Help me understand the differences.....

D

d.weglarz13

Joined
Jun 4, 2008
Messages
1,944
Okay. Real simple. I have a LOT of experience and time with the DMT bench stones and Shapton glass water stones. I use them all free hand with water. This is really all I know.
So, Bare with me, i know this is very vague, but any advice will help me understand more than I do now.
As far as diamonds, water, Oil Stones, Arkansas, ceramic stones go...............What is the use and pros/cons of either styles?
I know i know, sharpening a dull blade........But, more specifically, why use either one over the other.
Why Arkansas instead of oil stones, instead of water stones, or diamond, or ceramic?.......:eek:
Thanks for your patience, I haven't really used other stuff than what i have now.


So, what do you use, and why do you like or hate it? Freehand only talk please. I don't like the guided systems.

dave
 
You're straying off the fact map and into opinion territory, here. And that's all I've got. I learned on Arkansas stones about 40 years ago. I still have the same stones I bought 40 years ago, plus a translucent 8"X2" I paid $12 for at an antique shop 3 years ago. Even the softest stones are still flat and look as thick as new. Never been dressed. I didn't even know what that meant until I started coming here. With the exception of the translucent, my Washita, soft, white and black stones have each sharpened several thousand edges. Literally. I worked for 20 years on a 7-day-a-week swing shift and I sharpened everybody's knives on the evening and midnight shifts. Sleeping on the job was a firing offense; sharpening was allowed. So economy is my only fact in favor of natural stones-all my stones could be replaced today for around $300 and would last nearly forever. Sharper-than-useful edges are doable with almost any sharpening medium. Personally, I know what the "right" edge looks like, feels like, sounds like on my Arkansas stones. That makes them right for me, regardless of what I find to like in other media.
 
Mostly, I'd say, is speed. Grit for grit a diamond sharpener will cut faster than a water stone. I believe this is especially true for the new steels with their vanadium carbides and HRc hardness upwards of the mid 60s. Pretty much the same reason someone would opt for a belt grinder or one of those paper wheels.
 
  • Arkansas ('natural' stones): Natural abrasive in these is called 'Novaculite'. These stones are actually mined from quarries, and cut to shape. At coarser grits, these are much less aggressive than more modern stones, and won't effectively grind more modern, high-alloy steels with high carbide content (vanadium carbide, chromium carbide, tungsten carbide, etc.). Arkansas stones work well with simple carbon steels and some low-alloy stainless steels, and are likely among the oldest of the 'old school' sharpening stones. The fine-grit 'black hard' and 'translucent' Arkansas stones can be great polishing/burnishing stones, however. Still rather slow, but that can be used to great advantage, even when polishing some more high-wear steels. Also work very well for aligning edges and removing burrs.

  • Ceramics: Synthetic (man-made), using Alumina, a.k.a. aluminum oxide, abrasives in a more-or-less permanent binder. Extremely hard and durable, but at mainly fine/very fine grits. Not as useful for heavy grinding/metal removal, but great refining stones, especially on high-wear steels. Ceramics are generally the longest-lasting hones, and are usually made to stay flat over their entire life.

  • Oil stones (includes Arkansas): Aside from the Arkansas 'natural' stones, other synthetic oil stones might be either aluminum oxide ('corundum') or silicon carbide (sometimes called 'carborundum') in somewhat looser/weaker binders than ceramics. Oilstones will break down somewhat, which exposes fresh abrasive grit, and therefore has a reputation for working fast. The breaking down also means they'll 'dish' with use, and may benefit from flattening periodically. As the name implies, oil stones are manufactured and usually intended to be lubricated with oil, to keep swarf from clogging the surface, though they can be used with water or dry, according to preference. Norton's 'India' (aluminum oxide) and 'Crystolon' (silicon carbide) stones are definitive examples of synthetic oil stones. Synthetic oil stones may be the most widely-versatile of all, and can be used effectively on the large majority of knife steels.

  • Diamond hones: The hardest and most aggressive abrasive of all. Shallow layer of diamond abrasive embedded in a nickel substrate, usually over a steel plate. Designed to remain flat throughout their life, and if used and cared for properly, will not shed too much abrasive and therefore will last a long time. 'Proper use' means avoiding excessive grinding pressure, which can dislodge the diamond from the substrate and shorten the life of the hone. Diamond will abrade any other material, and is therefore most useful for very high-wear steels, and even for ceramic knives.

  • Water stones are a whole other kettle of beans. I don't have experience with them, but many others here do. I'm betting at least some of them will fill in the blanks there. Check for posts from knifenut1013, HeavyHanded and some others, for some good input there.


