silicon carbide stones

I think I've learned more about abrasives from this thread than in the last 3 years... I have a Norton Medium/Fine India that I got from Brigade Quartermasters many years ago when they were on sale for $10. Now I have to find it in my garage to go and read the box. All I have to do is follow the kerosene smell.... ;)

I don't know why, but I usually use it to put the final edge on my CS Trailmaster after I've set the bevel - I'm pretty hard on this knife. I really like the sounds, feel, and yes, smell, that comes from spending some "quality time" in my garage. Even when it's cold out.
 
hardheart said:
Well, that's not all bad. Didn't it say on the package? The blister pack mine came in gave the abrasive type and grading. Maybe this is like the Spyderco medium stones, I say they are brown, others call them gray. I cannot see gray in those stones to save my soul, online or in person. I'll get a pic of my combo stones in a little while, at least side by side it's pretty clear (at least to me)
Click to expand...

I have noticed people saying that as well . DM :)
 
Norton should be ashamed they don't list what the damb stone is on the package. Sodak what color is your stone? I'm still leaning towards gray = SiC. I've seen alot of wrong pics and info on the net. I am still convinced that gray is SiC and Brown is AlOx. I'll admit I'm not as sure about that as I was before this thread though. :)
 
bgentry said:
I can get an edge that will shave a little using only a medium SiC stone. I'll admit that it just barely shaves though. ...and yes, it is a VERY coarse feeling stone when you use it. It also seems to break off little pieces of itself which can make the surface feel really rough if the blade hits them. I sometimes sweep the stone with my fingers, or use a damp cloth.

A few months ago I was fascinated with the graph you've quoted above from Steve Bottorff. So much so that I added a 10 point scale to the X and Y axes so I could compare exactly "how much faster" or "how much sharper" each type of stone was.

I wrote Steve and showed him my addition to the graph, asking how acurate the spacing was between the various stones. He replied that he combined two graphs from Norton from two different sources and that the axes were not labeled in the originals. I took that to mean that the graph is correct in "relative terms" but it may or may not be exactly "accurate".

For example, consulting my annotated graph, I see that medium SiC is about a 5.5 in speed, and about a 2 in sharpness. Moving across the graph I see that fine diamond is also about a 5.5 in speed, but a 7 in sharpness! This implies that fine diamond produces an edge that is more than 3 times as sharp as medium SiC. That seems incredible to me, but I don't have any diamond stones to compare with, so I can't say how accurate that is. Would anyone here who's used both say that seems accurate to them?

If there's any interest I can post my additions to the graph.

Brian.
Click to expand...
The graph to me is not accurate as I have both and my coarse DMT left a coarse edge at I'd say the same sharpness . DM
 
bgentry said:
I think maybe the axis is shifted so that X doesn't start at 0, but something more like 5. If so, medium SiC would be a 6 and fine diamond would be an 8.5. Does that sound closer? Or would you care to guesstimate a few values in the 1 - 10 range on that graph? I.E, what value out of 10 do you think medium SiC should be? Or some other stone that you know well?

Or maybe it's a lost cause and the graph just isn't linear. Any thoughts on it are appreciated.

Brian.
Click to expand...
it's not the individual stones, as there are no X values, but the lines relative to each other. I have never thought that fine diamond (25 micron) was anywhere near 4K waterstone (3 micron). Even if that is using mesh instead of JIS, like on Norton waterstones, that's still a 6 micron ceramic abrasive compared to a 25 micron diamond. I think the SiC and alox lines are a little off, needing to shift right and perhaps extend a little.

Also, found the SiC/alox stone, now I can't find the combo SiC stone :grumpy:
 
db said:
Norton should be ashamed they don't list what the damb stone is on the package. Sodak what color is your stone? I'm still leaning towards gray = SiC. I've seen alot of wrong pics and info on the net. I am still convinced that gray is SiC and Brown is AlOx. I'll admit I'm not as sure about that as I was before this thread though. :)
Click to expand...
The one I got from HD is brown and grey, but my India is brown and tan (ish), if I remember right. I'll get it and correct this if I'm wrong. Heck, I'll get them both and post a picture...
 
