Abrasive Grit Comparison Sheet

I have spent a fair few years trying to compile a list of grit comparisons for my own uses: shaping, smoothing and polishing rocks, metals, plastics and wood; and sharpening everything from milling bits and lathe cutters to planes, knives and razors.

I have taken GREAT pains to make sure that any information listed has it's validity backed up by as reliable a reference as is possible, typically by a major manufacturer with reliable reputation, since the standardization entities themselves are decidedly loose in their determinations of compliance. I know there will be a few of the less reliable manufacturers that will use slightly different tolerances, but when dealing with those companies, you can expect a bit less accuracy since the cheaper price you pay does not cover reliable quality control.


Recently Olivia forwarded a list to me that had some very good information and I was able to track it back to one of it's points of origin and have added some excellent tolerance info relating to the FEPA grit ratings that I had not been able to find without her help......Thank you Olivia!


:soapbox:
If you have something to add or find a discrepancy in the provided information, PLEASE let me know so that I can correct it as soon as possible and prevent the dissemination of inaccurate information.....We ALL know that there is ENTIRELY TOO MUCH wrong information being passed off as correct. Personally I am a close tolerance kinda guy and find few things more infuriating than laboring under the assumption that you are doing things correctly only to find out later that your time has been wasted due to bad information.


Now that my rant is done, I hope everyone finds this information useful.

Feel FREE to post this on any other forum or pass it around as you see fit so long as no money changes hands.....Information Should Be FREE!

So glad it was useful!
... and I must admit that I already posted it elsewhere *shrugs* LOL

If I run into some more, i'm going to send it to you.

Smokinbird,

I hope you don't mind, but I just posted your chart over on the Knife Forums in one of my threads. Perfect timing.

Great Job!!!!
:rock:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jendeindustries

Smokinbird,

I hope you don't mind, but I just posted your chart over on the Knife Forums in one of my threads. Perfect timing.

Great Job!!!!
:rock:

---

Absolutely perfect!

I intend to post it on a couple other forums as well.....I have seen lots of partial comparisons, but I have never seen any references to back them up, and I just don't trust everything I read.

Thanks for this, man. I'm curious, where did you get the Shapton info? I emailed them asking for the micron info and never got an answer.

Speaking of which, does anyone have any idea about the Naniwa micron sizes? I called them and the rep I spoke to said he didn't have any idea about the microns, and was surprisingly unhelpful--he didn't offer any ideas how to get the information at all. This is very strange in Japan. Customer service is typically amazingly helpful...what's up with these hone companies???

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JimR

Thanks for this, man. I'm curious, where did you get the Shapton info? I emailed them asking for the micron info and never got an answer.

Speaking of which, does anyone have any idea about the Naniwa micron sizes? I called them and the rep I spoke to said he didn't have any idea about the microns, and was surprisingly unhelpful--he didn't offer any ideas how to get the information at all. This is very strange in Japan. Customer service is typically amazingly helpful...what's up with these hone companies???

---

I had a friend that speaks Japanese call them at 0285-72-7755 after I had the Glass stone info from their web site.

Since this was word of mouth and not a written and published table, I would be thrilled if anyone can correct me if they lay their hands on something in writing from Shapton.

I just emailed Naniwa to see if I can get anything useful from them.....we'll see.

I suppose the back of my GlassStones counts as
`in-writing'...

1000 mesh - 14.7 micron
2000 mesh - 7.35 micron
4000 mesh - 3.68 micron
8000 mesh - 1.84 micron
16000 mesh - 0.92 micron
30000 mesh - 0.49 micron

- Scott

This is slightly tangential, but I've found since using
the Shapton stones that the 4k is too fine to do what
I would consider minor sharpening. I've had to drop
down to the 2k on new razors a lot, and the grit
comparison to the Norton 4k sheds some light on
this.

Thanks!

- Scott

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by sebell

This is slightly tangential, but I've found since using
the Shapton stones that the 4k is too fine to do what
I would consider minor sharpening. I've had to drop
down to the 2k on new razors a lot, and the grit
comparison to the Norton 4k sheds some light on
this.

Thanks!

- Scott

---

I've come to the same conclusion with the Shapton Pro and couldn't figure out why until Smokintbird posted the grit comparison chart.

OK let me see if I have this correct here,,,,

My GS 8k is a way higher grit then my Norton 8k????

My GS 4k is too high a grit to sharpen a razor I have to drop to my GS 2k????

My Norton 8k is almost the same as shaving off my GS 4k????

Did I sum that up correctly????

OK unfortunately this GS is calling BS at this point in time...

oh wait I found the line I was looking for in the small print....

It is impossible to make

exact comparisons between all the different abrasives because different standards are used for average, minimum and maximum size, the percentage allowed outside

those limits, and the distribution of sizes within those limits, but this list is the closest comparison available since all entries are compared to microns by their respective manufacturers.


Don't forget the how does it feel factor here, Shaving is what really separates the men from the boys so to speak when it come to honing..
This also does not take into account the tricks of the trade...

I am really just having a very hard time swallowing that a Norton 8k is closer to a GS 4k then a GS 8k
I guess I am going to have to try a shave off the GS 4k... I will post back soonest....if it shaves anywhere near as good as a Norton 8k I will stand corrected....

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by sebell

I suppose the back of my GlassStones counts as
`in-writing'...

1000 mesh - 14.7 micron
2000 mesh - 7.35 micron
4000 mesh - 3.68 micron
8000 mesh - 1.84 micron
16000 mesh - 0.92 micron
30000 mesh - 0.49 micron

- Scott

---

Pam on Knifeforums just posted something interesting...

For the glass stone series,

Divide 14,700 by the grit size and you have the particle size in microns.

Divide 14,700 by the micron and you get the grit.

Multiply the grit by micron and you get 14,700.

(some of the numbers give small errors due to rounding. For example, the 4000 grit stone should have a 3.675 micron size, but since shapton only takes things to the hundredths, they round up to 3.68.)

So, apparently shapton considers a stone that has a one micron abrasive size to be a 14,700 grit stone.

Glenn - I completely understand your skepticism, I felt the same way at first, but after working on this for quite a while and trying comparisons of things like US to European sand paper and Norton to Japanese stones, I am forced to believe it....

BUT, don't take my word for it...compare what your glass stone says or better yet, their web site
(Ceramic On Tempered Glass : Shapton® Stones, Shapton® Sharpening Systems)

to what Norton says about their stones on their site

(http://www.nortonstones.com/Media/Do...nesCatalog.pdf)


Here's the kicker, and it gets me every time....I know that the scratch pattern from my Norton 4000 grit water stone (6 micron) is bigger than the scratch pattern from a friend's 4000 grit King water stone (3 micron), because I was able to see a sizable difference with a microscope...

...BUT...

....What these manufacturers don't say anything about, which could potentially make a HUGE difference (and does), is what the particles are made of and what shape they are.....

....I have seen some of the members on here saying that they would rather use 1 micron CrOx than 0.25 micron diamond paste because supposedly the diamond paste is so much more harsh, and as far as that goes, I saw a thread from ChrisL that said he got a reasonably comfortable shave from what was supposedly 50 micron CrOx, so what the actual sharpening media is made of DOES make a difference, since even ChrisL mentioned that he wouldn't try this with 500 grit sand paper....

Please let us know what you think of your Shapton Glass 4K shave compared to your Norton 8K shave....

...my guess is that the Norton will be smoother....Why, has to do with "Why Shaptons?"......the answer as far as I have ever heard is because Shaptons are more aggressive and work much faster.....but this might have the side effect of giving you a rougher shave also.

You might also try shaving from the Shapton Glass 8K and the Norton 8K and see if you think there is a significant difference in the feel of the two shaves....

I'm not at all an experienced honer, but I will say that I think this information has explained some things about problems I've had with honing. In my recent honing, I've been treating my King 4k and my Naniwa 8K like the Norton 4K/8K combo that is recommended around here--in pyramids and the like. I was getting good edges, but not great, and under magnification they looked very rough, like the 1k scratches were still present, even after a couple of rounds of aggressive pyramids.

HOWEVER, after reading this thread and reexamining my hones, I started doing pyramids with my 2K super stone and 4K King, then polishing on the 8K, and I am getting MUCH better edges, and they are glassy smooth under magnification. Of course, my use of pressure and the like is probably getting better just from more practice, but I can't help but think that the 2K/4K is a much better combination for smoothing out the low level scratches from my 1K diamond plate (which is actually not that great, and tears razors up something awful, but is really really fast for honing out chips and the like).

This would also tie in to my experience with the Japanese "Lapika" brand lapping film I picked up--clearly marked 2K=9 micron, 4K=3 micron, 8K=.5 and 10K =.3.

Glen and Smokintbird,

You both have valid arguments IMO. While the particle sizes are known, what isn't covered in the list (and can't be) is the "polish effect" of the stones. As it was said, the Norton 8K feels "smoother" than the 8K SG.

SG's add more scratches to get a smooth consistency while Nortons (and kings, pastes and nagura stones) "rub" the surface smooth with "softer" scratches.

I've been calling this the new school (Shapton) and the old school (Naniwas Norton, King, etc....) concepts. The new school uses a series of stones that quickly progresses by adding scratches, while the old school potentially uses less stones, but spends more time on each one in order to smooth out the surfaces.

As for me, I'm definitately in the new school camp.:)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Smokintbird

Absolutely perfect!

I intend to post it on a couple other forums as well.....I have seen lots of partial comparisons, but I have never seen any references to back them up, and I just don't trust everything I read.

---

Hi, it appears that Olivia took the jis tables from one of my pages... I can't give you a reference for the data to proove its accuracy, but I spent about a year with a kanji dictionary and yahoo.co.jp searching before I found a Japanese industrial abrasives manufacturer that had a detailed JIS chart showing both the old and new JIS down to this level of detail in a gif image that copied into text format:
http://members.cox.net/yuzuha/jisgrits.html
(I did not list the old JIS standards to that detail since the sedimentation tube method is obsolete but I did list a partial comparison of the old and new JIS on my Shapton grit page http://members.cox.net/yuzuha/jisgrit1.html The yellow numbers on here are purely theoretical and I calculated them for comparing Shapton's grading system to other stones and micron graded powders etc. )

Alas, I can no longer point you to the original site where I found the JIS information because the PC I had all that on died several years ago.... I also no longer have the complete details of the old JIS standard (you can download the standards from the JIS organization in English or Japanese but they charge a considerable fee to do so).

One really interesting thing to note on the detailed table though is the maximum size. 8000 grit can have a few percent 6 micron particles, which can put some dandy scratches in mean 1.2 micron finish. Also the 3% tails are interesting... The 3% below .6 microns is not very important but again it allows 3% to be between 3.5 and 6 microns and still be listed as 8000 grit!

BTW, I discovered that some of you also hang out on knife forums but some of you may not.... you can still find some useful stuff in the useful links sub forum of the kitchen knife forum over there... http://www.knifeforums.com/forums/showtopic.php?tid/759892/
http://www.knifeforums.com/forums/showtopic.php?tid/759541/
for example.

Lots of sources for stones anyway:) Might find some razor discussion in the "kitchen" and "keeping sharp" forums too.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jendeindustries

Glen and Smokintbird,

You both have valid arguments IMO. While the particle sizes are known, what isn't covered in the list (and can't be) is the "polish effect" of the stones. As it was said, the Norton 8K feels "smoother" than the 8K SG.

SG's add more scratches to get a smooth consistency while Nortons (and kings, pastes and nagura stones) "rub" the surface smooth with "softer" scratches.

