Thread: My GDLP has issues...........................

UPDATE:

I spoke with Harrelson today. Harrelson has tested my GDLP by lapping stones with it. He's inspected it carefully and prior to the inspection, he spent approx 40-50 seconds lapping the lapping plate with a Shapton 120 grit ceramic disc. Given the short amount of time Harrelson lapped my GDLP to rough up the surface, he said he doubts it changed the flatness of the surface to any significantly measurable degree.

Harrelson said he will be mailing my GDLP back to me tomorrow for me to use, try and decide on whether or not I'm satisfied with it. Harrelson said mine performs better than the 10 GDLPs he keeps in working rotation in his wood shop.

Harrelson said he is committed to making all Shapton customers happy and as such, if I am not satisfied with the GDLP, Harrelson said he would be perfectly willing to refund my purchase price and also "not charge shipping" which I assume means that he would also reimburse me for the return shipping I would have to pay for to send the GDLP back to him should I decide to do that.

Harrelson said that he felt that my GDLP was performing as it should and because of that, he did not feel that my GDLP was defective or not performing in such a way that it would warrant a replacement with a new GDLP.

I'll post when I receive the GDLP and start lapping my entire Shapton line of stones which have piled up unused since I've been without my GDLP. I'll also be anxious to use this GDLP to create slurry to hone with a Nakayama Asagi stone I received some time ago from So.

Chris L

Nice of him to send it back when it out does the ten he has for himself. I am not such a nice guy, I would have sent you a new one and kept the better then 10 for myself. That said, I bought a Starrett straight edge # 385 beveled from Tools For Working Wood.

When I was deciding whether to go with Shapton Glass or Professional stones I did a lot of web surfing to see what comments I could find. I leaned toward the Pros because of the 15mm thickness as opposed to the 5 for the glass stones.

I found a thread on Knife Forums in which a guy said that his Pro stones would warp between honing and that he had to flatten them every time he used them. This gave me pause but the honemeister at Japan Woodworker said that they guaranteed the stones and that he had never heard of such a problem so I went with the Pros.

I started with the D8C but HAD being what it is I soon went for the GDLP. I found it to be the cat's whiskers and was (and still am) very happy with it. Then going back to my stones for another session I took a cheap 12" stainless steel ruler and checked them for flatness and they weren't flat. So I lapped them and the next evening checked them and they weren't flat.

I ordered the straight edge and since receiving it they are flat and stay flat until a good amount of honing is done. The cheap ruler was the culprit not the stone. So the reason for this long winded dissertation is to suggest that when you get your GDLP back lap your hones and then check them with a straight edge that you know is reliable.

The beveled 385 isn't cheap but the peace of mind it brings me is worth every penny. Now when I go to my hones I know if they need to be lapped for flatness and the wear I am saving on the GDLP and the hones will pay for the straight edge in no time. Best of luck with your plate Chris.

excellent point Jimmy, a true straight edge is a good thing to have. Do you know the spec on that Starrett?

Originally Posted by Chris L

Harrelson said that he felt that my GDLP was performing as it should and because of that, he did not feel that my GDLP was defective or not performing in such a way that it would warrant a replacement with a new GDLP.

Good to hear that your plate is in good order Chris! Still, I think it is almost underhanded not to specifically state everytime you post info on the lapping plate you supply that it itself actually needs periodic lapping. Not a reason not to buy it, but I prefer if a company be up front and blatant about everything, otherwise what else are they holding back? Glad Harrelson gave his honest input though and hope your plate stays in good order!

Jimmy, more to the issue at hand, could you give us an honest comparison between the results from using the D8C vs the DGLP? I am aware that the pressure release grooves in the the DGLP will make it seem faster as water trapped between the hones will take more time to squish out with the DMT vs the Shapton but can you detect a flatness difference in the Shapton hones after flattening between the two, and if so, can you detect an actual difference when honing a razor on the hones? Personally I'm confident enough about the answer even though I don't have a DGLP, but I'd love to hear it from someone not directly influenced by potential sales to tell it like it is from his/her point of view.

Before anyone gets their knickers in a twist, I would like to point out that even after all the hubub about ChrisL's DGLP and my refuting the perceived superiority of the DGLP in any meaningful way does not mean I won't end up buying one. I've got money to burn at times and when the time comes I'll probably buy one, then I'll probably kick myself for having done so as I could have used that money to buy something useful like a new razor instead of just another diamond lapping plate that duplicates what I already have. The whole point of my grumbling and growling is that I'd hate to see someone say they won't buy a few Shapton hones because they can't afford to get the DGLP! I'm just trying to point out that you don't NEED one to get excellent results from the Shapton hones, any more than you needed a DGLP to get full use out of a Coticule or any other hone on this sordid little planet!

The DGLP is a very nice diamond plate by all accounts and Chris, I hope your ordeal is settled to your satisfaction, but all the marketing hype in the world will not convince me that my math is wrong... The difference over an 8" length between a possible 0.001" deviance and even a 0.0001" claimed deviance in a lapping plate when used to lap another hone does not amount to diddly when the devices are operated manually by the average joe and considering that the end result (and the end result is the ONLY RESULT that matters) is never measured to confirm the accuracy (nor does Shapton or anyone else claim that if you use THEIR lapping plate you WILL achieve such remarkable accuracy on the hone you are actually flattening as far as I can tell). Making things flat is a fine art, not something anyone can do without training and feedback from measuring the results. And for that matter, you have to measure each and every time something is flattened if you want to insure that it indeed is as flat as you claim it to be. The fact that those "in the know" who sell these products claim that all you need to do is slap that DGLP on top of your hone and give it a few swipes here and there clearly illustrates that haphazard flattening is "good enough" and that taking the steps required to achieve the ultimate in flat hones is not..... uhm... necessary?!?! And if so, why is such an uber flat diamond lapping plate required in the first place?!?!

Well, I think I've said enough... My goat is tired and claims to have been gotten enough for two lifetimes, never mind one.

Regards

Kaptain "Well lap my Shaptons..... " Zero

Originally Posted by kevint

excellent point Jimmy, a true straight edge is a good thing to have. Do you know the spec on that Starrett?

According to the vendor I got it from here the spec is,"All Starrett straightedges are accurate to +/- .0002/foot (2 ten thousandths of an inch per foot) from a mean true plane." If you get one go for the 12" beveled model as the straight edge is 11/64 thick and without the bevel it would be more difficult to use. Must be seen to be appreciated. A pro machinist's tool.

Originally Posted by kaptain_zero

Jimmy, more to the issue at hand, could you give us an honest comparison between the results from using the D8C vs the DGLP? I am aware that the pressure release grooves in the the DGLP will make it seem faster as water trapped between the hones will take more time to squish out with the DMT vs the Shapton but can you detect a flatness difference in the Shapton hones after flattening between the two, and if so, can you detect an actual difference when honing a razor on the hones? Personally I'm confident enough about the answer even though I don't have a DGLP, but I'd love to hear it from someone not directly influenced by potential sales to tell it like it is from his/her point of view.
(snip)
Regards

Kaptain "Well lap my Shaptons..... " Zero

Gee Kaptain, I feel like I am on the spot here so let me pre-qualify my response with the inevitable YMMV. First of all I had never lapped a hone in my life before this past March when I bought a friend's Norton combo set. The Norton flattening stone was functional but I wasn't happy with the general nature of the material so it wasn't long before I bought the D8C. I had more confidence in the D8C in that it was solid and I could be more sure that it was flat. I didn't have that confidence in the Norton.

Time passed and aside from the usual stiction hassle that you mention it did the job. After buying the Shapton pros I decided to go for the GDLP and give it a try. I found it to be outstanding. The speed with which I could lap a stone by far superior to the D8C and the grooves really eliminate any stiction.

Just for kicks I drew a pencil grid on a Norton 4K and lapped it with the Norton. When the grid was gone I drew another grid and lapped it with the D8C. I did a few strokes and according to my grid the stone wasn't flat. So I finished with the diamond plate until the grid was gone.

Drew another grid and got onto it with the GDLP. Did a few strokes and according to the remainder of the grid the stone wasn't flat. So what did that prove? Well I don't know how to quantify the difference in the three results. I imagine any of the three were flat enough to accurately hone a razor relatively speaking and I'd like to think that the Shapton GDLP was the flattest of all.

Back to your question. When I am honing a razor and the Shapton stone looks as if it needs a cleaning I draw a grid and lap it. Very quickly the grid is gone and I absolutely feel a difference when I go back to honing the razor. That said I probably would feel the same result from the D8C but I know it would take longer to lap the stone.

As far as my qualifications to give a valid opinion, I know you didn't ask but I offer them anyway. I have 45 years of experience in sharpening pocket knives on oil stones. I got into the razors only half a year ago but I have an AD disorder and have accumulated about 100 of them many of which are ebay specials that needed edge restoration. I have become fairly proficient at honing and have a large variety of hones. AD disorder again.

When I lap a hone I do it in the kitchen sink under running water and I am not heavy handed. I hold the stone in my right hand and the plate in my left with the stone on top and all angled at 45 degrees. I let the weight of the stone do the cutting and flip the stone every so often end to end. I use an X motion as suggested on the Shapton website. When I am satisfied that all traces of the grid are gone I double check with my trusty Starrett 385 and I am good to go. I think I am doing an efficient job of it and would be grateful for any constructive criticism if it sounds like I am not.

All of this sounds so darned complicated...think I'll stick with the coticules and thuringians for now. Since I only do my own razors, the stones I have should keep me set for a good, long time. Oh, and the coticules seem to do a better job on my face, anyway.

I'd also like to personally thank Howard for his insight and advice. I have no vested interest in this post, other than that as a potential consumer. I have heard the Shaptons are very nice stones, but the dealings here have left a bad taste in my mouth, and I'm not even the one who spent the cash on the things. I was wanting a nice combination coticule for Christmas anyway, and it looks like Howard just earned a customer.

ChrisL...good luck, and I hope your GDLP comes out of this okay. You're a much nicer guy than I would be, I just want to let you know that you deserve a nice, shiny star for being very patient.

Originally Posted by JimmyH-AD

Just for kicks I drew a pencil grid on a Norton 4K and lapped it with the Norton. When the grid was gone I drew another grid and lapped it with the D8C. I did a few strokes and according to my grid the stone wasn't flat. So I finished with the diamond plate until the grid was gone.

Drew another grid and got onto it with the GDLP. Did a few strokes and according to the remainder of the grid the stone wasn't flat. So what did that prove? Well I don't know how to quantify the difference in the three results. I imagine any of the three were flat enough to accurately hone a razor relatively speaking and I'd like to think that the Shapton GDLP was the flattest of all.

Well, this leaves us with the the following question: Is the slurry is removing the grid lines before the hone is flat? To finish this test you would need to go back to the DMT after the Shapton and test again. The problem with flattening hones that break down into an abrasive slurry is that the slurry is acting on the remaining surface of the hone that is not yet truly flat. To be fair to the lapping device you are testing, you need to re-do the grid lines and lap the hone again to see how long it takes to remove the lines the second time. Once you can demonstrate that you can remove all grid lines within a few strokes with *any* of your lapping devices, you know that you have the hone as flat as you and that particular device can make it. Only then can you move on to another lapping device to see if there is any change in performance but even the grid line + number of strokes is NOT a proper way to measure the results. It takes a fairly involved setup to measure the flatness accurately. Let's say you take your hone to it's ultimate flatness with your Shapton, now you go back to the DMT and discover it's not removing all the grid lines evenly... Great, so which lap is out of flat?!?! We don't know as we've not measured against a *known* flat surface or taken the time to set up a rather complex measuring system. If we had done that, the next issue that we would have to quantify is your ability to operate the lapping plate with perfectly even pressure all around (you can't) so you need to methodically switch directions, turn the hone end for end etc. in hopes of trying to even such variables out. Again, it's not easy to measure these results and a thou here or there is trivial. And that is my point when someone starts babbling about micron accuracy... It's just not going to happen in real life and I realize I'm babbling away myself...... sorry.

Originally Posted by JimmyH-AD

When I lap a hone I do it in the kitchen sink under running water and I am not heavy handed. I hold the stone in my right hand and the plate in my left with the stone on top and all angled at 45 degrees. I let the weight of the stone do the cutting and flip the stone every so often end to end. I use an X motion as suggested on the Shapton website. When I am satisfied that all traces of the grid are gone I double check with my trusty Starrett 385 and I am good to go. I think I am doing an efficient job of it and would be grateful for any constructive criticism if it sounds like I am not.

You are doing a fine job for all practical purposes, the use of the Starrett makes me cringe a bit... I would hesitate to use such a delicate measuring tool to check something as abrasive as a hone. It won't take much to potentially damage the accurate surface of that straight edge, but it's the machinist in me that's cringing and only because good tools cost money and I hate to see them worn before their time.

By the way, a straight edge does not tell you if there is a wind/twist in your hone or if there is a crown along the centerline unless you measure both ways and diagonally and it would take two straight edges to sight any wind/twist in the surface and ultimately it's incapable of measuring to the claimed level of the GDLP but it sure as heck is good enough for your purpose which is making sure that you're not waaaay off in your flattening technique and that is all that matters.

Jimmy, thanks for posting your results, I hope you can find time to go back and recheck the grid line removal on the DMT after you are convinced you have a hone as flat as can be on the Shapton.

Originally Posted by iron maiden

All of this sounds so darned complicated...think I'll stick with the coticules and thuringians for now.

That was not my intention, but I also didn't want anyone to pass up on the Shapton hones just because the sales dept. said you had to use their flattening hone or it won't work. And for the record, I'm still trying to determine if the 16K Shapton is as good as my Coticule as a touch up hone for me and my beard/face. So far, the Coticule is out front by a gnats whisker....

Regards

Kaptain "Couldn't think of anything witty to put here this time of the morning" Zero

Originally Posted by kaptain_zero

And yes, the granite surface plate, copper sulphate solution and a scraper were my friends back then!
Christian

I just realized I'd made an error in one of my replies up a ways in this thread..... sheesh. The copper sulphate solution was indeed part of my *kit* when working on layouts but it was not used for scraping, for that joy it was something called Prussian blue, a transfer dye..... and it did indeed transfer to just about everything in the shop.

I couldn't edit that post so I felt it only proper I pay my penance here....

Regards

Kaptain " I have the worlds best memory, it just doesn't work that often." Zero