Do high end knives need high end hones?

Cliff Stamp

BANNED
Joined
Oct 5, 1998
Messages
17,562
I was out awhile back looking for a set of micro star keys in a new hardware store, which I finally found when I saw a $1 sharpening stone, 2x6", no name, no box. I bought it on a lark mainly, but on a semi-serious not I wanted to check and see how effective it could be on the new steels as it is often argued that they demand diamond or other high end hones to achieve optimal sharpness.

I gave it a few test passes and the surface was horrible, it was actually dished in the center like a spoon. It was soaked for about a half an hour and then lapped with sand and water on a concrete block under it was smoothly abraded over it entire surface. The block works fine on its own, the sand just makes it much faster.

I used the South Fork which was blunted to less than 10% of optimal after
some recent cardboard cutting and recut the edge at 7.7 (1) degrees per side on the coarse hone. I was kind of surprised the angle was so consistent, I checked it at three places along the edge. Anyway, checking the blade under magnification it was cleanly abraded full to the edge. The burr was removed with a couple of passes at a highly elevated angle.

The edge was examined under mag (x10) and free of any burr and honed clean, really coarse, there were teeth up to 0.1 mm deep (almost at the point where they could be seen by eye). It was then reset at the primary and then the micro reset three more times just to check consistency and there were no issues with getting a clean edge.

With no stropping, the blade would shave, push cut newsprint about an inch from where it was held from the fingers and took 112 (11) grams to cut light thread and 0.29 (2) cm to slice light cotton under a 200 gram load and 0.61 (5) grams to slice the cotton under a 100 gram load.

Once this edge needs to be sharpened I'll check the other side and then likely see how it responds to a hard black arkansas.

-Cliff
 
I have never really bought the idea that you need an expensive coarse hone for high end knives (or rather knife steels). So I am not very surprised. The problem is more, that there are virtually no really fine and cheap hones out there. Right around 1000 grit (japanese) the cheap hones seem to end. However, in cutting speed the seems to be a large difference between stones even on the coarse level. I assume it is the particle shape that makes the difference. I don't think the correlation between price and cutting speed is strong, but I believe there is at least some trend.
 
The biggest problem I've seen with inexpensive hones is you just don't know what you're getting. A lot of them seem glazed and have to have the surface removed before they work, and I've seen some that aren't consistent, with areas more porous than others.

But all that's independent of the steel ..... whether SiC or AO, if it works OK on your soft carbon steel kitchen knives it'll work OK on your 'super stainless' or 62+ hardness tool steel, just slower.
 
Dog of War said:
A lot of them seem glazed and have to have the surface removed before they work.

What is the best way to remove a glazed or damage surface?

Pardon my ignorance, but I've got several old stones that I don't use...
If I could fix them, instead of replacing them, that would be great:D

Bob T.
 
Baatfam said:
What is the best way to remove a glazed or damage surface?

Grind it off, you can buy grinding/lapping plates, use x-coarse sandpaper or just sand (from a beach), on a concrete block.

HoB said:
The problem is more, that there are virtually no really fine and cheap hones out there.

Yes, essentially you have "fine" aluminum oxide which is quite rough, even a coarse waterstone, 800 or so is twice as fine. If you check ebay you can find a lot of old arkansas stones for cheap some times, similar on second hand stores, often they are pretty mauled, but it is just a rock, a bit of grinding and it is as good as new.

However, in cutting speed the seems to be a large difference between stones even on the coarse level.

Bond is really important.

-Cliff
 
Baatfam said:
What is the best way to remove a glazed or damage surface?

Pardon my ignorance, but I've got several old stones that I don't use...
If I could fix them, instead of replacing them, that would be great:D

Bob T.
Cliff's obviously done more of this than I have. With old stones I think the problem is often old oil, or using a stone that's been oiled before without enough oil. Once you clean the oil out and lap them, use soapy water instead of oil and they shouldn't get gunked up again.

Particularly nasty to remove a 'factory' glaze are some of the coarse SiC stones ..... seen some where you have to take off like 1/16" or better. I also have a cheap Norton 'puck' SiC stone and the extra coarse side just doesn't do a damn thing except make big irregular surface scratches.
 
Cliff Stamp said:
If you check ebay you can find a lot of old arkansas stones for cheap some times, similar on second hand stores, often they are pretty mauled, but it is just a rock, a bit of grinding and it is as good as new.

-Cliff

True, they may even be better that the more expensive ones that you can buy these days. Expecially, if you are able to find a good quality 50 year old Arkansas. But that is kind of cheating. Those are not really "cheap" hones. They may very well be quality hones that once were very valued that you just got for cheap :).

Yes, I agree, bond is very important, but again I would be paying more attention to bond on the finer stones. I have an Omura stone which is graded about 180 and a synthetic waterstone that is 220 (it's the same that Yazuha likes so much, but I forgot the name and am not able to read Japanese). The synthetic stone cuts much, much faster and feels....how should I say....a lot sharper. I am pretty sure that this is due to a different particle shape. I bet the ones in the Omura are mostly roundish, while the synthetic ones are more like shards. You can see some of that under a microscope, but it is pretty difficult to say for sure.
 
