We cannot do fine hand tool woodworking without very well sharpened tools. Yet, we want sharpening done in high quality and without great effort. 

So let us look at logical efficiency.

Now for most tools, I work with a 27.5° main bevel, and a 32.5° edge bevel. Use your choices in angles. (Forget my decimal numbers. I just established them long ago with equipment and nerdiness.)

If the working edge has deteriorated a lot from use, particularly with edge breaks from rough work, or if there has been a large series of sharpening done that greatly expanded the second, steeper bevel (32.5°), you need to regrind. Most of the time, you don’t need to do this but it is easiest to do with a machine.

The first step is to grind the lower (27.5°) edge on a wheel. The expensive Tormek machine is a basic approach. I have had one for about 25 years but now I suggest a similar machine at about one-fourth the cost. I also suggest a CBN wheel (cubic boron nitride), 10 or 8-inch diameter (8 is cheaper and easier), and ideally 2 inches wide, but spend less for a narrower wheel if you need to.

Grind away the bulk of the edge. If the edge tip is not broken up much, then barely avoid cutting the very tip (and usually the corner at the top). If the edge is broken up a lot, then just barely cut it away too.

It is not necessary to be exact about the angle. Here, we are working efficiently without a high-speed wheel. I like a 200 grit wheel. 

Now to the stones. Or directly to them if the edge is not too bad.

If the blade has been machined fully or just short of a rough edge, start with a course stone at the low angle (27.5°).

If this is one of the majority of sharpening times without machining, go right to the intact higher angle (32.5°) 

Now let us look at how we will use the hand-work stones.        

Here, organize your approach based on the micron levels. The micro numbers guide the fineness of the cuts. I work with these:

45µ  Most coarse.

9µ  I use a two-sided 9µ-45µ combo DuoSharp E/C. It is fast.

2µ  The step from the 9µ.

0.5µ  The final step.

I use the 45µ on a more dulled edge, especially with breaks, and if it has been machined to the edge.  

However, most of the time I start with the 9µ. That is because I try not to delay to resharpen. In a really minimally imperfect edge, I go right to the 2µ. Use your judgement. Sense and see the response you are getting from the stones. 

Note that the step interval is about 1/4 to 1/5 degree of fineness. That is the key to making sense of the stone progression. You could use smaller micron steps but you will need more stones, more setup, and probably take more time.

From the DuoSharp 9µ I go to a Shapton Kuromaku 8,000 (~2µ), then finish with the 0.5µ. Regarding the finest stone, after many years I continue to use the Suehiro 20,000 0.5µ as the final stone. It is a great stone leaving a great edge. It is now about $265! The Shapton Kuromaku 30,000, also 0.5µ, is even more at about $345, and their 30,000 Glass Stone, also 0.5µ, is about $290! 

But I notice online, the Proyan 15,000, which is 0.64µ, is only $46! I have never tried it but it sounds like a nice deal to finish off with.

Another way, but not quite as good, is to use a 3 or 4µ instead of a 2µ, and finish with a 1µ, such as a the much less expensive Shapton Kuromaku 12,000. Finishing off with a mere 3µ, such as a DMT 8000, will not give the same quality edge as the finer stones.

That is a rational plan for managing your tools. I will later go on to discuss  some ultra-fine very quick applications to do after the stoned edge.

Dear readers, you might wonder why I started writing again last week but was gone for over two years. (This site started in 2008.)

Here is the story.

I was in excellent health – regular doctor visits, no medications, excellent diet, weight, and exercise. However, at the gym one day, I fully collapsed, immediately unconscious. I was rushed to the hospital and underwent brain surgery for a major hemorrhagic stroke in my left-side brain. 

It was May, 2023. This was very bad.

For the next six months, with some hospital stay, shifting to home stay, and back to medical institutions, I worked on recovery. Unfortunately, things got worse by the end of 2023 and early 2024. The second major surgery, to put parts of my skull back together and try to make my brain work, occurred in January, 2024.

I was unconscious and near death, and had religious final rites.   