I have used Norton stones for the last 20 + years and own over two dozen and know the grey to be SiC and the reddish/orange to be fine India and the brown coarse India .
Then I have to agee w/ others that good info. from Norton is scarce . With their dealers its some what better . But I've noticed this w/ other manufacturers as well . DM
 
Well, it looks like I might change direction, since the SiC stones seem to be mainly for grinding and having a DMT XXC I'm not seeing the need to persue them any longer. The Norton stone I picked up will come in handy as a beater stone but I don't think I'll be relying on it any time soon to finish a blade. This has been a good learning experience about SiC stones though.

So looking at the other end of the spectrum what polishing stones will handle the steels of today? I've been thinking of the 16k shapton glass stone, I know gunmike likes them but I don't really hear much other talk of them. It would be nice if DMT came out with a 10k mesh stone but I think that's still a ways out. So what ya think, glass stone, waterstone, SiC in a high grit?
 
I am very partial to ceramics, particularly the Spyderco's in Fine or Extra Fine. Although I really doubt they are going to get to 16K, they have a great feel for finishing (for me, at least), and I've never had a problem with any steel, including ZDP.

Have you thought about Belgian Coticules combined with a Nagura stone slurry?

This is very subjective on my part, YMMV.
 
I've used natural stones on high alloyed steels like ZDP-189, S30V, M4, and S90V. Seemed to do ok, just takes longer. I've tried translucent Arkansas, BBW/Coticule combos, Nakayama Kiita, and mid-range with an Aoto. I also have a 10,000 Naniwa Super Stone that I like a lot, would like to try the Chosera or the 12,000. I don't know how great the 16,000 Glasstone is, I personally would go with any good 8,000 and jump right to the 30,000; if I felt like dropping that much on a single stone.
 
That's the thing, I like all the fancy steels and the last set of waterstone's I had (king) didn't work all that well on some of them. Did fine with ZDP but S90, S30, M4 I think did more cutting of the stone than the stone cut the steel. Might have been the quality of the stone too but I don't know much about waterstone's so I really couldn't say.

I'd go back to a UF ceramic but I don't like the excessive burring and is one of the reasons I sold them. I'm starting to think this is a hopeless road to follow, I've grown to love the look of a diamond finish but sometimes miss the perfect mirror look. The 3 micron DMT may not yield a perfect polish but it produce
the sharpest edge constantly on any steel of any other stone I've used.

Now that I've completely confused myself I'm starting to think I should just stick with my diamond hones and pick up a 10k waterstone down the road.
 
knifenut1013 said:
That's the thing, I like all the fancy steels and the last set of waterstone's I had (king) didn't work all that well on some of them. Did fine with ZDP but S90, S30, M4 I think did more cutting of the stone than the stone cut the steel. Might have been the quality of the stone too but I don't know much about waterstone's so I really couldn't say.

I'd go back to a UF ceramic but I don't like the excessive burring and is one of the reasons I sold them. I'm starting to think this is a hopeless road to follow, I've grown to love the look of a diamond finish but sometimes miss the perfect mirror look. The 3 micron DMT may not yield a perfect polish but it produce
the sharpest edge constantly on any steel of any other stone I've used.

Now that I've completely confused myself I'm starting to think I should just stick with my diamond hones and pick up a 10k waterstone down the road.
Click to expand...
knifenut1013,

I have the DMT xxf ("8000 grit")diamond plate and have only used it a few times, but I noticed that it leaves a much rougher looking surface than my 3000 and 6000 waterstones do. Have you noticed it getting finer as you used it more?

DMT includes a note that suggests this will happen, but flattening the backs of some very rough chisels must not be enough use to make it so, as I noticed no change after doing so. If you have seen this refinement to the scratch pattern, how much use did it take to see the change?

Thanks,
Bill
 
Took a couple of months of use to completely break-in just like the rest of the stones but now it leaves a similar finish to a 3000-4000 waterstone and a edge sharper than a 8000 grit. I purchased a cheap ceramic kitchen knife and tried to sharpen it, this helped the break-in process a LOT!

