Messages

The SVD-186 & SVD-186R work on the Tormek 1200. 

The bushings may be an issue with the extra weight.  

That could work.  One more thing I was thinking about (as it came up when looking at sharpening milling bits) is that the wings must be equal sized and come to a point at exactly the axis of rotation of the drilling bit.  The DBS-22 has a stop built in to that each wing is ground the same.

I think it could work, but I have the Tormek DBS and like how it offers the ability to change the point angle, and to add a secondary bevel.  Those seem to be limitations to what you're advocating.

But I believe the use of the SVD-110 tool rest is awesome.  I particularly want to use the green part from your pictures in a design I'm working on for a goniostat. 

I have the SJ-250 Japanese waterstone for my SuperGrind 2000, along with the other Tormek grinding wheels (SG, SB, DC, DF, & DE).  I can pass on my experiences, which may help give you some insight into what you are seeking.

The 4000 grit SJ is significantly smoother than the 1200 grit DE Diamond Extra Fine, so the surface produced by the SJ is correspondingly smoother.  This may matter for the tool you are sharpening, or may not.

The question I believe you should ask is if honing of the tool is sufficient or if the SJ-250 is needed.  For many tools, the honing step is sufficient.

I really like using the SJ to add a micro bevel to tools where honing is not sufficient.  My experience is that the SJ is is not as prone to round over the edge as a honing wheel can (if the honing wheel is not used properly).  I also find that the edge left by the SJ seems sharper, but I've not tested it to be sure.  I can only reply based on the surfaces left by both processes.

Adding a micro bevel takes extra effort and time.  The tools where doing this makes sense include:

• chisels
• plane blades
• wood lathe skews (especially when turning softer woods)

In all these cases, the surface left is stunning.

If you do incorporate the SJ into your sharpening process, I recommend you use it for adding a micro bevel to the tool.  This will significantly decrease the time needed for sharpening.  The micro bevel process is described here:  https://sharpeninghandbook.info/MicroBevels.html

Would you share the STL files?

[HUGE]

Rob, old friend, you haven't yet completely sold me on the Axminster deal, unless someone wanted a second Tormek. Even then, my inner thrifty old Yankee is skeptical. £400 could buy a lot of water and shininess. Or, I would think the proceeds from selling your old reliable Tormek plus that £400 could pay for a shiny new T8 Original with shiny new grinding and honing wheels, all with Tormek's new warranty.

I would stay in the serious considering mode a while longer.

Ken

I agree.  I've had to replace some parts over time on my Tormek T-2000, but it is a beast.  And some of the replacement parts are better than the original ones, so like Robert Pirsig's bike (in Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance), it is always getting better!  As long as Tormek sells replacement parts, I'll keep using it.

Some Tormek stuff is worth replacing when new ones come out:

• The SVD-186 is a significant upgrade from the SVD-185, which was a nice upgrade from the SVD-180
• The SE-77 is a really nice upgrade from the SVH-60
• The KJ-45 is a really great upgrade from the KVM-45, especially when used with the KS-123.
• The TT-50 is a HUGE improvement over the ADV-50

The base machine isn't in that category for me.  It is more like the grindstones  I have the diamond grinding wheels, yet I find myself using the SG grindstone most often. 

Summary:  if you want to get a 2nd machine, then this is a good way to go. Otherwise, I'd keep the machine you already have. 

Well, as one who's worn out two SG and one or two SB grindstones in the 21 years I've had my Tormek, I'd say it is very possible.

To me, 178mm is the more interesting point.  I've always thought of 180mm as the min.  And to get down to that, I had do some interesting machinations to get the water trough on the T-2000 raised up high enough (https://sharpeninghandbook.info/Grindstones-StoneLife.html).  

There are three factors in play here, and as this is a non-standard grind angle, you will need to figure out the recipe for yourself.

I recommend you incorporate these thoughts:

• The USB's height above the grindstone: I recommend you use the TTS-100 to set this and start with hole A.  Using this approach locks down this variable and makes for a repeatable approach.
• The JS on the SVD-185 or SVD-186: this determines the amount of sweep in the bowl gouge's wings (higher numbers = greater sweep). The chart in the Tormek manual shows this (page 82 in edition 10.5).  Again, locking down this variable makes for a repeatable approach.
• The projection of the tool from the SVD-185/186 is the last variable.  It will probably need to be greater than 75mm, but you will need to experiment with this factor.

These notes are all based on grinding the tool's edge on the grindstone in a traditional manner.  You might want to also consider using the multi-base (MB-100 or MB-102) as this will allow for sharpening at these angles with shorter projections.  This will become more important if you don't have enough tool shaft to achieve the needed projection. This approach is a little less repeatable though, and I'm sure that you already know that turning tools need to be resharpened often, so repeatability is key.

Good luck, and do keep us up-to-date on what you find.

I love the mrpete222 videos.  

I would have used the KJ-45.  Am I missing something?

I've made one of these and, as usual, Per's design is excellent.  

Is the Japanese knife sharpened on both sides, or only one?

This video overviews the SVS-32 which is the predecessor to the SVS-38, and works the same way (just 6 mm narrower).

https://youtu.be/gJTXMrHJQ88?si=3gsGKFTY0rgM2YA7

As noted, it works with tools down to 45mm / 1 ¾" in length. 

Either can be combined with an MB-100 or MB-102 and, using the side of the grindstone, get even closer.  Here's a video about the MB-100 (the MB-102 works the same way for this).

https://www.youtube.com/live/3r_1mZ9XjIs?si=PF8TGLUvtUxR3MEm

I've been round the bend with this issue, too.  The truth is that it's just a limitation of the current system, and there's no perfect way around it.  If you draw the blade straight across, keeping the jig perpendicular to the guide bar, and only raise your elbow to bring the belly into contact with the stone--as suggested by Tormek--you will have a higher bevel angle toward the tip. 

If, on the other hand, you pivot the jig to get the belly/tip lower down on the stone, there will be some inconsistency in that area, although it can be minimized with practice.  However ... there are some situations where no amount of pivoting can get the tip low enough to match the angle on the rest of the knife.

These days I don't let it wreck my head.  The angle difference generally isn't that extreme, and the system gets knives sharp, and quickly. 

I would ad to this:  identify a process which is repeatable.  In my book, that is the #1 key to success.