Gretch reminded me of this, and is something I've been intending to mention, but I keep forgetting........
(They say that memory loss is a common thing with aging. It seems that my memory is no exception, and it's getting worse!
)
Since I began honing both sides of an edge about a half dozen times between trips to the grinder, I began noticing a certain benefit to the changing shape of that edge. This benefit is not possible with a bevel that has the normal sweeping curve from tip to shaft.
When you hone the bevel side of an edge, in effect, what you are doing is creating a secondary bevel near the tip. This secondary bevel is very thin. The more times a rehone is done, the greater the width of the secondary bevel.
I'm finding there is a benefit among the drawbacks, when utilizing that secondary bevel on a sweeping curve on the outside of a bowl. Certainly controlling the cut is more difficult, but if that "sweet spot" is engaged, it can be a very nice flowing cut. If the edge is very sharp, the resulting manual sweep, and quality of that cut can be very satisfying......and require little sanding. This observation is only applicable to a point. There is a point when the secondary bevel works against the cut.......it can be too much, or too little, but when the presentation and the secondary bevel is perfect, it's a great benefit to my efforts. I believe there are many things, like species of wood, direction of grain, shape of the bowl exterior, proper direction of cut, that come into play with this.......in other words, everything has to be just right to reap the benefits.
The opposite is true for inside bowl cuts. Here, the larger the secondary honed bevel is, the worse the tool responds, and the worse the cut will be as a residual effect of that loss of response with the tool. I usually go to the grinder first thing with a gouge I'm using for finishing cuts on the interior. That way, during the course of shaping the interior, the secondary bevel is as small as possible.
ooc

(They say that memory loss is a common thing with aging. It seems that my memory is no exception, and it's getting worse!

Since I began honing both sides of an edge about a half dozen times between trips to the grinder, I began noticing a certain benefit to the changing shape of that edge. This benefit is not possible with a bevel that has the normal sweeping curve from tip to shaft.
When you hone the bevel side of an edge, in effect, what you are doing is creating a secondary bevel near the tip. This secondary bevel is very thin. The more times a rehone is done, the greater the width of the secondary bevel.
I'm finding there is a benefit among the drawbacks, when utilizing that secondary bevel on a sweeping curve on the outside of a bowl. Certainly controlling the cut is more difficult, but if that "sweet spot" is engaged, it can be a very nice flowing cut. If the edge is very sharp, the resulting manual sweep, and quality of that cut can be very satisfying......and require little sanding. This observation is only applicable to a point. There is a point when the secondary bevel works against the cut.......it can be too much, or too little, but when the presentation and the secondary bevel is perfect, it's a great benefit to my efforts. I believe there are many things, like species of wood, direction of grain, shape of the bowl exterior, proper direction of cut, that come into play with this.......in other words, everything has to be just right to reap the benefits.
The opposite is true for inside bowl cuts. Here, the larger the secondary honed bevel is, the worse the tool responds, and the worse the cut will be as a residual effect of that loss of response with the tool. I usually go to the grinder first thing with a gouge I'm using for finishing cuts on the interior. That way, during the course of shaping the interior, the secondary bevel is as small as possible.
ooc
Last edited: