When we say 4K/8K Norton, what grit size scale does that refer to? And are Shaptons measured with the same scale?
There's a European, USA and Japanes grit size scale.
Printable View
When we say 4K/8K Norton, what grit size scale does that refer to? And are Shaptons measured with the same scale?
There's a European, USA and Japanes grit size scale.
I'm not sure that the 4k/8k even refers to a specific grit size. It is some kind of mysterious scale. Is there an expert in the house? :D
Duh, reminds me to work on that table.
Norton 4000 = F800 or JIS(new) 2000
Norton 8000 = F1200 or JIS(new) 4000
I think of it as the ankle bone is connected to the shin bone, the shin bone connected to the knee bone, the knee bone connected to the thigh bone and so on. The analogy being start with the 1k to the 4k to the 8k and on up the ladder. :rolleyes: Whatever they really are it is coarse to fine in practical application. :shrug:
I do not believe I have ever seen a grit equivalency chart that I can believe. So Good Luck Olivia!
All manufacturing has tolerances- what are those per manufacturer?
8000 grit, whatever that means, will not be the same, even if they used equivalent sizes as one manufacturer may believe that 8000 grit should denote the smallest particle in the mix, while company B believes it should denote the largest.
Just buy natural stones, then you'll never have to worry about the grit sizes. :D
Actually the FEPA standard says that 75% of the particles are of that size.
The remaining 25% can be smaller or bigger.
Hee hee;( I was speaking hypothetically; internationally so. Even with this standard there is plenty of room to make one stone a "better polisher"Quote:
Originally Posted by 0livia
So that's Norton, how about Shapton, made in Japan? Do they use a different (i.e. Japanese) scale?Quote:
Originally Posted by 0livia
The reason I am asking is that most of us will do a grit progression when setting a bevel and progress to polishing an edge. We simply look at numbers and automatically presume that a higher number means a finer hone which would be OK if all manufacturers of synthetic hones use the same grit scale.
Shapton uses another kind of grit measuring type,
called the "Mesh-Size".
The Mesh Size is referred to on the back of the Glasstones,
right next to the actual grit size in micron,
unfortunately without any tolerances.
The Mesh-System is actually referring to a Wire-Mesh,
and theoretically the number indicates the density of a wiremesh that was used
to sort the grits out, in respect to the actual wire diameter
I guess things got a little out of hand
because wiremeshes could be used for sorting standart sandpaper grit sizes
but were nowadays commonly used for diamond pastes
wich came to be widely availiable.
But who could possibly think about a wire mesh designed to sieve out 0.5ĩm particles
The Mesh grit system is somewhat more reliable when it comes to higher grit sizes,
because Jis System stops at 8.000, everything beyond it is not covered by the system
(wich doesnīt mean it donīt exist)
The thing is, there seem to be many interpretations of the mesh system as well *sigh*
Maybe they all refer to different wire diameters (d'uh)
0.5ĩm is ofte times referred to as 50.000 Mesh,
sometimes itīs 60.000
and Shapton says itīs 30.000 ....
btw. Shapton 16k would translate into JIS 14k, I guess
I think we will have to get used to the fact that we will never be sure
if one hone is actually finer grained than the other.
But that is not a big deal, because even though we would now it
it wouldnīt asure a better finish, keener edge, smoother shave
So what I do is, I rely on the numbers as little as possible.
I know that my Shapton 5.000 comes before my Naniwa 8.000
for example.
But I am open minded when it comes to
Shapton 5k or BBW first?
Naniwa 10k or Shapton 16k first, or maybe after the Chinese 12k?
So when it comes to finishing I refer to feeling more than numbers.
If a Naniwa 10k gives me a better shave on a certain razor
than the Shapton 16k did, I am perfectly fine with that,
even though numbers would indicate different.
Itīs a lot trial and error
But you should not let yourself get confused.
A finisher is a finisher. Even though in my example above the Naniwa 10k
provided me a better shave than the Shapton 16k,
that doesnīt mean you have to go and buy both!
You cannot rely on the numbers given by the factory
if you want to compare hones with other brands.
But you can certainly rely on them as "relative progression scales".
So you will most of the time definitely know a Naniwa SS 8k comes after a SS 5k,
but maybe not before a King 8k, for example.
Olivia, that might be true, but if it is then I should be able to get a good shave off my King 4k stone...and I can't. It also means that the Naniwa 8K is a very high grit finisher...and it isn't.Quote:
Originally Posted by 0livia
Norton PROBABLY uses the same system as the Japanese waterstone manufacturers, as far as my research goes.
I hope this helps:
Well not really. The table I got this info from is the table from here, made by Christopher (Smokintbird)
Jim, why shave off a King 4000? Can you shave from a Norton 8000?
Welcome to SRP. I certainly don't know the actual grit sizes of various stone relative to each other. As you say we know that one maker's 8k comes after their 5k and chances are it will be so with another maker's 5/8 IME.Quote:
Originally Posted by Lesslemming
I read your other post on comparing Naniwas, Shaptons, Cerax and Suehiro. As you mentioned in that post the Cerax and Suehiro are uncommon in the USA. My experience with synthetic hones has been limited to the Nortons, Shapton Pro, Spyderco and the Dia Sharp DMT continuous plates. Being crazy about hones I am eying the super stones with lust in my heart.:)
Of the synthetics I've used I've done some mixing between manufacturer's stones based on their given grit rating and they seem to be close enough in the sense that a 4 or 5 comes before an 8 and an 8 before a 12 or 15.
I have read that the DMT 8000 plate is more equivalent to a 4k but I couldn't say for sure. Good to see another hone aficionado coming to the forum. :tu
Thank you Jimmy!Quote:
Originally Posted by JimmyHAD
Shapton, Spyderco, DMT, it seems you never did encounter soft hones?
You may like it! Not that we *really* need any more hones, do we?
Or am I the only one whose finishing hones outnumber his razors
... :hmmm:
How much are the Superstones in the USA anyway?
if anyone will find answer to this questions please let me know too. GL
Hi Benny! http://www.the-whisk.us/forum/images/smiles/wave.gif
The Naniwas are rather reasonably priced in the US actually.
When you take customs and shipping into account they are better at Edenwebshops for us.
Jimmy you'll totally like them!
That is exactly what my doctor told me. Funny.Quote:
Originally Posted by JimmyHAD
Btw. can I have a job at your quarry? I really need money.
Greetings back Olivia,
Edenwebshops was what came to my mind as well,
because I got mine from them.
Prices inside the US indeed seem reasonable
(pun intendet for germans only: reasonable in lautsprache = riesen nippel)
Iīm still having a lot of fun with my frankenstein!
Well, according to this thread you should be able to.Quote:
Originally Posted by 0livia
I still think that the Nortons use the same numbering system as the Japanese hones, whatever that may be. It just doesn't make sense that there would be such a huge difference between the Nortons and, for example, the Naniwas when lots of people here use both.
According to that table they have their own grit size system.
If you do ask them to deduct the VAT (19% tax). They can do so on shipments to countries outside the EU but often you need to remind them, especially if they are not used to dealing outside of the EU.Quote:
Originally Posted by JimmyHAD
We had this argument before. Here is a very up to date table. If you go on Nortons website their 4k is sort of between old and new JIS 4k and likewise with the 8k.
Wow ! Looking at that chart I can see where I had a hard time with the Shapton pro 5/8 compared with the Norton 4/8. If I wanted a similar honing experience I would have been better served using the Shap pro 2 and 5 in lieu of the 4/8 Norton.:gaah:
That's a great chart - who did that?
While grit comparison is one thing, how would we measure the results of pastes and nagura stones? - Or should we just leave well enough alone?
:deadhorse:
Smokintbird (Christopher) did that, Tom.
He's glad about additions, so if you have something to contribute to the chart, pm him.
Quote:
Originally Posted by JimmyHAD
I'm thrilled you found the comparison useful!
I have worked on that list for many years trying to make sure that ALL of the information in it is accurate....And like Olivia said, I would be thrilled to add any info ANYONE might have to contribute, but I really want the info to be documented by the manufacturer or standardization organization.
Here is the most recent version of the list...