Getting the most out of your Norton Crystolon fine stone

Status
Not open for further replies.
I've never had much luck with my Norton Crystolon stones, I have the 8x3in individual stones in the plastic boxes. They cut great and feel pretty good but my edge always felt "washed out" by the slurry... unless it's D2, that steel takes a crazy edge off the Fine SiC.

I've used it with mineral oil, WD-40, 3-in-1 oil, windex, simple green and dry. I use edge leading, edge trailing, firm pressure, light pressure and everything between, the edge is still meh. I've got a few knives sharp enough to work for edc but it always seems that the edge does not last very long.

Now, give me an India stone and all that changes, crisp edge from the stone with ease and sharpness for days. Now this is an edge you can use right off the stone with confidence.

Over the past few years I've tried to refine my skills with the Crystolon stones but in the end all the effort has only brought me mediocre results. Works for some I guess, but not for me, I'll stick to the India for sharpening when using oil stones.
 
Jason B. said:
I've never had much luck with my Norton Crystolon stones, I have the 8x3in individual stones in the plastic boxes. They cut great and feel pretty good but my edge always felt "washed out" by the slurry... unless it's D2, that steel takes a crazy edge off the Fine SiC.

I've used it with mineral oil, WD-40, 3-in-1 oil, windex, simple green and dry. I use edge leading, edge trailing, firm pressure, light pressure and everything between, the edge is still meh. I've got a few knives sharp enough to work for edc but it always seems that the edge does not last very long.

Now, give me an India stone and all that changes, crisp edge from the stone with ease and sharpness for days. Now this is an edge you can use right off the stone with confidence.

Over the past few years I've tried to refine my skills with the Crystolon stones but in the end all the effort has only brought me mediocre results. Works for some I guess, but not for me, I'll stick to the India for sharpening when using oil stones.
Click to expand...


I have the 8x3 set and even with the fine one "made in USA" the individual stones seem to have a looser composition than my combination stone. Is possible the combination one has seen way more use and is more dense as the top layers have worn away, but I've also lapped and conditioned the 8x3 a number of times and it just doesn't appear to work as well as the fine side of my 2x8 combination stone. I don't think its my imagination - initially I was prepared to write a letter to Norton and try to get my $ back.

One of these days I'll order a larger size combination stone and compare that to my 8x3's as well. In the meantime I've actually developed a mild phobia of dropping my 2x8...
 
HeavyHanded said:
In the meantime I've actually developed a mild phobia of dropping my 2x8...
Click to expand...

I'm pretty impressed with the 8x2 combi (jb8). Not the fanciest stone in the barn and doesn't put on the finest finish for sure. In a car analogy, it's not a Lexus, it's a Corolla. But man it is a workhorse, it can take a blade from profiling thru a good rough utility edge. I've reprofiled 10 edges on the C side, and gotten 3 knives sharp to my satisfaction on the F side, it is a really versatile stone for a measly $24. I can hardly think of too many better value stones out there that can sharpen all steel types. That said, I still prefer the AF stone for most utility sharpening (which is somewhat similar in grit and finish to the India). For high carbides, the Crystolon works ok too (I've sharpened a couple blades in s30v, and M390 on it), but I still prefer the coarse finish that I get from using the DMT coarse--a tip I got from Jason.
 
I don't have the main line Crystolon, from Norton, but I do have a couple of their Economy stones in SiC, as well as very similar SiC stones from Sears and ACE, in 6", 8" and 4" sizes (and even a couple of 3" pocket SiC stones). I've noticed to some degree, a couple of the same things Jason noticed. In trying a SiC stone on many knives, they always cut great, in terms of hogging off steel; but sometimes I've been a little on the fence as to whether I really like the finished edge coming straight off the 'Fine' side of some of these stones. In such cases, I've often followed with the Fine side of an aluminum oxide stone and/or a medium Arkansas stone. I do notice, sometimes, that the SiC stone's Fine side really does well, by itself, on individual knives here and there. In the last week, I used one of my 6" SiC stones (Norton Economy) to thin the edge on an older Buck 112 '4-dot' folder with a 425M stainless blade. THAT blade really, really liked the Fine-side finish from the Norton Economy stone, leaving it with a hair-popping, wicked-toothy edge, stropped only on the sueded-side bare leather of my belt. I've also noticed, in general terms, that SiC really does nice things with D2, as Jason mentioned.


