GA

Gordon Airporte

04/12/2004 8:41 PM

Hock 'classic' vs. cryogenic irons

Has anyone who has used both comment on any differences?


This topic has 3 replies

GA

Gordon Airporte

in reply to Gordon Airporte on 04/12/2004 8:41 PM

06/12/2004 5:58 PM

Gordon Airporte wrote:
> Has anyone who has used both comment on any differences?

Thanks guys. Somehow I hadn't considered ease of sharpening as a factor.

Sn

Scarfinger

in reply to Gordon Airporte on 04/12/2004 8:41 PM

06/12/2004 3:38 AM

On Sat, 04 Dec 2004 20:41:21 -0500, Gordon Airporte <[email protected]>
wrote:

>Has anyone who has used both comment on any differences?

I have a "classic" Hock iron in my #5 and it holds an edge very well.
When I replaced the iron in #8, the local Woodcraft had a cryo, so I
tried it. It holds its edge very well also, but I'm not convinced
that the price difference was worth it.
It is obvious that the cryo is harder when honing, but I'm not noting
any substantial evidence of improved edge-holding.

Paul.

dD

[email protected] (DarylRos)

in reply to Scarfinger on 06/12/2004 3:38 AM

06/12/2004 5:31 PM

>It is obvious that the cryo is harder when honing, but I'm not noting
>any substantial evidence of improved edge-holding.
>

It's much harder, and will hold an edge far longer. I hated it though. It's
much harder to lap and hone initially (several hours and a lot of elbow
grease). I prefer honing withouht having to think about it.I'll never get a
cryo blade again.


You’ve reached the end of replies