Yes, buying new there is not much you can get for $1. Interesting regarding nature of the particles, Lee has micrographs of a natural japanese waterstone that looks like flaky pastry, I have little experience with them. It would be interesting to quantify them in regards to sharpness/edge retention.

-Cliff
 
HoB said:
Yes, I agree, bond is very important, but again I would be paying more attention to bond on the finer stones. I have an Omura stone which is graded about 180 and a synthetic waterstone that is 220 (it's the same that Yazuha likes so much, but I forgot the name and am not able to read Japanese). The synthetic stone cuts much, much faster and feel....how should I say....a lot sharper. I am pretty sure that this is due to different particle shape. I bet the ones in the Omura a mostly roundish, while the synthetic once are more like shards. You can see some of that under a microscope, but it is pretty difficult to say for sure.

The kanji on the box ( あらと君 ) is "artao kimi" which appears to be some sort of pun on "rough whetstone, you" and "he is you" (implying that "it feels good to be yourself" or something of the sort) Not sure who actually makes it, but it appears to be made (or contracted) by Suisin as it looks an awful lot like the rough whetstone on their page with a different label on the box http://www.suisin.co.jp/English/whetstone/index.htm )
 
I'm a real big fan of getting the cheapest coarse stone you can find. You can get alot of stones when they are $1, 2, 5, or even 10 I've been real tempted to try one of the big pink, or green Japanese hones but have a hard time pulling the trigger, and getting one. The cheap coarse stones I've found do the job really well. as good as the higher priced stones? I don't know yet. .
 
I have used a bunch of x-coarse hones, including the really cheap ones in both aluminum oxide and silicon carbide, they won't match the speed of the japanese waterstones but will easily take it on a performance/price comparison.

-Cliff
 
Yes, it would have to really cut alot faster to beat the preformance/price of the cheap sili carbide hones. And really the cheap silicarbide hones cut pretty fast I use water with them and if I get too much sludge I give them a quick rinse under the tap and good as new.
 
I use water on them as well, I have used dry, but there seems to be a static problem with debris on the edges, similar with diamonds. I have a much easier time getting a clean edge on the above stone than a diamond plate due to the lack of debris on the edge.

-Cliff
 
Yuzuha, am truly in awe of your detective work when it comes to these japanese pages :thumbup: . Whenever, I look at them, I am usually simply stumped, even with babelfish I am not getting much out of them :( .
 
Cliff Stamp said:
I have used a bunch of x-coarse hones, including the really cheap ones in both aluminum oxide and silicon carbide...
Cliff--

Have you ever used a Razor Edge Coarse Hone and/or do you know what it's made of? If so, just wondered how it compares to AO and SiC hones and japanese waterstones. I haven't used a lot of different sharpening materials to compare the RE against but it does seem to remove metal quickly, wears well, and hardly dishes at all (although I use all areas of the hone to slow or prevent dishing).

Thank you.......
 
My favorite "inexpensive" stones are the Norton India oilstones. A fine India will produce a shaving edge, even though a bit coarse.
A good India stone will last forever, as long as you don't use 3 in 1 oil on it.

Lately, I have been going to the use of stones that use water, or can be used with water. I use a Norton Lily wite washita, followed by Norton soft or hard Arkansas stones, depending on how fine an edge I want. If I want the sharpest edge I can get, then I finish on waterstones at the 8000 grit level.

I don't like waterstones for curved edges - as on gouges and carving tools, or for knives. They are just too soft. I have a couple of Shapton stones, and they are harder, I just don't like to have to flatten them. That is why I like the Norton stones.

Lately, I have tried some Spyderco ceramic stones - medium and fine. They won't produce an edge that compares with Norton Arkansas stones, and I just don't believe the comparisons with grit value. They are meaningless.

The least expensive, quality stone that I would use is a Norton fine India. It cuts pretty fast and leaves a good edge. If you need to plane hard maple, then you need to use a finer stone after the India, and perhaps a strop as well. If you are sharpening a kitchen or hunting knife, you don't need any more than a Norton soft Arkansas. Most people would be happy with the edge from a fine India stone for many purposes.
 
The Orange India is my favorite cheap stone. Works well on everything from 1095 carbon to S30V. I've had great luck with S30V and Spydie Fine
 
Following Survivor1's good link, one can take any flat, hard surface and tape or use psa-backed sandpaper or lapping film and even fine-grit finishing can be inexpensive. Silicon carbide paper is sold as fine as 1 micron, aluminum oxide can be found in 0.3 microns and 0.05 microns, and diamond can be 0.1 microns in size. Well, the 1micron and 0.3 microns sized abrasives can be inexpensive compared to comparable grit hones.
 
arty said:
My favorite "inexpensive" stones are the Norton India oilstones. A fine India will produce a shaving edge, even though a bit coarse.
A good India stone will last forever, as long as you don't use 3 in 1 oil on it.

I have heard several people say that kerosene is a good lubricant for this stone. I've tried it, and it takes quite a while to get rid of the smell. What would you recommend?
 
Back
Top