David
 
HeavyHanded said:
I have the 8x3 set and even with the fine one "made in USA" the individual stones seem to have a looser composition than my combination stone. Is possible the combination one has seen way more use and is more dense as the top layers have worn away, but I've also lapped and conditioned the 8x3 a number of times and it just doesn't appear to work as well as the fine side of my 2x8 combination stone. I don't think its my imagination - initially I was prepared to write a letter to Norton and try to get my $ back.

One of these days I'll order a larger size combination stone and compare that to my 8x3's as well. In the meantime I've actually developed a mild phobia of dropping my 2x8...
Click to expand...

I might need to try the combo SiC, I kinda wrote it off after my experience with the individual stones.
 
Is there some reason to think it's a different composition specifically in the combination stones? Or is it in the 8x3 versus 8x2 stones? For example, if you got an 8x2 dedicated fine Crystolon, I wonder if it would perform like the fine side of the combi, or like Jason's 8x3 fine bench stone.

I wonder if there's a different manufacturing process for the 8x3 vs 8x2, or for the single-grit stones vs the combi.
 
Here's something would be really interesting to hear the thoughts of you guys who've used the Crystolons on a lot of different steels and over an extended period. Not just the guys who sharpen for $$, but anybody who has used them a lot and preferably on super steels. This derives from the comments in this thread, and from BluntCut MetalWorks BluntCut MetalWorks 's thread about using his new SiC stone + a UF ceramic on a super steel.

Question: For coarse sharpening work of super steels at grits less than 400, what do you see as the optimum role for the Crystolon stones? (The question is not whether the Crystolon "can" work on super steels--we know they can--but what do you see as best use of Crystolon, when you have a choice of sharpening tools).

Options:
  1. None: don't use Crystolons on super steels at all, use diamonds. Save the Crystolons for non super steels.
  2. Use Crystolons ONLY for heavy grinding work on super steels: profiling, edge repair, bevel resets, but not apexing. Do heavy grinding on a coarse Crystolon, and switch to a coarse diamond stone for apexing.
  3. Use Crystolons for all coarse work. The coarse for heavy grinding, and the fine for apexing. As discussed in this thread.
  4. None of the above, sharpen your super steels on rocks, bricks, and coffee mugs. :)

From the other thread, I'm guessing BluntCut MetalWorks BluntCut MetalWorks would go for 3. Jason, from other convos, I'm guessing you're at 1 or 2. Myself, just experimenting lately and not settled on anything. For probably the last 8 years, I was all diamonds, all the time. I had economy Nortons but didn't use on super steels. Lately I've tried the coarse Crystolon for profiling, it works fine on super steels, but in all candor, I prefer the profiled edge results I get from the Atoma 140 or the DMT XC. And for coarse apexing, I've proven to myself the Crystolon fine can work, but I strongly prefer the quality of the edge I get from Ultrasharp or DMT, on super steels. So right now, for coarse work on super steels, I am trending toward option 1. If I was a high-volume pro sharpener doing it for $$ and where the abrasives are consumables that you burn thru fast, I'd probably incline toward option 2, or 3, to economize a bit. Since I'm not at that volume, and since my budget can handle buying a $30 or $50 coarse diamond plate every couple years if needed, I'm leaning more toward 1 as I see it gets me the best results on super steels.
 
I don't know if there is a "best" stone, but certainly if you have Crystalon and are OK with a somewhat rougher edge then just go ahead and use it. At that grit level it will work as well as anything else and better than many. For me the cosmetic factor is the biggest reason to not use the Crystalon coarse.

I found the numbers I ran on 3/8" Manila with a BCMW test blank in 10v. This is real performance using the old Edge Inquisitor 3000, draw cut is a 2" pull. You'd be heard pressed to declare an absolute winner looking at these, though there is one option that stands out as a poor choice. Small differences in pressure cut is significant, draw cut weights tend to be more forgiving on a one-off test.

