Veritas Mk II jig

[David Ragan]

Hi,

I love sharp tools, and have lots of $ invested in stuff to do it. I have about no ability to sharpen free style.

For the MK II jig, I find the set up a real hassle. Of course, I also have the eclipse jig.

I mean, you have to get those things set up perfectly to abrade at just the right angle. I typically use a magic marker to see where I am on the edge.

I already realize from an earlier post that I prob crank down those registration knurled knobs too tight.

Is there an easier way?

[Robert Hazelwood]

I'm not very familiar with the Mk II jig, but I use an eclipse-style pretty frequently. The trick to making them easy and fast to set up is to use a board with stops on it. The guide buts up against the edge of the board, and the blade slides forward until it hits the stops, which are set at whatever projection distance gives you the angle you want. I have blocks set up for 20, 25, 30, 35, and 40 degrees. Once this jig is made, it only takes a few seconds to get it set at just the right angle. Then there's really no need for a magic marker, just sharpen until you feel a burr, remove the burr, then proceed to the next grit.

I do put a microbevel on the edge as a last step on my finishing stone. This is mainly to get rid of any remaining burr, as well as make sure the actual edge is completely polished to the finest grit. I do this with an eclipse jig, and I just lift the roller wheel slightly off the stone and take a few forward strokes, maybe 2 or 3. I think microbeveling is one of the selling points of the Mk II jig, but I haven't had any problems doing it "freehand" using an Eclipse style. If you wanted to be more precise, after finishing the main sharpening at, say 30 degrees, release the blade and reset it on the stop block using a thin shim (maybe thin cardboard or a wood sliver) between the edge and the 30 degree stop. This will raise the angle slightly. Then take a few edge-leading passes on the stone, and you're done.

[Tom M King]

I use both jigs. The thing that fumbles onto the front of the MK II is only good for establishing protruding distances out the front to start with, as far as I'm concerned. I have lines scribed onto the plywood base of a grinder, instead of something to jamb the cutting edge into. Just put either jig, with blade in it, upside down against the edge of the base, and cutting edge to right line. The Veritas cap iron screwdriver makes easy work out of tightening the Eclipse. My helpers can hone an edge as good as I can, using the
MK II.

[Patrick Harper]

I never was a big fan of the Veritas. It simply takes too long to setup. I use the Eclipse for my plane irons and the Kell for my chisels. The Kell is a bit tricky to use at first, but works great for anything up to 1".

[Prashun Patel]

MKII is a polarizing jig. I'm in the opposite camp as the previous posters. I love it. It's not that you have to get things set up perfectly, it's that you have to understand its quirks.

I rarely have to mark the edge. Once you get confident setting it up squarely, that is.

To that end, the fumbly thing is useful for squaring the blade AND setting the protruding distance.

One thing eclipsers don't appreciate about the MKII is that because the roller can be set at multiple positions (effectively altering the blade clamp height to the surface) you have a couple protrusion options for some of the common blade angles. This is very helpful when sharpening stubby blades like a spokeshave or long blades that you want at a shallow angle, like a paring chisel. With the eclipse, one protrusion fits all.

I also own an eclipse and feel both have their place.

[Mike Brady]

Don't you love sharpening threads? You can never say enough, so I'll heap on few things: The Mk II and the eclipse (particularly the genuine UK Eclipse brand) jigs are both good except for narrow chisels. Neither holds a chisel reliably and repeatably well. Supposed, LV was going to come out with another attachment to hold chisels, but for some reason, otherwise great tool makers don't keep their promises when it comes to new sharpening jigs. People seem to have trouble setting up the MkII. It is fiddly. I never have problems with mine, and the folks who have problems could use a little coaching to solve their problems.

There is a major difference between the above honing guides: On the MkII the blade in the jig registers flat (not beveled) side., using the shiny metal scale that slides onto the front. Because of this the thickness of the blade has no influence on the measurement, and the angle desired will be achieved on any iron or chisel. This not true of the Eclipse. A plane iron inserted into an Eclipse jig registers on the beveled side of the blade, and every thickness of blade will have a different honing angle if you use projection measurement to set it up. The only accurate way to set an Eclipse jig is to use a protractor, Wixey guage, or an angle block, all of which read from the non-beveled side of the blade. This means that the stop blocks that use projection measurement (we all use these, right?) as a way to set an Eclipse are giving you something "close" to what you intended, but not exactly. Your really thick irons will be at least several degrees off.