There's a LOT more to this than what I've contributed. But, that's what I see as the most basic differences between stone types. I'll also point out from the beginning: don't attempt to derive any meaning in comparing 'grit' numbers between different stone types. They're all graded by different standards, so a direct 'grit number' comparison between each type will be meaningless. Trying each type out, and getting acquainted with how they perform, is really the only surefire way to compare performance between each type.


David
 
Last edited:
Obsessed with Edges said:
I'll also point out from the beginning: don't attempt to derive any meaning in comparing 'grit' numbers between different stone types. They're all graded by different standards, so a direct 'grit number' comparison between each type will be meaningless. Trying each type out, and getting acquainted with how they perform, is really the only surefire way to compare performance between each type.
David
Click to expand...

Thanks for pointing out this very important fact that is often left out of discussions about the different grinding media. Many have bought stones and have been disappointed in their performance due to this fact. Before putting your money on the table, you should research your purchase to ensure what you are buying is in fact what you think you are getting. My wife says I over research things I buy on line, and can't understand why I don't just order what I want. If I do my due diligence in researching an item before I buy, then if it is wrong, my fault. It is different if you can go into a brick and mortar store and "touchy feely" :D everything before buying. Excellent post OWE as usual.

Blessings,

Omar
 
^^Thanks, Omar. :)

I've seen the 'Whhyyyy is this ## grit SOOO different from the same ## grit in another type?" question so often around here, I felt it was best to throw that qualifier in from the get-go. Pretty much a reflex response in me now. :D


David
 
Obsessed with Edges said:
  • Arkansas ('natural' stones): Natural abrasive in these is called 'Novaculite'. These stones are actually mined from quarries, and cut to shape. At coarser grits, these are much less aggressive than more modern stones, and won't effectively grind more modern, high-alloy steels with high carbide content (vanadium carbide, chromium carbide, tungsten carbide, etc.). Arkansas stones work well with simple carbon steels and some low-alloy stainless steels, and are likely among the oldest of the 'old school' sharpening stones. The fine-grit 'black hard' and 'translucent' Arkansas stones can be great polishing/burnishing stones, however. Still rather slow, but that can be used to great advantage, even when polishing some more high-wear steels. Also work very well for aligning edges and removing burrs.

  • Ceramics: Synthetic (man-made), using Alumina, a.k.a. aluminum oxide, abrasives in a more-or-less permanent binder. Extremely hard and durable, but at mainly fine/very fine grits. Not as useful for heavy grinding/metal removal, but great refining stones, especially on high-wear steels. Ceramics are generally the longest-lasting hones, and are usually made to stay flat over their entire life.

  • Oil stones (includes Arkansas): Aside from the Arkansas 'natural' stones, other synthetic oil stones might be either aluminum oxide ('corundum') or silicon carbide (sometimes called 'carborundum') in somewhat looser/weaker binders than ceramics. Oilstones will break down somewhat, which exposes fresh abrasive grit, and therefore has a reputation for working fast. The breaking down also means they'll 'dish' with use, and may benefit from flattening periodically. As the name implies, oil stones are manufactured and usually intended to be lubricated with oil, to keep swarf from clogging the surface, though they can be used with water or dry, according to preference. Norton's 'India' (aluminum oxide) and 'Crystolon' (silicon carbide) stones are definitive examples of synthetic oil stones. Synthetic oil stones may be the most widely-versatile of all, and can be used effectively on the large majority of knife steels.

  • Diamond hones: The hardest and most aggressive abrasive of all. Shallow layer of diamond abrasive embedded in a nickel substrate, usually over a steel plate. Designed to remain flat throughout their life, and if used and cared for properly, will not shed too much abrasive and therefore will last a long time. 'Proper use' means avoiding excessive grinding pressure, which can dislodge the diamond from the substrate and shorten the life of the hone. Diamond will abrade any other material, and is therefore most useful for very high-wear steels, and even for ceramic knives.

  • Water stones are a whole other kettle of beans. I don't have experience with them, but many others here do. I'm betting at least some of them will fill in the blanks there. Check for posts from knifenut1013, HeavyHanded and some others, for some good input there.


There's a LOT more to this than what I've contributed. But, that's what I see as the most basic differences between stone types. I'll also point out from the beginning: don't attempt to derive any meaning in comparing 'grit' numbers between different stone types. They're all graded by different standards, so a direct 'grit number' comparison between each type will be meaningless. Trying each type out, and getting acquainted with how they perform, is really the only surefire way to compare performance between each type.


David
Click to expand...
Thanks for the great discussion. I ve only been "seriously" sharpening for a few years now and I m always looking for information to help me attain sharper or more durable edges.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top