Hi. I am a newbie like the op. Found everyone's advice on which method to
use to sharpen tools very informative. I've decided to go with the
wolverine jig. My question was if anyone uses a 6" grinder or are these
jigs better with an 8". I currently have a 6" with a new 100 grit stone and
have been freehanding, which has not proved to be too difficult for me, but
for the sake of simplifying things, I think the jig would be great. TIA
Dave

Dave I use a 6" Delta grinder and it works fine. In the directions that
comes with the Wolverine it says to elevate the grinder an inch for 6 inch
grinders. Take a look at the following link to see what they mean. There is
a picture of a grinder, jig and platform for the jig.

Where are you. I'll give you a deal on mine.

Bob Darrah
West Linn, Oregon

"Dave jackson" wrote in message
hlink.net...
Hi. I am a newbie like the op. Found everyone's advice on which method
to use to sharpen tools very informative. I've decided to go with the
wolverine jig. My question was if anyone uses a 6" grinder or are these
jigs better with an 8". I currently have a 6" with a new 100 grit stone
and have been freehanding, which has not proved to be too difficult for
me, but for the sake of simplifying things, I think the jig would be
great. TIA Dave

Dave

I use a 6" hi speed grinder and actually prefer it over the 8" or other slow
speed grinders. I recently replaced my chinese made grinder with an Ebay
special Ryobi 6" thinline. I have the Wolverine and like the way the bevels
turn out on the 6 - it seems that the 8" grinders do not produce as
pronounced a concavity as the 6" on the bevels. The Wolverine jig is the
way to go - if only for the ability that it gives you in making the grinding
process a simple, predictable and repeatable one. That is the purpose of
any jig - to simplify or make consistent.

When grinding, make sure you take a moment to look at the bevel against a
stopped wheel (in Profile), adjust the platform or slider so the entire
bevel is in contact with the stone. That will produce an unfaceted bevel,
which will make your cuts smooth and the tool a pleasure to use.

Ray

I think there's much too much emphasis on bevel "facets" which may well
represent less than .001 in surface deviation and yet be visible because of
a slightly different grind angle. That's well within the compression
distance for even seasoned wood. It's the edge which cuts, and with a
skewed cut, even that's an average.

"Ray Sandusky" wrote in message
...
..

When grinding, make sure you take a moment to look at the bevel against a
stopped wheel (in Profile), adjust the platform or slider so the entire
bevel is in contact with the stone. That will produce an unfaceted bevel,
which will make your cuts smooth and the tool a pleasure to use.

I'm with you George. I used to free-hand and frequently had more than one
bevel. I now use a Wolverine for consistency and the grind certainly looks
prettier but IMO the multi-bevels were not the cause of any degraded cutting
performance.
Billh

"George" george@least wrote in message
...
I think there's much too much emphasis on bevel "facets" which may well
represent less than .001 in surface deviation and yet be visible because
of
a slightly different grind angle. That's well within the compression
distance for even seasoned wood. It's the edge which cuts, and with a
skewed cut, even that's an average.

"Ray Sandusky" wrote in message
...
.

When grinding, make sure you take a moment to look at the bevel against a
stopped wheel (in Profile), adjust the platform or slider so the entire
bevel is in contact with the stone. That will produce an unfaceted
bevel,
which will make your cuts smooth and the tool a pleasure to use.

Dave,
I have a 6" Delta from Lowes. It came with one white alum. oxide and one
grey wheel (as well as a light and a wheel grinder used to shape the
wheels).

For gouge sharpening I use a Sorby fingernail profile jig. This was easily
set up and does provide a consistency I have yet to be able to achieve
freehand.

-Kevin


"Dave jackson" wrote in message
hlink.net...
Hi. I am a newbie like the op. Found everyone's advice on which method
to
use to sharpen tools very informative. I've decided to go with the
wolverine jig. My question was if anyone uses a 6" grinder or are these
jigs better with an 8". I currently have a 6" with a new 100 grit stone
and
have been freehanding, which has not proved to be too difficult for me,
but
for the sake of simplifying things, I think the jig would be great. TIA
Dave

Geo

I think that many people have trouble with multifaceted bevels which round
over the cutting edge and cause the turner to alter their angle of approach
to the wood and makes the cutting edge of the tool efficient in a very small
section of the edge. A clean, concave bevel and consistently sharp edge is
preferred. So I advocate looking at the profile of the tool against the
wheel everytime the tool is dressed.

