Microbevel on coarser grit?

[aznpos531]

I've been freehand sharpening for a while now and I'm able to get a shaving sharp edge consistently (not quite at the hair whittling stage yet).
The general rule of thumb when sharpening is, as I gather, go from coarse to fine and this has worked very well for me. I was playing around with my stones recently and I've found that finishing the microbevel on a coarse stone (Spyderco medium stone) seems to yield a better edge than on a fine stone (Spyderco fine stone). Now i'm pretty confident that I'm maintaining a consistent angle. Does this make sense?

I'm mainly working with S30V, AUS-8/8Cr13MoV, and D2.

 

[Obsessed with Edges]

A lot of people like a microbevel with some more 'bite' in it. So, it makes sense to me. It's interesting to hear the medium Spyderco hone referred to as 'coarse', as at least a few might see that one as pretty fine, compared to what they're used to. Some view anything past 320/400 grit, which is much coarser than a medium Spyderco hone, as too fine. To me, that one is just on the cusp of almost (but not quite) polishing, with the Spyderco 'fine' hone being at the very beginning of 'polishing' stages. Different perspectives, depending who you ask. It's all good. A microbevel is a quick & easy way to tailor an edge's cutting performance to personal preference, without the extra work involved in completely re-bevelling an edge.

 

[HeavyHanded]

For a time I was putting a coarse microbevel on my fine ground edges, then realized I might as well just stop at the coarser stone in the first place and save myself some time, effort, and the terminal apex is a few degrees more acute as well. Unless you need the additional refinement for a specific task, don't bother. Many folks prefer some tooth for EDU.

 

[aznpos531]

A lot of people like a microbevel with some more 'bite' in it. So, it makes sense to me. It's interesting to hear the medium Spyderco hone referred to as 'coarse', as at least a few might see that one as pretty fine, compared to what they're used to. Some view anything past 320/400 grit, which is much coarser than a medium Spyderco hone, as too fine. To me, that one is just on the cusp of almost (but not quite) polishing, with the Spyderco 'fine' hone being at the very beginning of 'polishing' stages. Different perspectives, depending who you ask. It's all good. A microbevel is a quick & easy way to tailor an edge's cutting performance to personal preference, without the extra work involved in completely re-bevelling an edge.

haha you're right. I guess I should have called it a *coarser* stone. IIRC the medium is about 600 grit? I've been meaning to get something to bridge the gap between my XC DMT stone and the Spyderco medium. Since I rarely need to start with the XC, I reach for my medium so I guess in my mind it's the "coarse stone".
Thanks for your insight as always.

For a time I was putting a coarse microbevel on my fine ground edges, then realized I might as well just stop at the coarser stone in the first place and save myself some time, effort, and the terminal apex is a few degrees more acute as well. Unless you need the additional refinement for a specific task, don't bother. Many folks prefer some tooth for EDU.

Thanks for that. I guess I'll have to play around with my stones a bit more to find something I like.

 

[Obsessed with Edges]

haha you're right. I guess I should have called it a *coarser* stone. IIRC the medium is about 600 grit? I've been meaning to get something to bridge the gap between my XC DMT stone and the Spyderco medium. Since I rarely need to start with the XC, I reach for my medium so I guess in my mind it's the "coarse stone".
Thanks for your insight as always.

That's a pretty (VERY) wide gap in grit! Might look into the C/F/EF/EEF DMTs too. The medium Spyderco might be most logically placed after the EEF DMT (maybe the EF, if you chose to forego the EEF DMT). Even the EEF DMT will be more aggressive than the medium ceramic, because it's diamond, and will leave much deeper scratches in the steel. I've never really been able to trust the published 'grit' numbers for ceramics, because they're generally (as a group) much finer than equivalent grit (or 'mesh') specs for diamond. A 'fine' DMT is also listed at 600 'mesh' (25 micron particle size), and that one is MUCH coarser than a medium Spyderco. Same numbers, but completely different grit standards.