Messages

Perhaps we should restate the question to read, how many would like to see improvements to the knife sharpening jigs, and be willing to pay twice as much for the jigs?

Ken

Hey Ken:

Not sure why you're fixated on a redesign of the knife jig being such a high cost?  I don't think a redesign of the collar, and/or a self centering clamp, would be a major increase in price.  Both are available on other sharpening systems... and I think it could fall well within the current price range, since it's more of a change to the current model... not a total change to the clamp setup itself.

True, you could make a clamp as detailed as some of the other clamps (the drill bit jig comes to mind)... but not really asking for that here. 

Looks like the T-2 is now avail. in the U.S.?...




Tormek T-2
Sweet!  (It's a cool looking sharpener). 

I think I said the wrong thing then.  (falling asleep writing that, been working extra)
The truing tool.

Ah.   It also now comes with the T-8.   

Make the stone grader part of the package.  (do you need to sharpen, or grind out chips?)
Include shims or a new jig to deal with non parallel side blades.
Sometimes I wish the leather wheel was further out (ever hit the tip of a newly sharpened knife, back on the grinding wheel when buffing?).
A platform, for when the small knife jig, isn't appropriate.

Thanks for the response.

Not sure if it always was... but the stone grader is now part of the package.

I would rather see a new jig vs. shims.  And it would be nice to see an accessory that would extend the leather wheel position farther out (so you also wouldn't have to remove it while sharpening).

Good ideas!  Thanks!

Reading the manual section on "Thin Knives", diagrams on angle setting using the Angle Master depict the thin knife as having parallel sides, except for the cutting edge.  That is not what my knives have.  Instead they are angled.  A statement attributed to Leatherman, regarding their multi-tool knives stated the angle of the main blade is 9 deg. and the cutting edge 32 deg. (IIRC).  The manual seems to indicate that the bevel angle (cutting edge) can be set directly off of the blade side, but that ignores the angle of the blade sides.  Doesn't one have to subtract half the angle of the blade in order to get the correct angle for setting on the Angle Master? 

In the case above, it would be half of 32 deg. (16) and half of the blade angle (4.5) for a setting angle for the Angle master of 11.5 deg.?

Thanks,

Rick

You're correct that you need to make the adjustment... but you need to adjust the other way.  So, in your example, if you want to sharpen at 16 deg. per side, and the blade is tapered 4.5 deg., I would set it at 20 or 21 deg. (I wouldn't worry about the 1/2 deg.... just document what you use for future reference).

I would also mark the edge with a Sharpie marker, and make sure you're removing metal where you want.  (Manufacturer numbers and reality are often two different things).

Newbie Here, First Post,

Just recently received a T8 and several jigs. I will be doing primarily drill bits and knives. Watched the videos and reading the manual and everything else I can find.  Came across references to a "Grinding Angle Adjustment booklet" and that it is posted on the forum. I've been searching for where it is posted so I can download it.  Can't find it, so I'm asking for help.

Thanks,

Rick

Welcome to the forum.

I created a page with some links I found useful in the forum (pertaining to knife sharpening)... you'll find it here...  http://wp.me/P93bLq-g.

A link to the booklet is about half way down... but you can also find it in the thread that explains it here...  https://forum.tormek.com/index.php?topic=1849.0.

Enjoy!

CB,

I use the 3/4" Irwin Blue Chip chisels only for training and testing. A new Tormek owner is certainly free to start with whatever he wishes. Regardless of one's specialty, I believe a chisel is the most basic edge and should, in my opinion, should be the first learning tool. It is good training for Tormek fundamentals.

Ken

"To sharpen a knife, you must first sharpen a chisel"... does have sort of a zen "vibe" to it.     (Or, should I say... a "ken vibe" to it...)

It may be interesting for you to read how my granddaughter understands BESS. 
http://bessex.com/forum/showthread.php?tid=18

Jan

Best "results" I've seen!!!      

You know what's the worst part of this? All the thought I'm giving this issue, and i really don't intend to use this for much knife sharpening anyway lol

Bought it for the tool sharpening, i enjoy my bench stones for my knives too much to give that up, even if I did come up with a perfect jig.
Something to be said about the routine there, setting up and soaking the stones, then just putting on some music and relaxing while working up through the progression.
To me the tormek is functional, efficient, an apt tool when you want to get through the job.
Whereas freehand sharpening on the bench stones is something I'll do for the sake of doing it sometimes. It's as much about enjoying the process as it is about the end result

(not the same for chisels, planes, or turning tools. Those are always a chore in my mind, so the quicker and more accurate the better)

I do enjoy some "stone" time... but have found that using the Tormek can be just as enjoyable.  One of the reasons I returned to using it more. 

Yes, I have BESS scores for all traditional sharpness tests.

But this chart is due to be published in the Australian Knife Magazine in November, I am not allowed to make it public before that.
After November will share it on www.bessex.com

Haha... ok... thanks.  (Glad to see there's at least an interest in what the actual numbers mean....). 

...120 BESS, with average 150-160 BESS, which is smooth forearm shaving against the skin in traditional sharpness tests.

Since you mentioned this... is there a chart or comparison of what the different BESS numbers compare to (especially in the 'real world', like your example)?  I've seen the BESS website/forum... but haven't run across a comparison of what the numbers equate to.

p.s.  I've seen the "0-2000" chart... but it doesn't define the "level of sharp" I'm asking.

It looks kind of cool on there!  Like nice big tires on a truck.  If it fits and goes round and round, I'd try it and see if it indeed works.  But that's just me.

I could be wrong, (for the first time in my life  ), but I doubt if any forum members can really answer your question about machine robustness, etc. I would surely think the housing would have not problems.  Since you got it to fit, and if it seems to work, you may be good to go.

However, you could always run it by Tormek support and see what they say.  If you do, please let us know.

Ha... I thought the same thing... looks pretty cool.

I know the forum can't answer the durability questions... just thought I'd point out mainly that I have no idea... so "buyer beware".  From the other thread, RichColvin already asked Tormek and was told no... so probably won't pursue that.  (I would think if they wanted users to do it, they would advertise it... since it would make a good selling point?)  (Support... not advertise, might be a better word...).

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.