Ray

"George" george@least wrote in message
...
I think there's much too much emphasis on bevel "facets" which may well
represent less than .001 in surface deviation and yet be visible because
of
a slightly different grind angle. That's well within the compression
distance for even seasoned wood. It's the edge which cuts, and with a
skewed cut, even that's an average.

"Ray Sandusky" wrote in message
...
.

When grinding, make sure you take a moment to look at the bevel against a
stopped wheel (in Profile), adjust the platform or slider so the entire
bevel is in contact with the stone. That will produce an unfaceted
bevel,
which will make your cuts smooth and the tool a pleasure to use.

"Ray Sandusky" wrote in message

it seems that the 8" grinders do not produce as
pronounced a concavity as the 6" on the bevels.

Is that pronounced concavity a good thing, Ray? I always understood it was
undesirable, but perhaps I was misinformed. The books I have seem to imply
that concavity should be minimized.

Max

I think you see more of a problem than actually exists. You're describing a
dulled edge, which can be produced equally as well in a smooth-looking
grind.

Judge your edge by the work it does.

"Ray Sandusky" wrote in message
...
Geo

I think that many people have trouble with multifaceted bevels which round
over the cutting edge and cause the turner to alter their angle of
approach
to the wood and makes the cutting edge of the tool efficient in a very
small
section of the edge. A clean, concave bevel and consistently sharp edge
is
preferred. So I advocate looking at the profile of the tool against the
wheel everytime the tool is dressed.

Apologies. Now that the second cup is down and the adrenalin rush of the
first run complete, I realize that you sharpen with a jig. If so, you
certainly should visually inspect the grind for consistency of the _edge_.
Other than a constant pattern will indicate an incomplete grind and possibly
a dull edge.

For those who do not use jigs, it's not really meaningful. The edge is
tested with the thumbnail or, as I prefer, the work, then taken back to the
wheel if proven inadequate. The angles in a turning are so complex, in my
opinion, that even if they vary on the tool in minor degree - for instance,
having been altered by honing, they make only an academic difference, the
material being imprecise in its own right.

If the cutting pressure is minimal and the shaving smooth-edged, it doesn't
matter how you ground or honed the tool.

"George" george@least wrote in message
...
I think you see more of a problem than actually exists. You're describing
a
dulled edge, which can be produced equally as well in a smooth-looking
grind.

Judge your edge by the work it does.

"Ray Sandusky" wrote in message
...
Geo

I think that many people have trouble with multifaceted bevels which
round
over the cutting edge and cause the turner to alter their angle of
approach
to the wood and makes the cutting edge of the tool efficient in a very
small
section of the edge. A clean, concave bevel and consistently sharp edge
is
preferred. So I advocate looking at the profile of the tool against the
wheel everytime the tool is dressed.

This is a topic often discussed as well. I'd suggest you take a look at
http://mathforum.org/dr.math/faq/faq...e.segment.html and perhaps
download the spreadsheet. Plug in a chord length of a generous .375"
(beginning of bevel to edge) and the radii of 3" and 4" to see how very
little difference we're talking about.

Now notice that if you want the smoothest cut, you skew the edge, which
renders the concavity entirely irrelevant in use. Concavity is to
accommodate honing. You have to take less metal off to renew the edge,
because there's none in the middle.

If you're still a believer, might want to decide where, between 8 and 6, you
want to replace your otherwise useable wheel, and ship the unused portion to
me....

"Maxprop" wrote in message
nk.net...

"Ray Sandusky" wrote in message

it seems that the 8" grinders do not produce as
pronounced a concavity as the 6" on the bevels.
e
Is that pronounced concavity a good thing, Ray? I always understood it
was
undesirable, but perhaps I was misinformed. The books I have seem to
imply
that concavity should be minimized.

