Help selecting hones

I went to a Shapton demonstration a few weeks ago... put on by the owner.... I don't have much to compare it to... but their system sure seemed impressive. You do need water, but don't have to presoak.... just spray and go. I'd be interested to know if anyone has tried them, and how they compare to other stones.
 
cbwx34 said:
I went to a Shapton demonstration a few weeks ago... put on by the owner.... I don't have much to compare it to... but their system sure seemed impressive. You do need water, but don't have to presoak.... just spray and go. I'd be interested to know if anyone has tried them, and how they compare to other stones.
Click to expand...

Me too :)

I'm also curious to find out the differences between the Shapton hones and other brands (e.g., Norton)...

Thanks,

Matthew
 
Jeff Clark said:
There is a huge gap between a coarse diamond hone and ceramic finishing setup like a Sharpmaker.
Click to expand...

Jeff,

Taking a look at this graph you linked to, it looks like a coarse diamond hone and a medium ceramic (Spyderco medium benchstone?) achieve the same level of sharpness but at different speeds. In fact, it appears to me that the diamond hones achieve the same level of sharpness at all of the grits (medium/coarse, fine, extra fine). Is this correct?

I guess I'm trying to figure out why there is a huge gap between the coarse diamond hone and the medium Spyderco benchstone.

Thanks,

Matthew
 
Lets just use the grits in my post to compare. I'd say the finish of the coarse DMT is 300, fine DMT 600, Med ceramic Spydy 900, and fine Spydy 1200. I have all 4 of these as bench hones.
I edited to change 800 to 900
 
db said:
Lets just use the grits in my post to compare. I'd say the finish of the coarse DMT is 300, fine DMT 600, Med ceramic Spydy 900, and fine Spydy 1200. I have all 4 of these as bench hones.
I edited to change 800 to 900
Click to expand...

db -

Thanks for your input. I guess it might be prudent to ask the author of the graph that Jeff linked to which brands of stones he used to generate the data. At least though, I understand your post to say that you notice a difference in the level of edge refinement between the fine DMT and the brown Spyderco ceramic, a difference that is significant enough to warrant using the brown instead of going directly to the white. Would that be correct?

Matthew
 
Yes that is correct. I also stop with the med Spydy and rarely go to the fine white Spydy. But when I do goto the white I use the brown before I do.
 
I have a Shapton 15,000 so there really isn't much to compare it to. Does a really nice job. Is almost like a hard strop. Cuts fast, but being so fine, it does load a little so needs rinsing frequently. I'll have to try some of their coarser stones.
 
The graph that I posted is from Norton Abrasives. I would guess that most of the products compared were theirs. I wouldn't take the chart as gospel or as literally accurate. For example I have had better success with Spyderco ceramic hones than some other brands.

I think that it is deceptive to compare the grit of ceramic hones to other artificial hones. Most artificial hones are sort of aggregates of grit packed together with some binding material or packed together and baked (er something). The grit is very distinct. The ceramic seems to be fused together in a more nearly amorphous manner. This makes it more like natural Arkansas stones. The ceramic produces a smoother finish than its nominal grit rating would indicate.
 
The DMT diamond stones are grit rated, on the sharpness axis a 320 (coarse) DMT stone compares to any othe stone of the same grit, but it may cut much faster. I assume the rating of the graph was based on other (older) types of Diamond stones, some of which were made from natural diamonds, filtered in oil. These stones do not have a grit rating, but were rated coarse, medium fine etc. just as it is difficult to determine an exact grit rating for the ceramic stones. So the "coarse" of older diamond stones probably doesn't related to the "coarse" 320 grit of the current DMT stones.

I find there is a pretty big difference between different japanese waterstones (never tried Norton) in softness of the matrix and cutting speed in particular. In my opinion the "Bester" brand stones are far superior than the King stones, but they are also about twice the price but still cheap in comparison to the Shapton stones.
 
PS. I have found Norton waterstones to be coarser than equivalently graded Japanese waterstones.

I have a 220 grit and 1000 grit Shapton Professional waterstones. They cut fast and don't require a presoak.
 
Just wanted to close this thread out by thanking all who shared their systems and gave advice. I got a lot of food for thought! In the end, I decided that I really wanted the convenience and ease of diamond hones for reprofiling, and the ease of use of ceramics for edge finishing. Therefore, I have ordered the following:

1) DMT DiaSharp, 8" coarse
2) DMT DiaSharp, 8" fine
3) Spyderco 302M, 8" medium
4) Spyderco 302F, 8" fine
5) Spyderco 302UF, 8" ultra-fine

I may eventually pick up some waterstones for comparison, but for a baseline system I really needed something that I would not be reluctant to use. After all, much like knives, the best sharpening system you have is the one you actually use! :)

Thanks again,

Matthew
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top