Crystalon fine:
Pressure cut = 15.5 lbs
Draw cut = 8 lbs


diamonds DMT EEF:
14 lb pressure cut
9 lb draw weight

compared to wet/dry 1200 grit:
16 pressure
10lb draw

Muddy King 4k:
24 pressure
9lb draw
 
Last edited:
^Thanks for that! How would you guess those numbers might change if you used say a coarse diamond, like DMT C or Ultrasharp C? To me that's an interesting comparison, cause it'd head-to-head compare the Crystolon at about 280 to say the DMT at about 320. Lately I've been trying an approach Jason suggested for utility edges, basically finish on something coarse (for me that's Crystolon fine, DMT C, or for non super-steels, it'd be my AF), then just strop and done. Would be interesting to see how DMT C stacks up to Crystolon F when using as the last stone.
 
Honestly to look at the grind pattern one might think a closer comparison might be a fine DMT to the fine side of a Crystalon, but only on the high Vandium steels and at high RC. The non-super qualities of the SiC stand out a bit, end result is the finish being a good deal more refined than what you'd get off of more budget friendly steel.

Off the coarse DMT I'd expect the draw numbers to drop a little or stay the same, and the pressure cut ones to go up several lbs.
 
HeavyHanded said:
For me the cosmetic factor is the biggest reason to not use the Crystalon coarse.
Click to expand...

I've noticed that. I don't have many coated knives but have a couple where I liked the knife and the only option was dlc coated (example: CS Recon). With coated knives especially, when used on Crystolon, you see these light scuff marks just above the secondary bevel. And it looks terrible.

ETA: Is this the main thing in your view that prevents people from using the Crystolon F grit more frequently as an all-purpose coarse sharpening grit? Bluntcut mentioned this issue too.

HeavyHanded said:
Honestly to look at the grind pattern one might think a closer comparison might be a fine DMT to the fine side of a Crystalon, but only on the high Vandium steels and at high RC. The non-super qualities of the SiC stand out a bit, end result is the finish being a good deal more refined than what you'd get off of more budget friendly steel.

Off the coarse DMT I'd expect the draw numbers to drop a little or stay the same, and the pressure cut ones to go up several lbs.
Click to expand...

I find it interesting that your numbers above show the fine Crystolon performing reasonably close to the DMT EEF. If this holds up consistently across commonly used knife steels, it would seem a lot more time efficient. You could sharpen just on Crystolon F, and done, versus progression on diamonds such as C/EF/EEF. Basically getting you the same results for less time.

The potential issues with that: the cosmetic thing you mentioned, and the possibility those results vary depending on knife steels.
 
Last edited:
maximus83 said:
I've noticed that. I don't have many coated knives but have a couple where I liked the knife and the only option was dlc coated (example: CS Recon). With coated knives especially, when used on Crystolon, you see these light scuff marks just above the secondary bevel. And it looks terrible.

ETA: Is this the main thing in your view that prevents people from using the Crystolon F grit more frequently as an all-purpose coarse sharpening grit? Bluntcut mentioned this issue too.
Click to expand...

I think more of it comes down to people wanting a brighter finish on most of their knives. The higher the RC and carbide content the more favorably the Crystalon F compares to other media. Many regular sport and kitchen knives are neither of those, and the stone itself takes some familiarity to get good with.

I find it interesting that your numbers above show the fine Crystolon performing reasonably close to the DMT EEF. If this holds up consistently across commonly used knife steels, it would seem a lot more time efficient. You could sharpen just on Crystolon F, and done, versus progression on diamonds such as C/EF/EEF. Basically getting you the same results for less time.

The potential issues with that: the cosmetic thing you mentioned, and the possibility those results vary depending on knife steels.
Click to expand...

I don't believe on most steels you would get that close of a comparison. The Crystalon F will definitely return strong drawcut numbers but on many steels the pressure cut numbers will climb.

The edge wasn't tested by making slices through newsprint or anything like that either, which might have yielded a large subjective difference. I sharpened them up, checked for burrs and quality of the scratch pattern, and into the tester. Not being a retention test, I only made as many cuts as needed to verify the values were consistent. I really like the test equipment for that reason, it eliminates almost 100% subjective influences and cutting manila rope is something anyone can correlate/relate to.

If it shows an edge is drawcutting at 10lbs or less and pressure cutting at 20lbs or less, the edge is plenty ready for prime time.
 