I should add that I have three real Eclipse brand guides, all of which are the same model no.36, but dissimilar in details. One of them holds chisels pretty darn well in that second notch that is closer to the roller wheel. The other two are pretty useless ( at least on my LN chisels) because they don't grip the sides of a chisel well enough to keep it flat in the jig.

[glenn bradley]

I'm with Prashun; the MKII couldn't be much simpler. We're talking about the honing jig, yes? Slide on the registration jig, slip the cutter into place registering it along the side and touching the end stop. Snug the knobs down (no need to crush the cutter ), remove the registration jig and go at it. I also have a Kell which, like the MKII depends on sides of the cutter being perpendicular (or at the appropriate skew angle) to the cutting edge. This could just be one of those things that takes a knack and those of us with it, don't even know we have it. I'm sure folks who simply sharpen by hand without issue cannot figure out why I lack that ability .

[Curt Putnam]

I have and use the MK II, Kell and Eclipse style guides. The Kell excels with the narrow chisels (1/4" and down) and is good up to about an inch - also does great with spokeshave blades. I like the eclipse for putting cambers on plane irons. Yes, I could do that with the MK II cambered roller but then I have to change rollers. The MK II is the jig I start with (only one that can do skews). I move to the others as already stated.

[Mike Cherry]

Im relatively new to woodworking so take that for what its worth. Over the last few years i went from the MKII, to free handing, to the Eclipse with Lie Nielsen style stops for angle setting. The funny thing is, everytime I change methods, my edges get sharper. I tried the MKII again yesterday for the first time in two years, and my blade has never felt sharper(could be mental I suppose).

The point is, I feel like the jig that works best for me is actually me. As I get better at sharpening, the jigs and methods seem to mean less.

[Paul McGaha]

I prefer the eclipse style jig and this angle setting jig from LN:

https://d3h1zj156zzd4j.cloudfront.ne...SettingJig.pdf

[Jim Koepke]

My curiosity is always piqued when there is mention of exact sharpening angles. It is as if 25º is going to somehow magically be better than 26º for paring dovetails.

The purpose of a gauge block is to set the blade in a holder for repeatability. The problem is when a blade is abraded on an abrasive surface, the angle will change slightly. If there is a lot of material removed, the angle will change a bit more. Thus, the next time the blade is set in the holder with the gauge block it will look like it isn't the same as last time.

Freehand sharpening eliminates these kinds of problems.

I do put a microbevel on the edge as a last step on my finishing stone. This is mainly to get rid of any remaining burr, as well as make sure the actual edge is completely polished to the finest grit. I do this with an eclipse jig, and I just lift the roller wheel slightly off the stone and take a few forward strokes, maybe 2 or 3. I think microbeveling is one of the selling points of the Mk II jig, but I haven't had any problems doing it "freehand" using an Eclipse style.

Mike, it often comes to mind that maybe setting a thin metal ruler under the roller might do the same thing with more repeatability. Of course it would limit the length of the stroke one could administer to the edge. Though for a micro bevel it doesn't take a lot of abrasion.

jtk

[Frederick Skelly]

I'm in the opposite camp as the previous posters. I love it. .....the fumbly thing is useful for squaring the blade AND setting the protruding distance. I also own an eclipse and feel both have their place.

+1. I dont find it fumbly or slow. The only time I have difficulty is with narrow blades, and I THINK I found a technique for that last weekend.

Fred

[ian maybury]

Must say i find the mk 2 quick and highly predictable - but only since flattening and lining the blade clamp so that it reliably grips on blades as outlined a few months ago in a similar thread (the stock power coated surface is both a bit slippery and also not that flat), and sorting out a small roller misalignment issue. There's also right and wrong ways to use it. The cylindrical roller for example cannot as delivered due to tolerances be relied upon to accurately place a bevel in the same horizontal plane as that the clamp holds the blade in - better to (a) as posted before dial in the gauge to improve this alignment, and (b) use the cambered roller and let the set of the blade on the stone deliver the required alignment. Except that is for blades too narrow for this to work - say below 3/4in when the cylindrical guide (presuming it's delivering accurate alignments) is easier.

Each to his own on angles Jim, and this one keeps on coming up - and i'd argue there's no right or wrong in it. If it works it works.

That said i don't think anybody is claiming failing to hit a bevel angle within a degree or two makes any significant difference to the performance/cutting action of a tool.

