Sharpening stones. Shapton Pro?

Re: I believe these are Sigma Power ...

Joe in a Cleveland suburb

It looks like you can get SIGMA POWER SELECT II WATER STONE - 6000 GRIT from Heartwood Tools. Is this the same one?

https://www.heartwoodtools.com/sigma-power-select-ii-water-stones/sigma-power-select-ii-water-stone-6000-grit

Thanks.

different line...

David Weaver

I believe that's a sintered stone, but SP makes their model designations hard to decipher.

Their II line is generally soft sintered stones that you really don't want for woodworking (they are intended to cut steels with high hardness and high carbide content, and wear fast to do it - sloppy and constant flattening).

The confusing part is the 13,000 stone is nothing like that, but they still label it as part of the II line.

I find the 13k to be slower vs. the shapton stone, but it must be something different in use. The reason it's slower is that it's much finer than a shapton 12k. It's also thirsty - they're like polar opposites.

The base 6k stone that wasn't sintered is relatively hard (I don't have any SP stuff at this point other than the 13k, so I can't make direct comparisons - I may have the 1200, which is also a very hard stone...so I guess I have two , but the middle stones, I've long since sold). The 13k stone is twice as fine as the shapton 12k pro, though, and 5 times as closely graded.

Re: different line...

Joe in a Cleveland suburb

This is all so confusing.

Glad you guys are here to answer my questions.

DIN Rod....

David Weaver

There are so many different marples chisels that nobody could possibly pin down a single alloy. Both in different models, different years, and different origins.

They probably used oil hardening steel in some of them at some point.

It's not as if the woodworking community is careful about "carbon steel" vs. "A2" vs. "high speed", but it doesn't really matter much, either.

Re: Sharpening should be simple

Bruce McCrory

There are more sharpening methods or techniques than there are tools. It's about as confusing as determining the best steel type from David's new project experiments. [I don't think steel type matters if you have a few extra minutes of time to sharpen--if I read the information right.]

This overload of information makes our sharpening journey a nightmare. One that leads us into unnecessary expense. For your benefit, David made it easy to sharpen. Follow his unicorn advice and put that money burning holes in your pants toward new pants. We forget that sharpening should be minimal maintenance of the working tool.

It's three steps for razors and plane blades. First, grind the bevel to shape; only if the edge sucks or has been used for an axe. Second, fine tune the bevel and close the edge to a point on a stone--1000, or so grit. Maybe, trick it out on a finer stone. Then, finally develop the keen edge with a strop or buffing wheel.

I would go on, after the initial unicorn, and say buff or strop when things feel dull until the edge gets difficult to use, then go back to the 1000 stone, or finer stone to reshape the bevel. The strop and buffer are your best friends.

Just note that our problems with getting to hair-popping sharp have been inattentive oopses on the way. And, the best way to make an oops is linger with stones between 1000 grit and the buffer-strop. Even my barber, when I was a teen, could shave my neck after the ubiquitous double carborundum and leather strop.

What you and I need to do is practice and improve our chosen sharpening procedure.

Re: Sharpening should be simple

Joe in a Cleveland suburb

Well said. Thanks.

The steel experiments...

David Weaver

nobody says much, and that's OK.

I post about them more to document things, which can cloud up what's what - the conclusions would be a 20th of the length of talking about results or hardening and tempering.

Since there are no direct questions, there's no real simple answers. I've noticed that when I post a video about how to make a plane iron or something of that sort, rather than getting questions about the making, I get "do you have any of these for sale?".

Marples chisels

Warren in Lancaster, PA

It is not helpful to post spurious information on a forum.

Normally, I'd agree...

David Weaver

...in this case, I'd say it doesn't matter.

I've had, perhaps, 6 sets of marples chisels. I've had four sets of footprints. I can tell one set of the footprint chisels was made by marples just before they all left england.

Whether they're chrome vanadium drill rod or O1, it doesn't really matter. The woodworking community sees things as "carbon steel", "A2" and "other more exotic stuff".

A subset of "carbon steel" might be vintage cast steel. To get overly concerned about the details without knowing the person you're talking to wants to be very precise about it is nitpicking. Not of the productive type.

