Messages

Well done, CB.

I think we have two questions to consider: Is it possible, and, is it practical? We can further divide practicality into mechanically and cost efficiently.

CB beat me to the finish line. I have been extremely busy this week, and have not gone down to my workshop. In the back of my mind, I was starting to think that the shaft length might not be such an issue. The bushings on my eight and ten inch CBN are the same part. My steel CBN wheels are 1 1/2" thick (approximately 38mm). The eight inch wheel works fine on the T7 or T8, which means it would work on any 250mm Tormek. I do not remember if I tested the T4 water trough for width with the SG-250. I am guilty of operating on an assumption, sloppy procedure.

I replaced both the plastic EZYlock and the plain nut on the leather honing wheel with the steel EZYlock and the quick connect nut, both originally intended for the T7/8. The fit is exact. (My opinion is that the plastic EZYlock and plain nut were used to keep cost down.) I interchange with five wheels on the EZYlock side, and prefer to leave the wheels dismounted after use. I like to remove (and replace) the leather honing wheel after use to keep the housing cleaner. I found the standard parts adequate. I just find the upgraded parts more to my liking. Some people soup up their cars; I drive a plain car and soup up my  Tormeks. The replacement parts cost around fifteen US dollars wach, and should be available through any dealer. The new website has well drawn exploded parts diagrams with part numbers.

I am somewhat concerned with the shorten thread length with the wider wheel on the T4. It has not been a problem with my other wheels. Due to the low RPM, it also does not seem a major safety concern.

I have faith that the T4's machined zinc top can meet the challenge of the wider grinding wheel. It handles my heavier steel CBN wheel without difficulty. So does the motor.

To me, the real question is the cost practicality. If one happens to already have a T4, this becomes a moot point. However, if the point is to avoid the cost of a replacement SG-250, around $190 US, spending $425 seems poor thrift to me. A T7 close out would not cost much more, and it comes with a brand new SG-250.

When an SG-250 has worn down to 200mm, it still has a loy of usefulness, however, eventual replacement is inevitable. Why not order the replacement and have the benefits of both a full diameter grinding wheel and a very usable spare for heavy work? There even seems to be a market for well worn used Tormek wheels, which would lessen the cost of a new wheel.

I think I may view the Tormek differently than many members. This may be in part because my first Tormek was stolen. I tend to regard grinding wheels, stone graders, and the diamond tip of the TT-50 truing tool as long term consumables, like brake shoes on my vehicle. If my plastic EZYlock nut broke, I would just order a replacement (steel) part. I still find the Tormek an amazing machine, but one made with replaceable parts.

Good snooping, CB.

Ken

In my opinion... this isn't really... buying a T-4 to continue using a stone below 200mm.  I see it as a T4 owner having access to a stone (mainly the SB-250), they otherwise wouldn't be able to use, being able to buy a used stone that still has some life, and even the benefits of sharpening on a wider surface.  Different way of looking at it I guess.

Speaking of costs... I'm kinda surprised that Tormek doesn't just use the same shaft for both... doesn't seem to be much of a difference.  (I'm sure there's reasons for it though)...    I think the metal EzyLock will hold though, on the shorter distance.  If I had a stone small enough in diameter... I'd do an actual test to see if it worked over time.

Bummer your first Tormek was stolen... glad you stuck with it though. 

Well done, CB.

You have ecplained knife sharpening accurately. In my opinion, sharpening one's first knife with the Tormek should be preceeded by some experience sharpening a 3/4" (19mm) Irwin or Marples blue chip bench chisel. (See the first topic "tips and techniques" for a more in depth discussion of this.) The flat, large, single bevel of the bench chisel is the simplist edge I know of. The square edge jig is secured to the universal support. This facilitates learning the feel and sound of Tormek grinding.

Keep up the good work!

Ken

Thanks.

I read the topic you referenced.  I don't disagree that sharpening a chisel would be a good learning experience, and a good idea to start, but for someone who gets a Tormek mainly to sharpen knives... they will probably start with a knife... my experience anyway.

I will probably add a few notes on "setup"... since, for example, I learned the hard way, it's possible to "over oil" the honing wheel.  ... as well as a few things to watch out for... like overgrinding the heel area.

Thanks again.

wootz,

Interesting test... for sure.

Have you tested setting your microbevel also edge-leading?  Some testing with another sharpener (tested similar to the BESS), showed an edge leading finish produced a better edge.  Be interesting to see if your testing supports that or not.

Also, what would a test finished on the 4K wheel without microbeveling show, (if you did that)?