Odds were not much in my favor, but I lived. Still living in a supportive medical facility, I was a vegetable. My right leg and right arm were completely disabled. I could not speak, move, eat, or have basic systems work. In fact, I have almost no memory of the first 5-6 months of 2024. 

But by late May or early June, 2024, I started to gain some abilities. I could move with supportive equipment, and had some pathetic speaking ability. Of course, I had little understanding and I could not read a word. 

I recall watching a comedy movie about baseball and I was able to laugh. And I enjoyed music.

Some abilities started to return. I realized I could battle forward. I spent the next six months still away from home but working at everything. I relearned to speak, to move, and eventually to lift and walk, to read and to write (4 – 8 hours per day of studying) . . . and to live.

I much later learned via a knowledgeable medical source that about half of people who got what I did unfortunately do not live through it. 75% of the living end up in a bad, restricted state. The remaining 25% of the living gain some improvement but extremely few return to a full life. I am lucky, I did.

By the end of 2024, I came back home. I continued to improve. I can walk, hike, run a bit, exercise and lift heavy weights, read, write, and just LIVE. I diligently continue to work on all aspects of improving. It is going very well.

I do not quit.

I happily restudied woodworking with countless hours in the home shop! On June 24, 2025, I started to write online again. 

That’s my story.

Thanks be to God. Thanks to my family. And, my dear readers: I’m back online.

Click below to enjoy:

So put me in coach, I’m ready to play . . .

Yes, I’m still here. The last post was over two years ago, so perhaps you wonder what has been going on with your devoted author.

I will tell you but in the next post. Here, I want to go way back and tell you first about when I began woodworking. I mean way back. Enough that I can truly say that I’ve been woodworking for about 62 years.

In the basement of the family house, prior to Palm Sunday, I built a little Catholic memorial and then gave it to my mother and father. I did not see it again until 59 years later when I discovered it shortly after my mom died (at 102; dad at 91).

She had saved the woodwork in her small number of collectibles.

Woodworking. It mattered then, and it still does.

And this is how and why I work a saw, chisel, and plane. Because what I do matters.

Go ahead, dear readers, pick up your tools and make things.

It matters.

So, I’m back online. I will tell you in the next post what has been going on. And after that, we will do more woodworking stuff. Lots to come.

Ironically, I do not use a ruler for the Ruler Trick. As I described in a post about five years ago, I like a 0.020″ strip of plastic cut from shim stock and roughened on the bottom for a better grip on the stone. This is about the same thickness as a 1/2mm ruler.

One advantage of using shim stock is for short blades. In the photo above, I am using a 0.015″ shim to raise the spokeshave blade to approximately the same angle as a 0.020″ shim raises a full size blade that fully straddles the stone. Perhaps this adjustment matters little but it helps keep my sharpening technique consistent and it is simple to do.

Many specialty and joinery planes have short blades, and many are bedded bevel up. Some of the bevel-up blades, such as side rabbet planes, have quite a low clearance angle. The Ruler Trick is especially helpful on these.

The blade of the wonderful Veritas router plane is detachable from its vertical stem for convenient sharpening. The clearance angle of the blade as installed in the plane is only about 5°. For this little blade, only about 1 inch long, a 0.005″ shim gives about same 1/2° back bevel as a ruler or 0.020″ shim under a full size blade.

Regarding the direction of Ruler Trick honing as discussed in the previous post, the spokeshave blade above is about the shortest I can practically use the across-the-edge motion. For very short blades like the router and for short skew-edged blades, the along-the-edge motion is more practical.

Woodworkers are indebted to the late David Charlesworth for the Ruler Trick and for the abundance of his other insightful teaching.

Should your honing motion for the tiny Ruler Trick bevel on the back of the blade be parallel to the edge of the blade or perpendicular to it? Does it matter?

The late David Charlesworth demonstrates the technique in his You Tube video moving the blade perpendicular to its edge, i.e., across the edge. He starts with the blade edge beyond the long edge of the stone and pulls it back “two or three times.” He states that he does not “like to trap a wire edge underneath the blade.” He then moves the blade back and forth – barely over the edge of the stone and no more than 10mm onto the stone, which is a very short motion.

