The blade heel is a challenge

The blade in the video looked great!</p>

The only thing I can suggest is to be unaffraid to move back down to a more coarse grit when you notice the problem. It takes extra time, but if the imperfections bother you I think you’ll thank yourself for spending the extra time to get it right.

Also, with the coarse grits it is a good idea to avoid horizontal strokes or motions. These have been shown to cause micro chips at the apex that are very difficult to remove and leave the edge with a jagged feel.

One of the “cons” of the Wicked Edge is related to the relative motion of the stones at the heel.  The amount of steel removed at any point on the edge is a function of the linear inches of abrasive passing over that point fro each stroke.  Consider a point in the mid-point of the edge.  If you are using scrubbing strokes, a 3/4″-wide stone typically passes that point twice for each “back and forth” stroke.  A horizontal stroke produces 1.5″ of abrasive passing over that point for each stroke.  A 45-degree stroke (up or down) produces about 2.12″ of abrasive passing over that point.  An 80-degree stroke produces almost four full inches of abrasive passing by.  At the very end of the bevel, where the edge meets the ricasso, there is almost no linear amount of abrasive passing by if the stroke is anything but vertical.  In fact, between the ricasso and 3/4″ toward the tip (the width of the stone), the amount of abrasive passing any one point will be a variable dependent on the angle.  At the ricasso, the linear displacement is zero and at the 3/4″ point it will be the full extent of displacement dependent on the angle of the stroke.  Between the two points, the displacement will be a proportion dependent on the distance from the ricasso.  With 45-degree strokes, the abrasive displacement at 3/8″ will be about 1.06″.  At 3/4″ the displacement will be the full 2.12″ but at the end (the last bit of edge at the ricasso) it will still be zero.

The end result of this is that you’ll see a clear difference in the polish pattern in that last 3/4″.  If you try to compensate by taking some vertical strokes with the stones up against the ricasso, the resulting pattern will be a very obvious 3/4″-wide track.  This is caused by the fact that the downstream edge of the stone follows the edge which is riding against the exposed ricasso.  I try to eliminate this by starting my strokes with the stone against the ricasso, but then starting my stroke vertically, and then arcing forward and away from the ricasso.  With practice, you can blend the abrasive pattern into the main bevel.

If I haven’t made myself clear, please let me know and I’ll try again.  Or better yet, one of our advanced users can step in and straighten us both out.  I know there’s at least a couple here who are smarter than me.

7 users thanked author for this post.

sksharp, ArrSea Defense, wickededge, Organic, Marc H, Mark76, uilleann

tcmeyer’s explanation is exactly right.

1 user thanked author for this post.

tcmeyer