Thanks for sharing.

[perfect]

My pleasure And that's okay, I think it's obvious I don't mind rambling, even if it only helps one person lol

I dunno, I still think a platform and a bit of practice might be more ideal than any pivoting jig... I just haven't gotten around to trying that method yet (I kinda get stuck on one thing once i get an idea in my head, and have to play it out till the end before I try the next approach)
But, yeah, if you're going to pivot a jig, i don't think you can ever really hope for consistency unless the pivot point itself is consistent. (In an ideal world, with unlimited tools and resources at my disposal,  the solution i would create for a perfect pivot point is way more involved than anything I'm actually going to go into for this  )

I do need to set up one of those laser lines though. I think the inconsistencies I had in my bevel angles were due to losing track of the LOC while just trying to eyeball it to a point on the body of the grinder

I agree... Herman's platform setup is probably the ideal route... sharpening on a platform is probably the closest thing to freehand sharpening, with the advantage of a guide.  Eventually, I might give it a spin.

I'm always torn between the "science" of sharpening... guides, precise angles, etc. vs. the "freedom" of freehand.  Adding the laser guide is a definite plus... at least there's some degree of accuracy (pun intended), although certainly not the same as an actual guide.  I'll still pursue an ideal jig setup... but most of my actual sharpening... I'll concentrate on improving my freehand results.

Okay, so.....the experiment kind of worked. Not quite as spectacularly or as groundbreaking as i might have hoped for, but there did seem to be benefits.

I need to continue practicing more, but the cut down collar and using the arc to align the tip with the 45° line as measured from the left side of the jig shaft DID  result in me being able to keep the entire length of the blade at (or very near) the LOC. Whereas setting the tip protrusion per Tormek's instructions and/or using the stock jig collar often left me unable to even come close.

Like I said, I need more practice to get it down consistently, but I managed to almost get an even bevel angle all along the length of that 7" butcher knife with the most extreme belly to tip transition (third one down in my first pic of all the knives). This was the one that fell the furthest below the LOC using the stock jig. So I remain optimistic, if still inexperienced lol
Bevel width changed a bit at the transition to the tip, but not as drastically as I've had with other methods, only what one would expect for the change in blade thickness as the tip approaches the spine.

I'll need to visit a thrift shop and find some more junk knives to keep practicing on,
And i think maybe round off the shoulder on my cut down collar just a bit

Thanks again for doing this.  (You and I may be the only ones interested...).

I learned, dealing with another guided sharpener, that most knives can be set based on the belly/tip area... and that the setting actually falls within a pretty similar distance between knives.  (Not surprising, since basically, all you want is the belly/tip area approximately the same distance as the "flat" portion from the pivot point(s)).  But, as you indicated... hard to find a "perfect" fit.  Still, this appears to me to be a better more consistent approach, than the difference the current collar creates in how it keeps the knife near the LOC.

Even the experiment where I didn't use the stop collar at all, and kept the knife at a laser line... I could tell as I tried a few knives that some knives needed a slightly different approach toward the tip... a slight lift, etc.... so doubt if any jig would be "perfect".  But hopefully, we're getting closer.

The experiment continues.... 

I hate when I make an assumption without actually trying to see if it works.  Assuming that the wider stone wouldn't fit... until I read in the thread grepper referenced, where Ken stated the shaft lengths were "about the same"... appears to be an incorrect assumption.

I recently acquired a T-4, so went to investigate.  Sure enough, the shaft on the T-4 extends out farther than on the larger model (apparently why the EzyLock cap is wider on the T-4).

So, I got my used 50mm wide stone (currently at about 218mm) and put it on the T-4.  (See attached picture... Photo 1).  From what I could tell, it might actually work.

There is enough shaft extending out, to screw on the EzyLock (Photos 2,3).  I used the metal version... not sure if enough extends out for the T-4 version to adequately work, and didn't want to risk breaking it.

The water trough also has enough width to accommodate the 50mm stone (Photos 4,5,6... another surprise).  I couldn't move it into place (stone is still to big of a diameter), but holding it up underneath, it cleared no problem.  In Photo 6, I hooked one side of the trough, and there appeared to be enough clearance width.

So, with palms sweating, I hit the "ON" button.  T-4 started right up... no issues that I could tell.

I can't answer if any issues would crop up... for example, is the machine: motor, housing, etc., robust enough to support the wider stone?  And, I'm not sure if the EzyLock that comes with the T-4 would work.  But, from this experiment anyway... no other mods appear to be needed to at least install the wider stone on the T-4... and can't say now that it "wouldn't work"... it appears possible.