In the video, he previously honed the microbevel on the front of the blade using a guide, moving the blade perpendicular to its edge. Thus, the final minute scratches on the back of the blade meet up parallel with those created on the microbevel.

Others, in fact most, as far as I can tell, execute the Ruler Trick differently by moving the blade edge parallel along the length of the stone. This seems quicker and easier. It does mean that the final scratches on the back of the blade will be perpendicular, or at least at a large angle to, those on the bevel.

Another example of technique is from the outstanding teacher, Rob Cosman, who thinks through woodworking techniques so well. He hones the bevel in a vigorous circular/oval motion with the blade edge angled to the length of the stone. He then executes the Ruler Trick moving the edge parallel to the stone.

I used David’s original method for a long time and then drifted to using the parallel method because it is indeed easier. I began to wonder if the opposite directions of the final scratches on the front and back of the blade might weaken the durability of the edge. I lately have switched back to David’s method.

Does it matter? I cannot scientifically measure it but my shop experience is telling me that, yes, the pristine edge seems more durable using the Ruler Trick in the same direction as David demonstrated.

My only real point here is that you may want to try for yourself the different methods and consider the effects.

Another question: Should you go back and forth from honing the bevel to the back? In his video, David very gently hones the microbevel, and then does the Ruler Trick, and that’s all. He does not return to the bevel.

For me, that works well if I am cleaning up an edge that is not too worn, which requires just gentle brief honing and is easy to get right. More often, especially if I want a really nice edge such as on a smoothing plane, I find myself returning to the bevel and then repeating the RT. This means having to unclamp and reclamp the blade from a honing guide, if that is what I’m using.

Again, my point is to suggest we should be aware of just what we are doing, observe the effects, and decide from there.

Next: suggestions for managing the Ruler Trick with small blades.

Can the Ruler Trick be used for chisels? Yes. Should it be used for chisels? Depends. 

Yes, the RT affords an advantage similar as with plane blades in honing the flat side of the blade. The tiny 1/2° bevel created by the lift of the ruler makes it faster and easier for your finest grit stone to contact the metal on the flat side all the way out to the apex of the cutting edge. This makes resharpening easier. It also makes preparing a new chisel easier unless it fortunately has a minute hollow on the back to begin with. For example, I recently bought this DeWalt chisel (below) and set it up as a scraper chisel. Remarkably, it came with a nice slightly dished back.   

However, that 1/2° bevel on the back of a chisel has consequences in use. For paring, there is a less definite feedback to sense the angle at which the chisel will bite. We want to sense the lowest angle at which the chisel cuts wood. The long handle and a full flat back of the chisel aid that sense. A tiny bevel on the flat side confuses it a bit. 

Now, this is in my hands. You may find you can adjust and recalibrate your feel so you can pare just as effectively. 

For chopping, we often want to sense vertical, such as in dovetail work. The tiny RT bevel makes that sense slightly less definite. Again, you may find you can compensate and it is no problem at all. As with almost everything else in woodworking, there is more than one good way to do things but it is important to be aware of what is really happening at any cutting edge. 

All of this applies to Western style chisels. Japanese chisels do not need the Ruler Trick. The hollow on the back of the blade minimizes the area that contacts the stone and thus the amount of metal you have to remove to hone all the way out to the cutting edge. This is a huge advantage of Japanese chisels, and one of several reasons I use this style of chisel almost exclusively. 

Next: There seems to be different opinions on the direction to apply the Ruler Trick honing – across or along the length of the edge. 

The late David Charlesworth’s “Ruler Trick” is a wonderfully efficient addition to your sharpening methodology. For those unfamiliar with it, please see his short video – it is easier to appreciate than a verbal description. It basically is a simple way to hone the steel only just behind the cutting edge on the flat side of a plane blade without having to work the entire flat side. The resultant tiny bevel is only about 1/2°. (See the thin bright line in the photo above.) Thus, you create two meeting surfaces of finely honed steel to make a sharp edge. 

It is often promoted primarily as way of efficiently commissioning a new blade. The “trick” is that you do not have to flatten the entire back or any sizable area of it, just that thin strip near the edge. For that alone, it is invaluable but it is even more useful in subsequent sharpenings to remove the wear bevel.

Here I must credit Brent Beach and his incredibly extensive and informative website. The “wear bevel,” simply put, is the rounded wearing of the top and bottom of the blade just behind the apex of the cutting edge. For both bevel-up and bevel-down planes, as the lower wear bevel develops, it requires you to push down harder on the plane to get it to cut. As the wear progresses, you sense the plane blade getting more dull. Notably, the lower wear bevel is greater for higher bevel-side honing angles in bevel-up planes, which are often used to reduce tear out. 

When we sharpen the bevel side of the blade in bevel-down planes, we are rectifying that lower wear bevel. We remake two clean surfaces meet and reestablish the clearance angle just behind the edge apex. 

A particular problem comes in bevel-up planes. That lower wear bevel is only addressed inasmuch as you effectively work on the flat side steel just behind the edge apex. If you do not fix the flat side, you have not effectively prepared the blade for work.

The practical reality is that it takes too much work to remove a layer of metal, albeit quite thin, over the whole back of the blade to remove the wear bevel on that side. Enter the Ruler Trick. It does it quick and easy. Brent Beach describes a steeper, more complicated “back bevel” but I think the Ruler Trick is a good compromise in practice, though I cannot quantify this. 

So, here is my point: while the Ruler Trick is very helpful for sharpening bevel-down plane blades, it is, as a practical matter, essential for sharpening bevel-up plane blades. Note too, that many specialty planes are also bevel-up, such as shoulder planes and router planes. They need the Ruler Trick too.

Next: What about chisels?

Adding paste wax over a shellac finish as described in Part 1 of this series makes for my favorite finish of all – when used in the right circumstances, of course. Wax also is a nice addition after satin wipe-on poly or satin water based finishes. 

Wax produces a beautiful luster and smooth feel. It does not, however, add significant protection for the wood. I would not use it on a tabletop. I actually wonder why I do not use it more often just on the outside of pieces such as a gently used cabinet or box. I guess I’m about satisfied with the appearance after, say, a gel varnish, and at that point in building maybe I’m getting lazy. 

I have always used Renaissance microcrystalline wax based on Krenov’s recommendation in The Fine Art of Cabinetmaking and I was reassured to read that it was Mark Schofield’s favorite of the 21 brands he reviewed in Fine Woodworking magazine #255 (July/August 2016, pp. 54-57). He found it easiest to apply, buffing was no problem, and it gave a medium sheen.

I apply it sparingly with a soft cloth and spread it in any convenient motion. Renaissance dries quickly so there is very little waiting to then buff off all the excess with a clean cotton cloth and produce that nice luster. Just like using Turtle Wax on dad’s car long ago, it is easy to apply too much wax or let it dry too long and thus create unnecessary work for yourself. 

Here I will mention a few other products that have worked well for me though I cannot offer comparative assessments. For mildly exposed outdoor work where UV protection is needed, I have had good luck so far with Epifanes Rapidclear varnish. It applies and flows out well.   

Once in a long while, I want black wood, just plain black, as a contrast trim element. General Finishes oil-based black Gel Stain works and beats dealing with an expensive exotic like Gaboon ebony. As a pigment stain, it is more reliable in the long run than a dye stain. 

For a low-key finish on food utensils, Howard’s Butcher Block Conditioner has done the job quick and easy. 

This is the last installment of this seven part series. By the way, now you can surmise which finishes I do not like for my work, including almost all stains and thick film finishes including French polish. 

The other aspect of finishing I do not like is the deliberate confusion and hype put forth by manufacturers, even some of those that make excellent products. Woodworking is rife with misleading nonsense from too many manufacturers of finishes and tools, which really exploits the long history and rich traditions of the craft. 

My goal here is to provide you with directly usable, honest, accurate, and clear information “from the sawdust and shavings of my shop.” I hope my efforts help your efforts in meaningful creativity.