DMT Diasharp: The "Final" Thread

[Josh K]

I disagree. If you spend enough time on the finer grits, you'll eventually get all the way to the bottom of the deep scratches anyway. It might take a little bit longer, but you'll get there, and you'll have removed less metal in the process.

If you're removing less metal, then I refer you to my previous post. Why not just use the finest grit available?

I would argue that the difference between working up through successive grits and starting at the finest you're removing marginally less metal. Such a minute difference would be insubstantial.

 

[nozh2002]

Well, as I sad already - I do not need theories, because what I am talking about is based on few years practice and proven results. Now, you may see on photoes that D8EE does not create mirror polish, and it does not suppose to with 3 micron abrasive size. So just try this on practice and you will not need to came up with all this theories and argueing.

Thanks, Vassili.

 

[THG]

If you're removing less metal, then I refer you to my previous post. Why not just use the finest grit available?

I am of the opinion that it wouldn't be practical. It would take forever to either reprofile or restore an edge, for example.

I'm not saying that you should just jump into the finest grit possible. All I'm saying is that just because there are "in between" grits doesn't mean that you have to use them. For example, XXC is 120 micron and XC is 60 micron. If they made 3 more grit sizes between the XXC and XC, you wouldn't tell me that all of those are necessary, would you?

Now what you said about the amount of metal being removed being minute, you're probably right about that. It probably won't matter to most, but I think that the more "in betweens" you use, the sooner you will grind your knife upwards to the spine. We're likely talking about few years in terms of the knife's entire lifetime, so I suppose it is relatively negligible. Not a huge selling point, that idea.

 

[Jason B.]

If you're removing less metal, then I refer you to my previous post. Why not just use the finest grit available?

I would argue that the difference between working up through successive grits and starting at the finest you're removing marginally less metal. Such a minute difference would be insubstantial.

The only time your removing lot's of metal is when you are using your coarsest stone, less time is spent with each stone after removing very little metal and making the sharpening process much faster. I can see the theory behind skipping stones but I don't see the proof. If all you needed was two grits then they wouldn't sell all the other ones.

The time that it would take to get coarse scratches with a very fine stone you could have been done twice over if you progressed though the grits.

 

[Jason B.]

Well, as I sad already - I do not need theories, because what I am talking about is based on few years practice and proven results. Now, you may see on photoes that D8EE does not create mirror polish, and it does not suppose to with 3 micron abrasive size. So just try this on practice and you will not need to came up with all this theories and argueing.

Thanks, Vassili.

Exactly what theory are you talking about?

You say yourself you only have a few years of sharpening experience, why would you not take advice from those with much more?

 

[John Frankl]

Thanks for all the replies so far.

It seems we now have one more consideration. I was looking to order when I noticed a 4" x 10" stone. It is pricey, but would the additional width and length make it perform much better than the two existing options?

Thanks,

John

 

[Broos]

I would get 8" stones and use the money left over to get more stones, specialty stones (small ones and round ones and tapered ones can come in handy), strops, or fancy stropping compounds.