Its worth the wait, trust me. Unfortunately diamond hones are always going to leave you with a deeper looking scratch pattern because of the way the abrasive material cuts the steel. Stick it out and use the stone as much as you can, before you know it you won't want to use anything else for finishing. If your looking for a mirror surface on a wide bevel you might want to use another method though.
 
knifenut1013 said:
Took a couple of months of use to completely break-in just like the rest of the stones but now it leaves a similar finish to a 3000-4000 waterstone and a edge sharper than a 8000 grit. I purchased a cheap ceramic kitchen knife and tried to sharpen it, this helped the break-in process a LOT!

Its worth the wait, trust me. Unfortunately diamond hones are always going to leave you with a deeper looking scratch pattern because of the way the abrasive material cuts the steel. Stick it out and use the stone as much as you can, before you know it you won't want to use anything else for finishing. If your looking for a mirror surface on a wide bevel you might want to use another method though.
Click to expand...
Thank you very much. This is what I needed to know.

Bill
 
knifenut1013 said:
... I'm starting to think I should just stick with my diamond hones and pick up a 10k waterstone down the road.
Click to expand...
Not to say 'I told you so' but.... ;)

I suppose it's all a matter of personal taste, but for me, between diamond stones for the high alloy stuff, India on the carbon steel and low alloy stainlesses and when I want to enjoy all the "tradition" and feel of a good sharpening session, then ceramic for microbevels and touchups, and finally clay coated paper when I'm after uber-sharp ... that pretty much covers it.
 
My fine diamond took years to "break in" . Then I finally realized its just going to cut that way more like a 3-400 grit . Until I used it to lap several Arkansas stones and a ceramic stone .
This broke off a lot of the diamonds and now it looks well worn but still sharpens and is closer to the grit they state . The diamond grits are just not what they state as a different method is used w/ them . If you want that fine looking bevel you have to use a different cutting matrix . DM
 
knifenut1013 said:
That's the thing, I like all the fancy steels and the last set of waterstone's I had (king) didn't work all that well on some of them. Did fine with ZDP but S90, S30, M4 I think did more cutting of the stone than the stone cut the steel. Might have been the quality of the stone too but I don't know much about waterstone's so I really couldn't say.

I'd go back to a UF ceramic but I don't like the excessive burring and is one of the reasons I sold them. I'm starting to think this is a hopeless road to follow, I've grown to love the look of a diamond finish but sometimes miss the perfect mirror look. The 3 micron DMT may not yield a perfect polish but it produce
the sharpest edge constantly on any steel of any other stone I've used.

Now that I've completely confused myself I'm starting to think I should just stick with my diamond hones and pick up a 10k waterstone down the road.
Click to expand...
Yeah S90V will eat away at any stone. SiC stones are great for the price. If $ isn't a concern DMT hones are by far a better choice in my opinion. From my opinion nothing I've tried betters diamonds for coarser work like 1,000 grit and under. I'm still a fan of the cheap black SiC stones but that is more of a cost reason than anything else. For finer finishing I do like waterstones and ceramics. I'm becoming a big fan of ceramic just because they are less messy. No water, no oil, and no flattening, just pull it out and a few strokes and your done.
 
Dog of War said:
Not to say 'I told you so' but.... ;)

I suppose it's all a matter of personal taste, but for me, between diamond stones for the high alloy stuff, India on the carbon steel and low alloy stainlesses and when I want to enjoy all the "tradition" and feel of a good sharpening session, then ceramic for microbevels and touchups, and finally clay coated paper when I'm after uber-sharp ... that pretty much covers it.
Click to expand...


Yeah, yeah :p

Personal taste is a big part of it but finding a stone that does everything well is what lead me to diamonds to begin with. Other stones might polish better at the same grits and work good with this steel or that steel but diamonds work good with all steels. I think this thread was just a laps in my judgment and has made me realize I have already found what I was looking for.

Hey db, 1000 grit and less? my next thread might change your mind :D
 
All right, before you go closing this thread, here's a pic of my Norton India coarse/fine. This is not the HD stone, but one that I got years ago on the internet. It looks like grey and red/orangeish/brownish.. It's 1 inch thick, 2 x 8 inches width/length.

norton1.jpg

norton2.jpg
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top