Quantcast
Asymmetry – The REAL DEAL - Page 3
+ Reply to Thread
Page 3 of 12 FirstFirst 12345 ... LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 120

Thread: Asymmetry – The REAL DEAL

  1. #21


    Dave Martell's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    Airville, PA
    Posts
    9,473
    I couldn't say, anything could happen ....or not

  2. #22
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    San Francisco
    Posts
    257
    Sorry, may have been clumsily phrased. Let me try again:

    When you say "but it is likely that some effect will occur over time". Is that a function of the "shoulders" growing further appart (i.e.: blade becoming thicker behind the edge) over time due to sharpening without thinning? If not, how does the effect occur over time?

  3. #23
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    London UK
    Posts
    106
    Well based on the maths of it, any error that's introduced due to the incorrect positioning of the edge and angles to said edge can only get more pronounced as the blade gets thicker. (i.e. it's also the reason that if you're 1* off when you're shooting a bb gun at a board 30' away you'll probably still hit (1* over 30' = 6" off target), but the same 1* difference over 100' means that you'll miss (1' 9" off target))

  4. #24


    Dave Martell's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    Airville, PA
    Posts
    9,473
    Quote Originally Posted by clayton View Post
    Sorry, may have been clumsily phrased. Let me try again:

    When you say "but it is likely that some effect will occur over time". Is that a function of the "shoulders" growing further appart (i.e.: blade becoming thicker behind the edge) over time due to sharpening without thinning? If not, how does the effect occur over time?

    I was referring to taking the edge away from matching the blade's asymmetry.

  5. #25
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    San Francisco
    Posts
    257
    Quote Originally Posted by Dave Martell View Post
    I was referring to taking the edge away from matching the blade's asymmetry.
    Which will get worse over time because the shoulders grow further appart?

    Would the edge not also move away over time from matching the blade's asymmetry if we use different angles?

    Seems like appropriate thinning should solve the issue with both methods, no?

    Dave, please let me know if I am out of line with my questions. I would completely understand if concrete answers fall into the "trade secret" category.

  6. #26
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Posts
    346
    great post Dave

    LOTS! of misinformation around the interwebs.

  7. #27


    Dave Martell's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    Airville, PA
    Posts
    9,473
    Quote Originally Posted by Dave Martell View Post
    I was referring to taking the edge away from matching the blade's asymmetry.
    Quote Originally Posted by clayton View Post
    Which will get worse over time because the shoulders grow further appart?

    Would the edge not also move away over time from matching the blade's asymmetry if we use different angles?

    Seems like appropriate thinning should solve the issue with both methods, no?

    Dave, please let me know if I am out of line with my questions. I would completely understand if concrete answers fall into the "trade secret" category.

    All questions are welcome but I'm having trouble understanding what you're asking, sorry.

  8. #28
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    San Francisco
    Posts
    257
    Here is drawing illustrating the difference (from what I gather) between using "same angle less abrasions" vs. "different angles". I understand this is just one possible scenario, but key difference would only occur on one side of the blade and would manifest itself in the highlighted yellow portion of the drawing.





    All in all the two methods do actually appear to create two different edge profiles, at least they do on my drawing. Question is does it matter or is one "better" than the other.
    So far, I don't know. but could see this mattering much more on thicker knives. Meaning thickness plays a role which is also why it gets worse over time IF you don't thin the blade.

  9. #29


    Dave Martell's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    Airville, PA
    Posts
    9,473
    Clayton, I would think that these two scenarios do offer different results. I'd like to point out that my opinion of doing either (as an absolute) isn't the best way to go about it though, so if you're looking for one way to be better than the other so that you can follow that you'll be headed down the wrong path.

    The correct way is to not use any formula or mathematical equation, work the bevels as they need to be worked. If it takes 10 min of grinding on one side and 2 min on the other or of you have to slightly tweak the angle for one side vs the other then do what you must to keep the asymmetry of the knife in tact which will in turn keep your knife cutting straight.

  10. #30
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    San Francisco
    Posts
    257
    Thanks Dave!

    Completely understand about not doing either as an absolute. I was really just trying to get to the bottom of the "vary sharpening angle vs. not vary sharpening angle from one side to the other" thing.

    Looks like varying the angle can have some merits and might be possibly worth the "pain".

+ Reply to Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts