Thread: Norton 4000/8000..What if it cost more?

Hey all:

There was an interesting thread that started a month ago and therefore has aged. It was the review created by a user that is now banned. There were interesting points shared regarding opinions about the benchmark Norton 4000/8000.

I think most would agree the Norton 4000/8000 is the current benchmark stone. My question I'd like to hear opinions on is:

If the Norton 4000/8000 stone were to cost twice as much as it does now........do you think it would still be THE benchmark stone?

Keep in mind at twice the price it would essentially match the Shapton ceramic on glass 4000 and 8000 grit stones (no soaking required).

I posted this question in the advanced honing section rather than the basic section mainly because I will go on record saying that I too believe for the money I don't think the 4000/8000 can be beat and I do think it's a quality versatile workhorse of a stone and I didn't want to give anyone entering the world of honing the impression that I'm out to trash the Norton 4000/8000. I do personally think the cost of the Norton is a huge reason that it's the benchmark since I think there are other stones or combination of stones that are equal or better than the Norton but cost more. I am certainly no expert on honing and may therefore be speaking out of line, but I've wondered what others think about this.

I guess really my question is that simple: If the Norton 4000/8000 stone were to cost twice as much as it does now........do you think it would still be THE benchmark stone?

Chris L