Crystolon works fine on M390. Got a hair-shaving, crossgrain-cutting edge on this Kershaw tonight. Then tried out a 400/1000 SharpPebble SiC, this put an even nicer finish on it and increased sharpness noticeably. With this one could potentially have an all-SiC solution for super steels, if you wanted to stay cheap and avoid diamonds. Have to confess, that finished edge looks REALLY nice, it got even better on the SharpPebble. And the feedback from both stones is far nicer than my diamond plates. I'm so conflicted. :)

The finish on edge in this pic is after Crystolon fine:

y4mGuB8y6F87sBSGkgdtbGeDg2akDL_32HxPMSVk-Xndg6kx3_OY483J7JvECVah13rqiOpnW56Z6C4U-w0a-pe3qHo8kuv8QbdI5rqDY9Ifu_TtFG206XiLISGrUHwcV8zwCKLFhWBxHLLwpwyHxlVgrm3FhDdbk18bEAuDoUNmilo0oQD1ebrRwjM8ISBt1c3PJU5oZaH7k8I_LYzx-xifA


The SharpPebble. Initial impression from 1 usage: a nice SiC waterstone and paired with a Crystolon JB8, could be a pretty end-to-end affordable solution.

y4mxaxg7w2-UiscX1YEiT6NAd_04ZRvBuDuKCG9PqltB2r9uvanLtMmec1Wy14cF9IMMXciJuM5wscaUOyaQHB1AQ_1NUnWkNl8psZnikByT5NPswfit1ySVmnboGuKT7TFW5qVYmPu1Paay-0nvXug1C1d42GwTPtOTHoatXNUIBQvVH7ke1f6niENhUP0pWA26L7czAjiBhF9rMHmvKN5fw
 
maximus83 said:
Crystolon works fine on M390. Got a hair-shaving, crossgrain-cutting edge on this Kershaw tonight. Then tried out a 400/1000 SharpPebble SiC, this put an even nicer finish on it and increased sharpness noticeably. With this one could potentially have an all-SiC solution for super steels, if you wanted to stay cheap and avoid diamonds. Have to confess, that finished edge looks REALLY nice, it got even better on the SharpPebble. And the feedback from both stones is far nicer than my diamond plates. I'm so conflicted. :)

The finish on edge in this pic is after Crystolon fine:

y4mGuB8y6F87sBSGkgdtbGeDg2akDL_32HxPMSVk-Xndg6kx3_OY483J7JvECVah13rqiOpnW56Z6C4U-w0a-pe3qHo8kuv8QbdI5rqDY9Ifu_TtFG206XiLISGrUHwcV8zwCKLFhWBxHLLwpwyHxlVgrm3FhDdbk18bEAuDoUNmilo0oQD1ebrRwjM8ISBt1c3PJU5oZaH7k8I_LYzx-xifA


The SharpPebble. Initial impression from 1 usage: a nice SiC waterstone and paired with a Crystolon JB8, could be a pretty end-to-end affordable solution.

y4mxaxg7w2-UiscX1YEiT6NAd_04ZRvBuDuKCG9PqltB2r9uvanLtMmec1Wy14cF9IMMXciJuM5wscaUOyaQHB1AQ_1NUnWkNl8psZnikByT5NPswfit1ySVmnboGuKT7TFW5qVYmPu1Paay-0nvXug1C1d42GwTPtOTHoatXNUIBQvVH7ke1f6niENhUP0pWA26L7czAjiBhF9rMHmvKN5fw
Click to expand...

If that Sharp Pebble stone is SiC I'll eat my hat. :p SiC isn't white--you can only get it in black or "green", which is a grey-green color. That looks like an AlOx stone to me. :)
 
No hat eating... just lighting and stand alone issues. Here is a night time pic - stone 1K side is definitely greener than 1.2K (whitish due to light diffusion on small SiC particles).

* correction: 1200 grit green SiC


FVL6BBx.jpg
 
Last edited:
Also pinged SharpPebble support about the web page, they confirmed SiC. I responded to them also to find out what grit rating they used on this stone.

support@sharppebble.com <support@sharppebble.com>
Thu 11/30/2017, 10:45 PM

Hi Tim,
Thanks for reaching out. Our website information is correct, which is 400/1000 grit sharpening stone is made from Silicon Carbide.
Please let me know if you have any other queries.
Thanks,
Sharp Pebble Support
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top