Micron on Spyderco Bench Stones

g33kfu

g33kfu

Joined
May 16, 2007
Messages
112
Anyone know the micron size on the spyderco ceramic bench stones? 302M, 302F, 302UF
 
Thanks. makes things difficult doesn't it. I'm looking to get rid of my old cheap stones and go to a DMT dia-sharp and Spyderco bench stone combination. In order to keep the gap small between the diamond and ceramic it would be nice to know how they compare. I've seen posts where guys have no issues going from say a "fine" DMT to a "fine" or "medium" Spyderco. I'm probably over thinking it but the stones aren't cheap so I want to get it right.
 
g33kfu said:
Thanks. makes things difficult doesn't it. I'm looking to get rid of my old cheap stones and go to a DMT dia-sharp and Spyderco bench stone combination. In order to keep the gap small between the diamond and ceramic it would be nice to know how they compare. I've seen posts where guys have no issues going from say a "fine" DMT to a "fine" or "medium" Spyderco. I'm probably over thinking it but the stones aren't cheap so I want to get it right.
Click to expand...

That's a realistic progression, actually. Might even be able to go from an EF DMT to the medium Spyderco. This is just due to the difference in aggressiveness of the diamond, which cuts much deeper for a given grit size, and therefore leaves a coarser finish, versus an equivalently-sized (or even larger) ceramic grit. Best way to figure out how each works best, is just to use 'em for a while. You'll begin to get a feel for where they'll fit in your sequence.
 
g33kfu said:
Thanks. makes things difficult doesn't it. I'm looking to get rid of my old cheap stones and go to a DMT dia-sharp and Spyderco bench stone combination. In order to keep the gap small between the diamond and ceramic it would be nice to know how they compare.
Click to expand...

I asked a similar question a while back.. perhaps twice! I found that post by Sal that was linked above and thought "that was that". Looking at the Grand Unified Grit Chart (a sticky in this forum if you haven't seen it before), the results seem cut and dried. Spyderco medium is 15 micron. Spyderco fine is 6 micron. So the DMT EF at 9 micron should be right in the middle. Right?

No freaking way. Not even close. It's got to be the binder in the Spyderco ceramics, but they seem far finer than all the charts make them out to be. I have the Spyderco medium and fine and the DMT XXC, C, and EF. The EF is a rather large step backwards from the Spyderco medium. I get a far finer polish from the Spyderco medium, and then even more from the fine.

The DMT EF also cuts much faster than the Spyderco medium: It's hard to quantify, but I'd say something like 3 - 5x as fast? I'm guessing based on a few recent experiences.

I read a post here a while back that talked about the shape of abrasive particles that resonated with me. If you think of most abrasives as mountains and valleys, it's mostly true on the whole. Diamonds, on the other hand, have very sharp faceted shapes. Think of REALLY pointed mountains. So diamonds tend to "rip and tear" as they cut, due to their (observable with a microscope) physical geometry.

As I continue to tell myself for the past few years and now: To study sharpening is to study abrasives and steel.

It's kinda fun. :)

Brian.
 
I agree gentry. Yet, different types of grits (grains) respond to metal differently and leave a different scratch. DM
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top