There are din rod types that are good enough to make files (much better than 1095, and better than O1) and there are types only suitable for cheap pocket knives. There's too much variety in steels, and in the steels used within each brand to get that picky.

What's even less helpful

David Weaver

is providing misleading information about steels once they're identified. I've seen that here, and I've seen it in spades with japanese steel fanatics.

FWIW—Marples reference

Wiley Horne

https://williammarplesandsons.com/chisels-gouges/chisels/

Warren is likely already familiar with this site, but here it is just in case, and for others with Marples tools. May be useful for narrowing down the birth year of your Marples chisels or planes.

Site not specific enough about steel to solve O1 versus straight high-carbon, but the ad copy through the years tends to stress traditional high carbon or ‘carbon-rich’ steel, as opposed to innovation in alloys—the only alloy I found mentioned anywhere was manganese to assist with through-hardening.

Wiley.

P.S.—This gentleman Roger Ball appears to be with us still, and he lists contact info. Might know something about the steel, as he made quite an avocation of digging up and organizing Marples info.

Irrelevant

Derek Cohen (in Perth, Australia)

Warren, you are missing the point: it is not about the exact nature of the steel. Since the question asked was about sharpening stones, ballpark is good enough to get into the range needed to discuss waterstones.

Regards from Perth

Derek

Re: Sharpening stones.  Shapton Pro?

Joe in a Cleveland suburb

Derek,

Do you use the 1000 for the primary bevel then the 6000 & 13000 for the micro or secondary bevel?

Thanks.

Joe

Re: FWIW—Marples reference

David Weaver

That's an excellent site.

I'd imagine the alloy that marples used changed over time, even before modern fast processing techniques. The simplest reason even for that is changing contracts for ore (either due to more favorable terms, exhaustion of a supply, or especially if finding an ore that has a reputation for making excellent steel).

The interesting thing about the ores that make excellent steel is that they had elements already in them that were later found to either improve hardenability, toughness or in some cases, make natural stainless steels.

I'd be curious to find out what an analysis of an older chisel would be, or an older blade, but not curious enough to do it. The ward iron in my try plane definitely has better toughness than 1095 samples I've made (which dispells my original guess that absolutely pure clean steels should have the finest grain and highest toughness). From the practical standpoint, too, halving the transition rate or slightly increasing the tempering temperature (or both) is a toolmaker's friend. A steel that's 2 points harder and ever so slightly less fine will hold a better edge than one 2 points softer and finer.

My files after forging and breaking look less fine than 1084, but they undoubtedly have a stronger crisper edge. The grain size is some tiny fraction of a thousandth. I couldn't tell anyone a significant difference between DIN rod and O1 steel or 52100 from a user's standpoint after hardening and tempering are accounted for. I just wish I could get more of the DIN rod stock at retail to try some 1.2% carbon stock to see if I could match file steel and try making an iron out of it.

When we argue over water hardening vs. oil hardening, etc, people stop paying attention because it's meaningless to them, and for anyone doing fine work, it could be for their whole lives and make no difference.

Re: The steel experiments we don't do...

Bruce McCrory

Since there are no direct questions, there's no real simple answers. I've noticed that when I post a video about how to make a plane iron or something of that sort, rather than getting questions about the making, I get "do you have any of these for sale?".

That's because we are afraid of total screw up, burning the house down, or; simply judging the process to be too much skill development, too much cost (for a new house, too) to take the chance of burning our eyelashes off.

I like to learn and understand what and how something is being done, but there are far too many of those 'random(?)' interests to actually jump into the trenches and shoot.

Re: The steel experiments we don't do...

TomD

Having done all my heat treating in the yard, and forging for that mater, I don't worry about loosing the house. Actually, owning a large shop, there are quite a few things I prefer to do outside.

Cost wise, you can make all chisels using a propane torch, I have not done it, as I moved to a slightly larger forge directly, but I know people have forged Bowie knives in coffee can forges. So cost is hardly the issue either. The 50 dollar knife shop book is useful.

One can make virtually a lifetime of plane blades in an afternoon, at least if one starts with O1 plate. And roughly for the cost of one Hock. I'm not really recommending it as everything tends to spin off into more and more digressions. It is maybe more the survival of a clear purpose that I think scares people.