Max

Max

If you look at the work we do, you will note that most of it is round. so
if the bevel is alos rounded - concave- the bevel will sit on the wood
better so when the handle is lifted the edge wiil make contact in a more
complete manner than if the edge were made up of 1000 facets

Ray





"Maxprop" wrote in message
nk.net...

"Ray Sandusky" wrote in message

it seems that the 8" grinders do not produce as
pronounced a concavity as the 6" on the bevels.

Is that pronounced concavity a good thing, Ray? I always understood it
was
undesirable, but perhaps I was misinformed. The books I have seem to
imply
that concavity should be minimized.

Max

I'm in central Ohio. What kinda deal ya have in mind? thanks, dave
"Bob Darrah" wrote in message
...
Dave I use a 6" Delta grinder and it works fine. In the directions that
comes with the Wolverine it says to elevate the grinder an inch for 6 inch
grinders. Take a look at the following link to see what they mean. There
is a picture of a grinder, jig and platform for the jig.

Where are you. I'll give you a deal on mine.

Bob Darrah
West Linn, Oregon

"Dave jackson" wrote in message
hlink.net...
Hi. I am a newbie like the op. Found everyone's advice on which method
to use to sharpen tools very informative. I've decided to go with the
wolverine jig. My question was if anyone uses a 6" grinder or are these
jigs better with an 8". I currently have a 6" with a new 100 grit stone
and have been freehanding, which has not proved to be too difficult for
me, but for the sake of simplifying things, I think the jig would be
great. TIA Dave

"George" george@least wrote in message

This is a topic often discussed as well. I'd suggest you take a look at
http://mathforum.org/dr.math/faq/faq...e.segment.html and perhaps
download the spreadsheet. Plug in a chord length of a generous .375"
(beginning of bevel to edge) and the radii of 3" and 4" to see how very
little difference we're talking about.

I have a graphic geometry/trig. program on this computer--plugged in the
respective radii and voila, not much apparent difference when superimposed.
However I can visually see the difference between a bevel produced on my 6"
grinder vs. one on the same tool produced by my 8" grinder.

Now notice that if you want the smoothest cut, you skew the edge, which
renders the concavity entirely irrelevant in use. Concavity is to
accommodate honing. You have to take less metal off to renew the edge,
because there's none in the middle.

This makes sense.

If you're still a believer, might want to decide where, between 8 and 6,
you
want to replace your otherwise useable wheel, and ship the unused portion
to
me....

I went to an 8" grinder to accommodate the larger wheels based upon my
interpretation of what I was reading. But many herein use 6" grinders
(which I also own) with apparently good results and no problems. Guess it's
a non-issue. So why do the instructional books make such a big deal of it?
The implication is that if you don't have 8" wheels, or larger, you might as
well take up knitting baby blankets in lieu of turning.

Max

"Ray Sandusky" wrote in message

Max

If you look at the work we do, you will note that most of it is round. so
if the bevel is alos rounded - concave- the bevel will sit on the wood
better so when the handle is lifted the edge wiil make contact in a more
complete manner than if the edge were made up of 1000 facets

This seemed intuitive to me, even after reading the oft-repeated behest to
get a grinder with larger wheels in some of the instructional books.

Also see George's explanation and my response. So I rephrase the question:
why is such a big deal made about larger-wheel grinders? I've seen the work
of many of you herein, and frankly I doubt if bevel concavity plays much of
a role pro or con.

Max

Hey, everyone's gotta have an opinion. Some are based on discovery, like
math computations or scientific experimentation, some on experience, either
personal or vicarious, without attempt at explanation. Some are just the
way "Personality X" does things, and s/he's a recognized turner.

Doesn't matter how you get the edge, matters how you employ it.

I think Ray's sort of tweaking you and me with his "round" reply. If you
know your geometry, you know that two points define a line. If those two
points are the heel of your bevel and its edge, the only thing they can do
is slide along that line. To cut below the line, you need to lift the heel.
Same for a convex arc, where it would be impossible to cut anything smaller
than the radius of the wheel that ground the bevel while maintaining full
contact.

