Translucent Arkansas versus Spyderco UF

Hi,
The results of bevels honed with a tranlucent Arkansas and Spyderco UF(the Zowada pictures) are very close.
I'm then wondering what the real grit is of an Arkansas tranlucent hone.
The Spyderco UF seems to be around 14000 grit then the Arkansas must be in the vicinity...
Is the tranlucent Arkansas considered as a finishing stone like the Spyderco UF?
Another question is: can the tranlucent Arkansa hone be used dry, without oil, like a belgian yellow coticule? If yes, is the grit then higher than the Spyderco UF?

Norton sells a translucent Arkansas that they label as 4K.

Spyderco does not assign a grit to their ceramics. See:Ceramic benchstones compared to DMT extra-fine? - Spyderco Forums The posts at that link by Sal are those of the owner of the company.


Adding to the confusion is the issue of how the surface of either stone is finished. Both of these are very hard compared to waterstones, so the surface finish could be a factor. For instance Sal says in the link above that a UF is a polished version of the F.

The translucent Arkansas do not go by grit either as I just learned.
They go by density. 4 k would be much too low IMO.
The quartz is homogenous and has a Mohs hardness of 7.
They polish and are best as finishing stones because they are quite slow otherwise.
I've not yet tried to use one dry but I guess it works.
I prefer to use mine with water and a little detergent in it to keep it from pearling of.