I didn't get drummed out of rcw for musing about long lasting edges and frequent sharpening so I'll move a little farther up the bevel, away from the edge and maybe away from conventional wisdom. It may be too big a stretch (more likely I'm just nit picking) to question this, but from how I turn, it doesn't seem that minute and exacting adjustments and readjustments of jigs, protractors etc. to assure a very consistent bevel is all that necessary. OTOH, this might explain my less than museum quality turnings. :)
This is _not about the length of the bevel or a specific included angle. It is _not about facets on a bevel for relief or due to bad grinding nor about flat, concave or convex bevels. I'm just musing about the need to keep bevel angles as exactly consistent as possible.
I know we want a tool to feel the same every time we use it, but how much does a tool need to be physically the same to feel the same. Is our memory so acute that the surprise of a tool's bevel being slightly different from the last time we picked it up enough to ruin our day? Aren't minor variations from one grinding to the next and from sharpening to sharpening subconsciously corrected for? Small differences in tool rest height don't seem to be a big problem. Are minor bevel variations important enough for us to continually microadjust our jigs?
Even if I'm nit picking or patently wrong, I think one of the good things about this group of turners who turn on a lathe as well as on a keyboard is that we question turning dogma and we do so based on our experience, not on implied authority. That said, is the importance of slight variations in bevel angles more myth than fact? To what degree? Why would anyone care? :)
Turn to Safety, Arch Fortiter