On Sun, 29 Mar 2015 09:57:59 -0500, "Lloyd E. Sponenburgh"
<
lloydspinsidemindspring.com> wrote:
>Ed Huntress <
hunt...@optonline.net> fired this volley in
>
news:773ghapoblk68cbtt...@4ax.com:
>
>> You're going to find that your opinion on this is opposed by
>> almost every experienced metalworker who's commented about it for the
>> past 200 years. And the old ones used files instead of milling
>> machines. They really knew files and filing.
>>
>
>Oh, fooey! I didn't learn that by "just trying it one day". Pretty much
>anything I've learned about metal came from "the old guys".
Same here.
>I've got
>books on the shelf that are probably even older than you, unless you hail
>to the mid-1800s!
I have some of those, too.
>
>It's an old, honored, and well-recommended method among almost ALL
>"experienced metalworkers....[for] the past 200 years"....
Nicholson, in its 1920 manual, says that it's Ok in some circumstances
(mostly in the finest finishing); not Ok in others. They caution that
using oil results in a shallower cut and less bite.
As I said, you can do it on softer materials. When you get into the
marginal range of material hardness, you're inviting a skate.
>
>It's NOT a replacement for chalk, no; each has its place. But that
>statement you made is just... wrong...
Not really.
>
>I won't venture to say what works best for you, because that's you and
>the tool alone in a room, and has little to do with 'advice' or my own
>experiences. But both work well for me, and I do not vary the pressure
>(enough to stop cutting) during a filing stroke, regardless of what I use
>to prevent pinning. Shucks! I don't "backfile", either. Do you?
If you mean applying pressure on the backstroke, of course not.
--
Ed Huntress
>
>
>Lloyd