Thread: Strop Width Question

Anybody know why the old strops from the era when straight razors were commonly used were 2" wide ? It can't be because 3" leather was too expensive - leather was common (and therefore cheap) compared to today. I don't think it was a cupping problem, since 2.5" wide D-rings were available in the 1800's too. So there must have been another reason...

Don't confuse common and cheap. Strops were typically a lifetime purchase and would probably have cost just as much, relatively speaking, as they do now if not more. Shoes for example were far more expensive.

Maybe, in the days before air conditioning, when humidity and heat varied widely, the narrower width leathers gave fewer problems?

Originally Posted by MickRussell

Shoes for example were far more expensive.

And much, much better made. They weren't made to be disposable.

I think it WAS to reduce cupping. Even on a d-ring a wide strop can cup. It took some of our best minds here to develop 3" strops that won't cup and even if I were one to use 3" strops there are only a couple of sources currently available that I would trust to make my 3" strop.

I prefer strops narrower than 3 inches. Possibly, fewer problems with cupping combined with the fact that 2 inch strops are just fine was a winning combination.

The majority of the vintage strops I have run into over the past 35 years have been 2 1/2 inches which seems to have been the standard going back in time. I swore I would never use anything else until Don had me try a 3 inch strop and after the first couple weeks with it, that has been my mainstay. I have never had any problems with 3 inch strops cupping although I have seen a couple cup over the years. Very rare and usually when not stored hanging. Cupping seems to be weird in any case. I have seen a 2 1/2 Roo strop cup and so far not a 3 inch Roo. Good thing about those is that the leather is thin and when you pull it taught, it still works very well. Most of the older stuff that I have run across that is less than 2 1/2 has been on paddles. The two inch strops have been, in my opinion, a more recent width primarily aimed at expense saving. Nothing wrong with them. Personal preference still plays a large part with strops both in width and in draw.

Have fun,

Lynn

I am only a beginner but it was my understanding that if the strop is less than 3 inches in width, say 2 inch to 2.5 inches it necessitates a more diagonal/lateral movement (The X pattern) to cover the razors edge and thereby adjusting out any variances in your stropping ability.

So using this X pattern technique would wear the edge more evenly and thereby less likely to develop a frowning edge as can develop if one is to honeing in a perfectly horizontal straight line also.

Perhaps our forefathers were adopting the X pattern; in this case a 3 inch strop was not necessary so was not made.

If one has a 3 inch strop as a first strop and not experienced in stropping in the X pattern and therefore stropping in a perfectly straight line they may discover the problems I have mentioned above.

This is the main and number one reason I have a strop a little over 2 inches so I had no choice but to practice and become experienced at performing the X pattern.

I am only a beginner so please correct me if I am mistaken and this is not the case.