Then there's the concave....

Which is why "rubbing the bevel" doesn't mean at right angles to the edge,
but along it, where the depth of cut is more or less the same height above
chord you calculated, and a gouge with its swept and curved edge can take a
shaving which curls with little shear, and twists with more, while
referencing on the concave face of the cut.

"Maxprop" wrote in message
k.net...


I went to an 8" grinder to accommodate the larger wheels based upon my
interpretation of what I was reading. But many herein use 6" grinders
(which I also own) with apparently good results and no problems. Guess
it's
a non-issue. So why do the instructional books make such a big deal of
it?
The implication is that if you don't have 8" wheels, or larger, you might
as
well take up knitting baby blankets in lieu of turning.

Bite the bullet and buy yourself a Tormek and a couple of their jigs and
forget about how your going to sharpen your chisels.
If you don't have the cash go through some of your junk that you don't want
and put it on EBay and you'll get enough cash to buy it. That's what I did.


"Maxprop" wrote in message
k.net...

"George" george@least wrote in message

This is a topic often discussed as well. I'd suggest you take a look at
http://mathforum.org/dr.math/faq/faq...e.segment.html and perhaps
download the spreadsheet. Plug in a chord length of a generous .375"
(beginning of bevel to edge) and the radii of 3" and 4" to see how very
little difference we're talking about.

I have a graphic geometry/trig. program on this computer--plugged in the
respective radii and voila, not much apparent difference when
superimposed.
However I can visually see the difference between a bevel produced on my
6"
grinder vs. one on the same tool produced by my 8" grinder.

Now notice that if you want the smoothest cut, you skew the edge, which
renders the concavity entirely irrelevant in use. Concavity is to
accommodate honing. You have to take less metal off to renew the edge,
because there's none in the middle.

This makes sense.

If you're still a believer, might want to decide where, between 8 and 6,
you
want to replace your otherwise useable wheel, and ship the unused
portion
to
me....

I went to an 8" grinder to accommodate the larger wheels based upon my
interpretation of what I was reading. But many herein use 6" grinders
(which I also own) with apparently good results and no problems. Guess
it's
a non-issue. So why do the instructional books make such a big deal of
it?
The implication is that if you don't have 8" wheels, or larger, you might
as
well take up knitting baby blankets in lieu of turning.

Max

"George" george@least wrote in message

I think Ray's sort of tweaking you and me with his "round" reply. If you
know your geometry, you know that two points define a line. If those two
points are the heel of your bevel and its edge, the only thing they can do
is slide along that line. To cut below the line, you need to lift the
heel.
Same for a convex arc, where it would be impossible to cut anything
smaller
than the radius of the wheel that ground the bevel while maintaining full
contact.

It was most kind of you to include yourself in the above reply, but I was
the one who bit. Or perhaps Ray simply limits himself to 6" bowls. :-)

Max

"Ace" wrote in message

Bite the bullet and buy yourself a Tormek and a couple of their jigs and
forget about how your going to sharpen your chisels.
If you don't have the cash go through some of your junk that you don't
want
and put it on EBay and you'll get enough cash to buy it. That's what I
did.

Perhaps I "protesteth too much." I actually get fine, usable edges with my
8" grinder, and hone them with sanding discs mounted on a backing plate run
on the lathe. I've been doing them freehand successfully so far, and
probably will invest in a Wolverine jig system, but not the Tormek. While
nice, I just don't believe it will be of much benefit, apart from impressing
my woodworking friends.

Max

Careful Bill,

On this ng, KISS is an inappropriate attitude toward sharpening. It's
not simply about the importance of using sharp tools; it's being earnest
about special sharpening equipment and complicated methods.

Those not cognitively deprived place their lathe just behind the
sharpening center. Makes it convenient to turn around to the lathe
briefly and quickly return to the edge production centre. Ain't their
bevels handsome?

The rest of us sharpen turning tools any way that works. Our crass
offhand methods do leave ugly bevels with strange facets that don't even
know they can't cut.

TIC, 'G' & Arch

Fortiter,


http://community.webtv.net/almcc/MacsMusings