Question about waterstones

Re: Question about waterstones

Jim in Burlington Ontario

>You don't say what your final grit is using scary sharp. I routinely use the 0.5q paper after my 8000 grit Norton. I have a set of King stones and don't bother with nagura stone. I think it comes down to pressure. All told IMO King stones cut very slowly.

Re: Question about waterstones

Carole in VA

>I was taking SS to.5 and then .3 for the final polishing. Perhaps I need an 8000 grit waterstone after the 6000 grit, or an Arkansas,or both...but they are so expensive! I may just stick to the SS method...it's a lot less messy which is a factor since I don't have running water in my shop! I guess I am trying to find out just how sharp an edge I can get and then just how sharp an edge I actually need. :-)

Re: Question about waterstones

Rick Hoppe in L.A.

>Carole, I have experience with this issue. I started with Scarey Sharp and now use Shapton waterstones.

If your final grit in SS is 2000(US), then a 6000(Jap.)stone is a step down. 2000 grit paper is more equivalent to an 8000 stone.

Waterstones don't produce a "better" edge than SS, They're just faster cutting. Also, sandpaper "loads" pretty quickly and need to be replaced. A waterstone doesn't load, it just needs flattening fairly frequently.

Re: Question about waterstones

Rick Hoppe in L.A.

>Carole, an 8000 grit waterstone is equivalent to about 1 or 2 microns which for all practical purposes is as sharp as one needs. This degree of sharpness (given good sharpening technique) will make the hairs on your arm fairly leap off ahead of the blade. SS is a good system. Just make sure to always use adhesive-backed paper. I've found just using water to make the paper "stick" will round over the edges of the tool because the paper will start to curl pretty quickly.

Re: Question about waterstones

steve knight

>you said most of it. really for the most part the abrasive media does not make a difference. the steel will only get so sharp and thats it no matter how fine you go to. speed ease of use cost and practicality are really what you choose.

Re: Question about waterstones

Dave Wright, Paris Mountain SC

>Rick,

The finer grits do indeed load with swarf quickly. This can be completely removed quite easily though. Backwrap a 2" wide piece of Longmask tape around a laminate roller. Roll up and down the sandpaper surface. The tape will completely pull up the swarf, leaving a clean surface ready for more honing. Longmask tape won't leave adhesive residue to interfere with the blades. You get several swarf removals before the adhesive loads and won't pick up more.

This method works best if you securely adhere the paper to the flat surface below. I use permanent spray adhesive to laminate sandpaper sheets to both sides of a MDF scrap. The paper is wet/dry, but the system needs to be kept completely dry - including making sure that water doesn't come over from earlier honing stages. The paper wears out eventually, but only after a good number of swarf removals. Paper life is also extended by not bearing down real hard.

FWIW, I only use sandpaper for the last grit, 2000 or 2500 depending on what I have in stock. The secret to success with all non-renewable honing media is grit removal. Scrubbing my diamond and ceramic stones with Comet every now and then restores most of their newly purchased cutting speed. I used waterstones for a few years, and eventually decided that I would rather scrub with Comet and roll with tape than flatten waterstones.

Regards,

Dave

Re: Question about waterstones

Wiley Horne--Glendora CA

>Hi Carole,

You can get an excellent working edge with any of the standard abrasive methods. I have a suggestion for checking out your new stones. But first some background.

Touching up can be tricky. Especially when starting from an edge that's already very sharp like your 0.3 micron edge. Instead of 'sharp', think 'thin'. When you take your 6000g stone to an already sharp or thin edge, what can happen is that you work the bevel and create a fine burr, then work the back, but the burr doesn't actually come off. You can get a weakened wire edge which stays on, and you kinda worry it back and forth. Maybe it partially sloughs off, leaving tags and rags. And your touched up edge is not as good as what you started with.

I suggest you use your stones as follows to get a clearcut test. Start with the 1000 grit, and work the bevel until you are down to fresh steel, and can feel a distinct burr on the back of the blade. Each stone will create a burr, but think of this as the primary burr, and it is an important indicator that you've reached fresh steel. Do you have a middle stone, like 3000 or 4000? If so, go to it. If not, go to your 6000. Think of that primary burr as hanging by a hinge of metal. If you are going straight to the 6000, I suggest that you not work the back on the 1000, but rather go from the 1000 with the burr still on the blade to the 6000 and begin working the bevel on the 6000 for a while, and then go to the back. This will 'thin out' the hinge holding the burr, and you will cut the burr off cleaner. Then proceed and hone further on the 6000, working the bevel and then the back until you're satisfied. But the blade should immediately start feeling sharp as soon as you cut the burr off using the 6000.

Now if you prefer to remove the primary burr using the 1000 stone, and there is no middle stone to go to, just be aware that you may need to spend some extra time on the 6000 to completely hone through the 'scar' left by the primary burr breaking off.

Bottom line: If this discussion of burrs is too theoretical, the basic suggestion is to test your stones by starting from scratch on the 1000g, raise a true burr, and then hone on the 6000g to a final edge.

Wiley

Re: Question about waterstones

Jim in Burlington Ontario

>Rick I don't know what kind of paper your using but film backed paper is designed to be held down by a thin film of water. As for wether or not 8000 stone is good enough could make a great debate. My feelings are having used micro abrasives after water stones is they do make a big difference if you looking to use your smoother to finish your work. As to others who say the paper loads up quickly your only making very few strokes to polish the micro bevel. Well worth the few dollars to take your sharpening to the next level.

Re: Question about waterstones

Rick Hoppe in L.A.

>Jim,

When I was doing SS I was using silicon carbide w or d. Those had a tendency to curl when wet.

The micro abrasives I've used have been adhesive backed from Joel at Tools-for-WW.

Yes, I'f you're using a .5 film to polish a bevel it would take a long time to load up.

As to whether it makes a difference...Hmmmmm. What is the micron grade you're using for the final polish?

Re: Question about waterstones

Jim in Burlington Ontario

>I have used 0.5 and 0.3 . It's worth the few bucks to give it a try and see for yourself.