Where it can make a very big difference is when sharpening single bevel style on e.g. a japanese tool, or just when wanting to touch up a microbevel again - it IS necessary to get back pretty close to the prior angles. That's whether or not the tool is being hand sharpened or a guide is in use. For sure also a micro bevel over a slightly (say 5 deg) shallower angled and hollow ground primary bevel is a bit less demanding in this regard - but not if both ends of the bevel are required to simultaneously touch the stone as is commonly the case when hand sharpening.

Honing guides can in a sense be the cause of their own misfortune. Especially if used with a wide cylindrical roller over a single bevel as above, or if a specific blade doesn't have straight sides or whatever - they have to be able to repeatedly place the blade in the correct alignment in two directions if re-sharpening on a stone isn't to be problematical. A further complicating factor with a guide can be the need to move from a fine grinding tool like the top surface of a Work Sharp to waterstones - if the method used doesn't replicate the prior grinding angles on the waterstones then there's going to be an awful lot of cleaning up required on the latter.

This repeatability is pretty straightforward to achieve using the angle setting accessory with a tuned Mk 2 guide….

[Hilton Ralphs]

I should add that I have three real Eclipse brand guides. One of them holds chisels pretty darn well in that second notch that is closer to the roller wheel. The other two are pretty useless ( at least on my LN chisels) because they don't grip the sides of a chisel well enough to keep it flat in the jig.

Mike, perhaps a modification is needed as Deneb illustrates on this video.

[David Ragan]

Must say i find the mk 2 quick and highly predictable - but only since flattening and lining the blade clamp so that it reliably grips on blades as outlined a few months ago in a similar thread (the stock power coated surface is both a bit slippery and also not that flat), and sorting out a small roller misalignment issue. There's also right and wrong ways to use it. The cylindrical roller for example cannot as delivered due to tolerances be relied upon to accurately place a bevel in the same horizontal plane as that the clamp holds the blade in - better to (a) as posted before dial in the gauge to improve this alignment, and (b) use the cambered roller and let the set of the blade on the stone deliver the required alignment. Except that is for blades too narrow for this to work - say below 3/4in when the cylindrical guide (presuming it's delivering accurate alignments) is easier.

Each to his own on angles Jim, and this one keeps on coming up - and i'd argue there's no right or wrong in it. If it works it works.

That said i don't think anybody is claiming failing to hit a bevel angle within a degree or two makes any significant difference to the performance/cutting action of a tool.

Where it can make a very big difference is when sharpening single bevel style on e.g. a japanese tool, or just when wanting to touch up a microbevel again - it IS necessary to get back pretty close to the prior angles. That's whether or not the tool is being hand sharpened or a guide is in use. For sure also a micro bevel over a slightly (say 5 deg) shallower angled and hollow ground primary bevel is a bit less demanding in this regard - but not if both ends of the bevel are required to simultaneously touch the stone as is commonly the case when hand sharpening.

Honing guides can in a sense be the cause of their own misfortune. Especially if used with a wide cylindrical roller over a single bevel as above, or if a specific blade doesn't have straight sides or whatever - they have to be able to repeatedly place the blade in the correct alignment in two directions if re-sharpening on a stone isn't to be problematical. A further complicating factor with a guide can be the need to move from a fine grinding tool like the top surface of a Work Sharp to waterstones - if the method used doesn't replicate the prior grinding angles on the waterstones then there's going to be an awful lot of cleaning up required on the latter.

This repeatability is pretty straightforward to achieve using the angle setting accessory with a tuned Mk 2 guide….

Ian, are you saying that I should:
1) find a way to take off the powder coat of the MkII? How do you do it? How can a guy like my with just a big file do it? Very carefully is good enough?
2) You are correct in my original ongoing frustration in duplicating the original bevel, whatever the degree is.
3) I love your point: you are saying that using the cambered roller allows the bevel to find its own state of flushness with the stone surface? If this is the case, I will indeed go over to the cambered roller. And, if that is the case, that would also mean for me to apply more finesse in sharpening, less downward pressure-to not force the blade down so much.
4) if I start using, say, the microbevel setting on the MkII guide, then my issue with exactly reproducing the sharpening angle is not that big a deal, right? Because I re-establish the microbevel each time?

And, I love the link to the LN angle setting jig that Paul posted above. Cool

But, is it accurate enough?

And, after so many times of fitting a super sharp blade edge in there, don't you in fact cut a groove in the block, effectively lengthening the guide, thus decreasing the subsequent sharpening angle?