly, you did order the WP honing jig. Be sure to post on how you like it or do not. I have some products from them that I absolutely love, and I have had a few that I should have thought about more before I bought them. Not necessarily a problem with the product, just something that I do not use.

[Will Blick]

> If I remember correctly, you did order the WP honing jig. Be sure to post on how you like it or do not.

I will repeat what I originally wrote in this thread. I own the WP honing jig. I have been using it for 4+ months. It keeps my plane blades square. Then I wrote, I liked it so much, I ordered a 2nd guide (not the mounting jig), in which the final order date was fast approaching, hence why I made the thread. Is this more clear?


> Possible, but not typical for LV.

Remember, these are low costs products, high precision can not be expected. My experience is, molds get altered through use... a mold has a useful life, as the tolerance of the mold continues to change when exposed to heat, wear n tear, etc. The mold can therefore produce varying outcomes through out its useful life. In this case the mounting parts to the jig can be square on some, and not on others. Or, it could be errors cancel out on some. This can happen when you have matting parts.


> Sharpening thread, surely you did not expect anyone to stay on topic!

yeah, what was I thinking! my bad...