Link to new sharpening jig? Back pages of AW

Re: Link to new sharpening jig? Back pages of AW *LINK*

Ted Owen, Pittsburgh

>You thinking of this honing guide, Joe?

Best, Ted


LV Honing Guide

This one?  *LINK*

Rob Lee

>


Alisam

again you excell, no wonder we like your company

Ian in Sydney

>

Anynody Done a Review on that one?

Dan Clermont

>I am very happy with my Veritas MK II honing jig and assume that is the one Joe Hurst is refering too.

Guess that is my review ;)

Dan Clermont

Re: This one?

Brent Smith

>Kudos to Rob and Lee Valley, always ready to help even when there is no profit involved.

Brent

Thanks all, especially Rob

Joe Hurst

>Thanks everyone, for the speedy reply.

I would especially like to thank Rob, who no doubt may already have the competitor's tool sitting on a nearby shelf or table.

Admittedly, I'm intrigued by the design, but not by the price. If I was somehow ham-fisted enough to break everything, I could replace my old-style Lee Valley sharpening system and Eclipse jig for half the price. I just can't see the benefit in this new jig to justify the premium price.

I'd certainly like to hear from anyone who feels differently.

In the meantime, I'll continue reading those back pages for other interesting inventions. You never know what will pop up next.

Many thanks,

Joe

Re: Anynody Done a Review on that one?

Frank D. in Montreal

>Ain't that a little biased there, Dan???

When I saw the jig(s) my first impression was that it looked like a clone between a Krell and a General. Do you need all three? What I don't like is that it rides on the bench or whatever is under the stone. So now you need to worry about having 2 things flat, not just the stone.

Anyways, that's not a review.

Frank

Re: Anynody Done a Review on that one?

Dan Clermont

>Hi Frank,

I am totally Biased regarding the Veritas Jig. I drove to the store and the "gave" me one for $58.50 Canadian plus taxes AND they through in a plastic bag to carry it home in.

I Love that store ;)

Take Care,

Dan Clermont

Observations from a distance

Derek Cohen (in Perth, Australia)

>This honing guide has some clever features.

I like the way it is possible to adjust the bevel angle by altering the blade rest angle. This does away with additional jigs, such as the LV registration jig. However, it only works as long as both sides of the guide are set accurately. No reason why it should be an issue here since indents are used.

I also like the sliding square that is used for the blade. Clever. Again, tolerances are important here otherwise it will twist. Even a slight twist will cause an out-of-square bevel.

The guide has a wide range of bevel angles, from 5 - 60 degrees. This allows for the honing of a scraper plane blade, which the LV cannot do. This also permits backbevels, as the LV does. However, it does not cater for 1-2 degree microbevels (which the LV does).

I think that this would be a very good guide if you are dedicated to using sandpaper only (Scary Sharp method) and not inclined to venture beyond this medium. Perhaps you might use diamond stones as well. The guide depends on constant parallel surfaces, that is, where the base surface (on which its feet run) is parallel to the sharpening surface (on which the blade runs). I find it interesting that the model is running on a waterstone. I don't know about your waterstones, but mine are never going to be parallel to the base surface. They are flat - very definitely flat - but tend to slope either forwards or backwards. Can this guide cope with that? I cannot see how. So its use must be reserved for a certain flat surface. I am not sure if diamond stones can be included here even though the plate may be flat. In any event, the finest diamond stone is insufficient for final honing. What happens after this stage?

It is a pity that the guides do not use a roller since that would address the issue. I wonder why?

Regards from Perth

Derek

Slight clarification

Derek Cohen (in Perth, Australia)

>Why is it I only see my mistakes AFTER I have posted the message and then cannot correct it?!

I wrote: "The guide has a wide range of bevel angles, from 5 - 60 degrees. This allows for the honing of a scraper plane blade, which the LV cannot do."

I MEANT to say, "this guide can take blades 4" wide. This allows for the honing of a scraper plane blade, which the LV cannot do"..

My apologies.

Regards from Perth

Derek

Re: Slight clarification

William Duffield, on the Cohansey

>Which scraper plane are you having problems with? My L-N #112 has a 2 7/8" wide blade, which just fits the new LV MKII honing guide. The maximum width blade that my LV guide will accept is 2 59/64". As I noted elsewhere, the LV will not accommodate a 60° bevel angle, but a 54° bevel should be durable enough, especially since I no longer have to resharpen it by hand or in the kludge setup I've been using.

However, I have noted that the registration jig on the LV works much more precisely at lower bevel angles, and becomes very tricky to set at 54° and 2 7/8" wide. If you get the depth jig too close to the center of the guide, the blade won't fit, and if you get it too far to the edge, the blade registers against the blade clamp pin instead of against the side of the registration jig. All in all, it is a very good tool, and I am more than pleased with mine.

All I need to do now to make it perfect is make a plastic triangle with lips top and bottom on the perpendicular edge, to drop into the bottom of the registration jig so I can set the angle for the skew rabbet planes. One guage, flipped end for end, should work for both left and right skew rabbets.

Re: Slight clarification

Derek Cohen (in Perth, Australia)

>Duh! William, you are quite right about the #112. That note was written at 1:00 a.m. and I was thinking of the Mk I (possibly because there is a physical resemblence in the screw down). I also have a #112 and it works very well in the Mk II. Thank goodness I have you for backup! :)

I will post a bit more about sharpening skews (and other unusual blades)on the Mk II separately.

Regards from Perth

Derek

What's with 2 59/64ths? Can't you say 74mm?

Ian in Sydney

>tongue very firmly in cheek

Re: What's with 2 59/64ths? Can't you say 74mm?

William Duffield, on the Cohansey

>I realized the measurements were getting a bit absurd, but I figured I would have less chance of making an error and reporting something incorrect if I just read it off the scale I'm used to using. I could have converted into three or four different units, and probably made at least one mistake on every coversion. So, I'll just let the interested parties make their own conversions and their own errors. You wouldn't want me to try to translate my words to French or German either, even though there are many here who are more comfortable in those languages. I'll bet I could get slapped hard for an inept translation of tongue planted firmly in cheek.