lansky system hones not flat?

[Obsessed with Edges]

I wouldn't flatten lansky stones, because they are used in a guided system removing a millimeter of stone could result in 2~3 degree change.

I mount the hone to the rod such that the base (working surface) of the hone is flush with the rod. In other words, I put the rod & hone on a flat surface with the honing surface down, and make sure the rod is laying flat on the surface. Then tighten the thumbscrew with the hone & rod laying flat on the surface in this manner. As long as this is so, it makes no difference how thick the hone is. The hone will always be aligned properly (and consistent with other hones used) for the desired angle setting.

 

[chococrazy]

I mount the hone to the rod such that the base (working surface) of the hone is flush with the rod. In other words, I put the rod & hone on a flat surface with the honing surface down, and make sure the rod is laying flat on the surface. Then tighten the thumbscrew with the hone & rod laying flat on the surface in this manner. As long as this is so, it makes no difference how thick the hone is. The hone will always be aligned properly (and consistent with other hones used) for the desired angle setting.

It doesn't matter you're just moving everything proportionally the thickness of the stone is changed so how far you must travel to touch the blade will be different making the angle more obtuse.

 

[Obsessed with Edges]

It doesn't matter you're just moving everything proportionally the thickness of the stone is changed so how far you must travel to touch the blade will be different making the angle more obtuse.

As long as the working surface of all hones used in the sharpening sequence are moving in the same plane as the rod, the actual angle measurement is pretty much moot (I don't care what the degree number is as long as the angle is consistent from one hone to the next). The important thing is that each hone is set in the same plane relative to one another.

The L-shaped rod is what makes it possible. The 'short end' of the L, extending upwards through the hole in the end of the hone, allows the rod to be adjusted up or down to be flush with the plane of the hone's working surface, regardless of the thickness of the individual hone. The height (or thickness) of stone that exists above that plane is moot. Believe me, it does actually work.

 

[chococrazy]

As long as the working surface of all hones used in the sharpening sequence are moving in the same plane as the rod, the actual angle measurement is pretty much moot (I don't care what the degree number is as long as the angle is consistent from one hone to the next). The important thing is that each hone is set in the same plane relative to one another.

The L-shaped rod is what makes it possible. The 'short end' of the L, extending upwards through the hole in the end of the hone, allows the rod to be adjusted up or down to be flush with the plane of the hone's working surface, regardless of the thickness of the individual hone. The height (or thickness) of stone that exists above that plane is moot. Believe me, it does actually work.

It does work I know that, but to get the same angle you got before you flattened you'd have to adjust the L rod. You are right the only thing that really matters is the angle from hone to hone you wan't that to be as consistent as possible.

 

[Obsessed with Edges]

It does work I know that, but to get the same angle you got before you flattened you'd have to adjust the L rod. You are right the only thing that really matters is the angle from hone to hone you wan't that to be as consistent as possible.

That brings up another important point. If you're trying to exactly match the edge angle from a previous sharpening, you'd have to mount the clamp in exactly the same position on the blade every time. That's challenging in itself, and even that won't help as material is removed from the blade edge from one time to the next. The blade effectively gets narrower each time (from edge to spine), so the blade edge moves in toward the clamp, even if the clamp is mounted in exactly the same place on the spine. As the edge gets closer to the clamp, that side of the triangle gets shorter, and the angle will change.

It comes down to whether you're using the Lansky to just touch up a previous sharpening (in which case trying to attain the same exact angle is very important), or if you're using it to re-profile (which means it doesn't matter what the previous sharpening angle was, it's going to be completely redone anyway). I only re-profile with the Lansky, and do my edge maintenance with a strop or some very light passes on a ceramic stone freehand (followed by stropping).