New 'Blog' post... proofreaders welcome! 


Sharpening Your First Knife on the Tormek Using the SVM-45 Knife Jig

Somewhat unrelated to this but I think this is the right group to get the proper answer.
My SG250 is down to 230.  Would it work on a T4 once it is below 200 and I purchase a new wheel for the T8
Best Wishes
Tim

I don't believe so... the T-4 wheel is only 40mm wide (vs. 50mm of the T-8)... so it won't fit width wise... at least not without some alterations (longer shaft and different water container would be needed... even then, not sure if it's possible).

"Polish level" shouldn't be the only thing to look at... typically a harder medium will leave a crisper more refined edge (and retain more 'bite'), than a comparable finish level on a softer medium like leather.  You should be seeing a difference in how the knife/tool actually performs.  That, to me is the indicator of whether or not something should be used.  "Polish" becomes a byproduct.

In reality, the only real 'guide' needed is to properly set the knife in the jig, so that the belly/tip area is approximately the same distance as the flat portion from the pivot points.

Yes, this is exactly what that orange 45 degree line does. I don't know about you, but I can't "eyeball" that long of a distance at 2 angles

I agree... and perhaps didn't say it right.  You can accomplish the same thing just by measuring the distance, (like in the attached picture).  The 139mm is more what I was thinking isn't really a part of the process... it's just a convenient measurement... especially, since, as Ken pointed out... a lot of knives fall close to that.  But you can accomplish the same thing at any length.  (Probably still clear as mud haha).

I think the pudding will come out fine.

I'd like to see Tormek make a platform jig for knife sharpening.

I agree... and would add that a moveable "blade stop" could be added to the platform, that could be moved up behind the spine of the blade.  This would help control the blade... especially grinding into the bevel, it would prevent the blade from being "pushed back".

Kavik... thanks for doing all this.  Here's my inital thoughts...

It's funny... I was going to suggest cutting the collar off a jig... but didn't want to do it myself, (and don't like suggesting something I won't do).  Glad you did it.  I think just eliminating the sides of the collar (so that the jig could still "ride" on the USB, yet still pivot without significantly altering the pivot point), might get rid of some of the 'drawbacks'.  (BTW: from your earlier post about the lock screw getting in the way... the newer knife jig eliminated the lock screw completely).

Your comment that "after a couple of tries it just felt 'right'"... is what I referred to earlier... that pivoting a knife with the current jig, doesn't feel like a natural motion (and hinders the ability to maintain the LOC).

I think the template is a good reference... but want to point out that it's not really a part of the setup.  It does combine it with Ken's Kenjig setup and purpose though.  In reality, the only real 'guide' needed is to properly set the knife in the jig, so that the belly/tip area is approximately the same distance as the flat portion from the pivot points.  But the template is a good way to do that, and gives a "standard" to work from. (Hope that makes sense).

All in all, I think your testing was well thought out... and seems to validate what I'm thinking.  Hopefully your actual testing will further validate it.  Interested to hear what others have to say.  Thanks again!

You're welcome... hope it helped.

I'm sorry I made a mistake in naming the wheel I'm interested in. It is the Sun Tiger not Sun King wheel. It is produced by the Matsumaga company. I have heard that older Tormek machines were equipped with this wheel.

Pretty sure it's the same wheel.  Here's a bit of info I found...

Japanese Water Stone Wheel Sun Tiger Grain Size 4000
Improve your Tormek with these premier Japanese water stone wheels, made by Matsunaga (Brands: King and Sun Tiger) With the 4000 grain size you achieve a mirror polished edge. Specially recommended for those who sharpen a lot of knives and want a perfectly sharp edge without using a leather strip.

Either way, if it's a 4K wheel... it's a polish/finishing wheel... not a sharpening wheel.  (A replacement for the stock wheel, would be the 800g Japanese Waterstone version).

I have the chance to pick up a 4000 grit  Sun King wheel. I have no problem with the wheel that came with my used Tormek T7. I'm just wondering if it would be an upgrade to switch to the Sun King wheel. Thanks.

The 4K King wheel is more of a polishing wheel.  It could be used in addition to the stock wheel... to create a finer, more polished and refined edge... but it's not a replacement for the stock wheel... (it would be more of an alternative for the leather honing wheel).

So, for example, if all your knives/tools were sharpened with the stock wheel, you could then install the King 4K wheel and maintain the edges with it.