Recommendation? Progression From Manticore?

M

MtnHawk1

Joined
May 22, 2019
Messages
337
I use and like the 60 grit Baryonyx Manticore. I usually progress to 120 grit from there, then finish at around 325-400.

I am wondering if I could skip the 120 and go directly to the higher range or, if that is too much of a jump from 60 grit, skip the 120 and finish with ~220 grit. I don't know much about the technical pros and cons of grit progression, which is why I'm asking the question. Eliminating a step would save some sharpening time and, when I'm in the wilderness, even a little less weight and bulk in my pack is always welcome.

I have knives for wilderness and kitchen use, and a few folders and multi-tools. These are all utility knives for a wide range of tasks. I'm not looking for the perfect knife and edge for each task, just a good, all-around working edge, and so I can keep my sharpening equipment to a minimum without sacrificing quality.

Thanks!
 
Last edited:
I went from Manticore to Shapton Glass 220 with no problems. The Manticore is very coarse, but doesn't seem to leave really deep scratches.
 
I actually go from the Manticore to the 400 grit Arctic fox stone. If you are chasing a more polished edge that will probably not get rid of all the scratches from the manticore but if you are just looking at refining the edge that you set on the manticore Ive found that it does a good enough job. After that I will hit it on a strop or the leather stropping belt on my Worksharp Bladegrinder attachment with diamond paste loaded up.
 
Unless you are talking about reprofiling or rapairing major edge damage, why not just start with 325-400 grit?

I have a coarse diamond plate for that(doesn't get used much), but I generally don't use anything under 800 grit for sharpening. We are obviously going for a different sort of edge, but I can't see a 400 grit stone taking much time to sharpen a dull knife.
 
chalby, I didn't start this thread to discuss how I sharpen, but to see if I could get a specific question answered.

Some of my knives are big, thick wood chopping knives with ~10" blades and .25" spines. Even most of my smaller fixed blade wilderness knives with a blade length around 4.5" are still fairly thick for their size.

What kind of 400 grit abrasive do you use that wouldn't take much time to sharpen a dull knife? I have a 400 grit diamond plate and haven't even tried that to quickly remove metal because even my 120 and 140 diamond plates, as well as SiC around that grit range, aren't nearly as fast as the 60 grit Manticore for my wilderness knives.

I like knife sharpening but it's not something I want to spend anymore time at than I have to. If I need to remove a certain amount of metal freehand it makes sense to me, at least, to do it faster rather than slower.
 
Last edited:
What are you doing that is causing so much damage that you need 60 grit?
 
It's not so much about repairing damage, although sometimes that happens, especially with wilderness knives. It's more about not spending any more time sharpening than I have to. Like I said, if a certain amount of metal has to be removed I'd rather do it quickly than slowly.
 
MtnHawk1 said:
It's not so much about repairing damage, although sometimes that happens, especially with wilderness knives. It's more about not spending any more time sharpening than I have to. Like I said, if a certain amount of metal has to be removed I'd rather do it quickly than slowly.
Click to expand...

I deal with a lot of damaged blades and as a professional sharpener its one of my most common tasks. Even when I use a 120 grit diamond plate I know I'm inflicting a bit of damage and LOTS of wear with such a coarse stone. Constant use of very coarse abrasives will shorten the life of the tool and is mostly unnecessary once you realize you can be less aggressive and more efficient with finer grits.

If staying within the baryonyx line I would say the Bull Thistle would be much better for roughing an edge back in and the Artic Fox for a final finish. You will likely notice your bevel geometry improve and overall sharpness easier to achieve along with longer tool life. I would also aim to tune the edge up with the Artic fox as much as possible leaving the Bull Thistle for weekly, monthly edge refreshing. In reality you should always be using the finest stone possible to tune up your edge and leaving total profiling for when the edge can simply no longer be tuned up by a finer stone.
 
Jason B., thanks for your post. I have read many of your posts, learned from them, and value and respect your knowledge and experience.

The points you make are informative and well taken. I already do regular, quick tune-ups of my knives to minimize full sharpenings, as you described and suggested, so I'm probably not using very coarse abrasives as much as might be assumed from my OP.

I'll order the two Baryonyx stones you mentioned with my next order. I've been thinking about trying them, anyway, so your post is a good incentive.
 
  • Like
Reactions: BJE
MtnHawk1 said:
chalby, I didn't start this thread to discuss how I sharpen, but to see if I could get a specific question answered.

Some of my knives are big, thick wood chopping knives with ~10" blades and .25" spines. Even most of my smaller fixed blade wilderness knives with a blade length around 4.5" are still fairly thick for their size.

What kind of 400 grit abrasive do you use that wouldn't take much time to sharpen a dull knife? I have a 400 grit diamond plate and haven't even tried that to quickly remove metal because even my 120 and 140 diamond plates, as well as SiC around that grit range, aren't nearly as fast as the 60 grit Manticore for my wilderness knives.

I like knife sharpening but it's not something I want to spend anymore time at than I have to. If I need to remove a certain amount of metal freehand it makes sense to me, at least, to do it faster rather than slower.
Click to expand...
Sorry, I was trying to help. You mentioned wanting to cut down sharpening time and I thought that was worth mentioning. I certainly think it would be faster using one stone in the 320-400 grit range, than using 3 coarse stones in progression for a regular sharpening.

We may be talking different levels of a dull knife here though. I'm talking about a knife that is struggling to cut well, but has no easily visible edge damage. Give me 5 minutes and I can get my dull knives sharp with a 800 grit stone let alone a 400 grit. By the sound of you talking about "removing a certain amount of metal" you are talking about what I would consider a repair job. Only then would I be reaching for a coarser stone.

Anyway sounds like you have a solution, so happy sharpenings.
 
MtnHawk1 said:
Jason B., thanks for your post. I have read many of your posts, learned from them, and value and respect your knowledge and experience.

The points you make are informative and well taken. I already do regular, quick tune-ups of my knives to minimize full sharpenings, as you described and suggested, so I'm probably not using very coarse abrasives as much as might be assumed from my OP.

I'll order the two Baryonyx stones you mentioned with my next order. I've been thinking about trying them, anyway, so your post is a good incentive.
Click to expand...

I have not used the Bull thistle but from the looks, grit and description I would bet its a good stone. The Artic fox I have and use, I actually take the pocket stone with me fairly often on hunting and camping trips. It will yield a very nice edge with the only down side being it loads up pretty bad, though I wouldn't say it really hurts performance, more of a visual annoyance. They can be used dry but I like to soak mone in water for a minute then use them like a waterstone. Makes the overall performance more consistent and easier to remove the swarf.
 
Jason B., thanks for the good info! :thumbsup: I am impressed with Baryonyx quality and it's always good to get feedback from those that actually use them.

I especially like that the Artic fox can be used dry. I also prefer using water but it's nice to know they can be used dry, if necessary, on my wilderness trips.


chalby, thanks for your reply and no problem. I've read where the majority of communication is nonverbal so there is plenty of room for misunderstanding with written messages. I'm sorry, too, for my part in this misunderstanding.

I think you nailed the exact cause of our misunderstanding with your statement: By the sound of you talking about "removing a certain amount of metal" you are talking about what I would consider a repair job. Only then would I be reaching for a coarser stone.

If I'm correct, it sounds like what you consider removing enough metal to call a "repair job" may for me be "normal sharpening" because of the amount of metal I need to remove on a long and thick knife edge. As I stated, some of my big wood chopping knives have ~10" blades and .25" spines. They are very thick, including the edges, compared to most knives. I am talking about not only sharpening but also thinning the edge, and behind the edge, because often factory edges are too obtuse and too thick, at least for me. Maybe I should have called this reprofiling, but the difference between sharpening and reprofiling can get a little hazy sometimes, depending on one's definition. At any rate, I need to remove that much metal only one time. Once I get the edge I want I try to avoid sharpening any more than necessary by regularly doing quick touch-ups on my edges.

Then there are other important sharpening factors to consider, such as steel composition, hardness, heat treatment, types of abrasives, etc., that further complicate the subject and can make it difficult to talk about sharpening in simple terms, potentially leading to even more misunderstandings.

Does this make sense or do you see it differently?
 
Last edited:
MtnHawk1 said:
If I'm correct, it sounds like what you consider removing enough metal to call a "repair job" may for me be "normal sharpening" because of the amount of metal I need to remove on a long and thick knife edge. As I stated, some of my big wood chopping knives have ~10" blades and .25" spines. They are very thick, including the edges, compared to most knives. I am talking about not only sharpening but also thinning the edge, and behind the edge, because often factory edges are too obtuse and too thick, at least for me. Maybe I should have called this reprofiling, but the difference between sharpening and reprofiling can get a little hazy sometimes, depending on one's definition. At any rate, I need to remove that much metal only one time. Once I get the edge I want I try to avoid sharpening any more than necessary by regularly doing quick touch-ups on my edges.

Then there are other important sharpening factors to consider, such as steel composition, hardness, heat treatment, types of abrasives, etc., that further complicate the subject and can make it difficult to talk about sharpening in simple terms, potentially leading to even more misunderstandings.

Does this make sense or do you see it differently?
Click to expand...
Yes this makes sense. The difference between normal sharpening and repairing an edge can be a little hazy as well. After a while it makes sense to go back to a coarser stone to reset the bevel.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top