 

[chococrazy]

That brings up another important point. If you're trying to exactly match the edge angle from a previous sharpening, you'd have to mount the clamp in exactly the same position on the blade every time. That's challenging in itself, and even that won't help as material is removed from the blade edge from one time to the next. The blade effectively gets narrower each time (from edge to spine), so the blade edge moves in toward the clamp, even if the clamp is mounted in exactly the same place on the spine. As the edge gets closer to the clamp, that side of the triangle gets shorter, and the angle will change.

It comes down to whether you're using the Lansky to just touch up a previous sharpening (in which case trying to attain the same exact angle is very important), or if you're using it to re-profile (which means it doesn't matter what the previous sharpening angle was, it's going to be completely redone anyway). I only re-profile with the Lansky, and do my edge maintenance with a strop or some very light passes on a ceramic stone freehand (followed by stropping).

True. That's a flaw with ALL angle guided sharpener.

 

[Obsessed with Edges]

True. That's a flaw with ALL angle guided sharpener.

Agreed. I sort of wish that the manufacturers of the angle-guided systems would be a little more specific in their documentation about what these systems are best suited for, i.e. re-profiling instead of edge maintenance & touch-ups. I bought my Lansky system years ago, at that time not really knowing it's limitations with regard to matching edge angles from one sharpening session to another. I suspect that's why a lot of people get frustrated with these systems (as I initially was), if they're just looking for something to maintain an existing edge bevel. That's why I only re-profile with it now.

 

[chococrazy]

Agreed. I sort of wish that the manufacturers of the angle-guided systems would be a little more specific in their documentation about what these systems are best suited for, i.e. re-profiling instead of edge maintenance & touch-ups. I bought my Lansky system years ago, at that time not really knowing it's limitations with regard to matching edge angles from one sharpening session to another. I suspect that's why a lot of people get frustrated with these systems (as I initially was), if they're just looking for something to maintain an existing edge bevel. That's why I only re-profile with it now.

You're suppose to reprofile all edges on a lansky before moving to a fine. Since common grind is 15 Lansky does a 17 only.

 

[Obsessed with Edges]

You're suppose to reprofile all edges on a lansky before moving to a fine. Since common grind is 15 Lansky does a 17 only.

I always do. But I've seen a lot of posts here on BF from folks complaining how difficult it is to set up the proper angle to touch up their existing bevel with a Lansky (or Edge Pro, GATCO, etc.) system. That's why I don't think the message is getting across to users about what they're best suited for.

And 'common grind' in reality is anything but. There's a huge variation among manufacturers as to the actual edge angle they put on their blades, and even between knives from the same manufacturer. The edge grinds are done by hand on a bench or belt grinder in most cases, so there's really no guarantee that the bevel consistently matches the advertised angle. And most of the knives I own came with a factory bevel that was more obtuse than 15 degrees (or 17 for that matter). That's why I re-profile almost every knife I buy nowadays, so I can set it up just the way I like it.

 

[fsatsil]

I wish 15degrees was a common factory grind it would save me alot of time re-profiling! I think 25-30 is a much more common? I also highly doubt that the angle numbers on the clamps are really correct because if you take three different clamp systems and set each to say 20 they will all be different angles. I think the numbers are meant to be more of a rough guide then the actual angle, but I could be wrong. I use the clamp style systems mainly to reprofile and use fine bench stones and/or a strop to do the touch ups.

 

[kzooglock23]

I had a nice diamond kit that was junk. Go buy DMT benchstones and they will last forever. The whole lansky set-up; the rods are bent, the guide ears are not straight, the clamp does not tighten on the spine properly (becaue the milled flat on the clamp is not straight). I ended up getting new stones and gave the piece of crap away. So long $70 bucks. Spend your money elsewhere.

SB

 

[Obsessed with Edges]

I wish 15degrees was a common factory grind it would save me alot of time re-profiling! I think 25-30 is a much more common? I also highly doubt that the angle numbers on the clamps are really correct because if you take three different clamp systems and set each to say 20 they will all be different angles. I think the numbers are meant to be more of a rough guide then the actual angle, but I could be wrong. I use the clamp style systems mainly to reprofile and use fine bench stones and/or a strop to do the touch ups.

Agreed on all points. And there's the issue of what makers actually mean when they specify their angles. Some of 'em specify in degrees per side (so 15 degrees would be 30 inclusive), and others will spec based upon the inclusive angle (so 15 degrees would be 7.5 per side; I LIKE THAT! ). And, when putting a blade in a Lansky/GATCO clamp, there's also the variable of how wide is the blade itself? Obviously, a wide blade like an 8" chef's knife would locate the edge much further away from the clamp, and a small blade such as the spear blade on a Swiss Army knife will put the edge much closer to the clamp. So, even if you're using the same slot on the clamp, the angles will be completely different. More often than not, I'll try to use the lowest slot possible, so long as I don't end up trying to 'sharpen the clamp'. I like my edges profiled for fine slicing, so thinner is my preference most of the time. The number setting on the slot is irrelevant as far as I'm concerned.

 

[Obsessed with Edges]

I had a nice diamond kit that was junk. Go buy DMT benchstones and they will last forever. The whole lansky set-up; the rods are bent, the guide ears are not straight, the clamp does not tighten on the spine properly (becaue the milled flat on the clamp is not straight). I ended up getting new stones and gave the piece of crap away. So long $70 bucks. Spend your money elsewhere.

SB

Yep. I've got the same pet peeves about the clamps. My biggest irritation is the inability of the clamp to adequately grip the blade spine, especially with small blades on pocket folders. I also have a GATCO set, and it's clamp is even worse (it's not flat on the gripping surfaces, so blades tend to 'pivot' side-to-side inside the clamp). And the small notch in the end of it absolutely will not hold a small blade at all. It's too rounded off near the edge, and the shoulder at the back of the notch is too shallow (and also rounded on the inside corner). I've been putting masking or painter's tape on the blade to provide a little more grip, but even then sometimes that won't quite help. And the 'ears' on the Lansky clamp are too thin, so they flex & bend too much if you put much pressure on the hone while sharpening. If nothing else, that forces me to use a coarser hone with lighter pressure to accomplish the same goal (which is good sharpening practice anyway).

So far, I've been adapting & improvising & just basically working my way around the flaws in these things, and I've been getting pretty good results in spite of the many shortcomings. I'll keep using it until I wear out the hones, in all likelihood. Gonna make sure I squeeze every last dollar out of it I can before moving on & trying something else.

 

[chococrazy]

Yep. I've got the same pet peeves about the clamps. My biggest irritation is the inability of the clamp to adequately grip the blade spine, especially with small blades on pocket folders. I also have a GATCO set, and it's clamp is even worse (it's not flat on the gripping surfaces, so blades tend to 'pivot' side-to-side inside the clamp). And the small notch in the end of it absolutely will not hold a small blade at all. It's too rounded off near the edge, and the shoulder at the back of the notch is too shallow (and also rounded on the inside corner). I've been putting masking or painter's tape on the blade to provide a little more grip, but even then sometimes that won't quite help. And the 'ears' on the Lansky clamp are too thin, so they flex & bend too much if you put much pressure on the hone while sharpening. If nothing else, that forces me to use a coarser hone with lighter pressure to accomplish the same goal (which is good sharpening practice anyway).

So far, I've been adapting & improvising & just basically working my way around the flaws in these things, and I've been getting pretty good results in spite of the many shortcomings. I'll keep using it until I wear out the hones, in all likelihood. Gonna make sure I squeeze every last dollar out of it I can before moving on & trying something else.

I guess I got a good set my father gave it to me a while ago I estimated it's probably 3~4 years old as a lot of the oil was gone. The stones had also a lot of metal build up, and one hone was out of the holder. I just glue that back into place with rubber cement. I can get hair whittling/ close to hair whittling just off of the fine diamond hone.