I've been calling this the new school (Shapton) and the old school (Naniwas Norton, King, etc....) concepts. The new school uses a series of stones that quickly progresses by adding scratches, while the old school potentially uses less stones, but spends more time on each one in order to smooth out the surfaces.

As for me, I'm definitately in the new school camp.:)

---

I'll second that! micron size alone will only get you in a rough ball park. For example; a surgical arkansas stone is made of daitoms which range from about 5 to 10 microns but they are bonded so tightly and closely that they produce a much finer finish than their grain size. Belgian coticule stones are rated about 8k to 10k but are full of garnets, which have a dodecahedral (20 sided) or 24 sided crystal shape. That means the edge angles are going to be like 108 degrees or more so even if you have enough pressure to sink the exposed facets into the steel, it will cut very wide shallow furrows (and a more gently scalloped edge) compared to the sharper angles of something like diamond or CBN which would make deeper narrower furrows (and probably a more saw-like edge).

Crystal shape and size are both important. Also the resiliance, bond strength and poroisty of the binder can make a significant difference.... if the binder has a little bit of give, not only can the average height grains sink in a little so the low lying grains can touch the work, the high riding grains can also sink in the average height of the rest of the grains thus increasing the number of grains in actual contact with the work... increases the speed and produces a more even scratch pattern than hard sintered abrasives. Shapton pro stones are resin bonded like this, as are rubber and shellac bonded CBN and diamond wheels (the resin is very dense and stiff on a macro scale though so they can seem quite hard and give very little "road feel").

The amount of grit per unit volume matters too... too much grit will make the stone seem slower as the grains can't sink in and get a good bite in harder steel. Sort of like a bed of nails... the more nails there are, the less they hurt.. Need just enough particle density to grind efficently, but also have to keep it low enough that each grain can get a good bite.

I've read articles on picking the right grindstone for industrial tooling (I was really bored) and it seems to be a bit of a black art balancing the abrasive material, partical size, porosity and bond strength (needs to shed grit at the same rate as the edges of the grains dull) to match the material they are grinding to a particular finish.

We have to suffer the same thing with manual stones, except they only give us grit numbers so we pretty much have to try different stones out on whatever steel we're sharpening.:(

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by yuzuha

Hi, it appears that Olivia took the jis tables from one of my pages...

---

Certainly not, but your page might be the source for the guy who gave it to me.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by yuzuha

One really interesting thing to note on the detailed table though is the maximum size. 8000 grit can have a few percent 6 micron particles, which can put some dandy scratches in mean 1.2 micron finish. Also the 3% tails are interesting... The 3% below .6 microns is not very important but again it allows 3% to be between 3.5 and 6 microns and still be listed as 8000 grit!

---

Pam,

Welcome to the SRP!

That's some good stuff there, and you put it in a very understandable language.:rock:

You may have answered a question or two that is somewhere around here - The random scratches in the edge of the razor that Olivia was posting about could be caused by this percentage of fluctuation.

:D

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by yuzuha

Hi, it appears that Olivia took the jis tables from one of my pages... I can't give you a reference for the data to proove its accuracy, but I spent about a year with a kanji dictionary and yahoo.co.jp searching before I found a Japanese industrial abrasives manufacturer that had a detailed JIS chart showing both the old and new JIS down to this level of detail in a gif image that copied into text format:
http://members.cox.net/yuzuha/jisgrits.html
(I did not list the old JIS standards to that detail since the sedimentation tube method is obsolete but I did list a partial comparison of the old and new JIS on my Shapton grit page http://members.cox.net/yuzuha/jisgrit1.html The yellow numbers on here are purely theoretical and I calculated them for comparing Shapton's grading system to other stones and micron graded powders etc. )

Alas, I can no longer point you to the original site where I found the JIS information because the PC I had all that on died several years ago.... I also no longer have the complete details of the old JIS standard (you can download the standards from the JIS organization in English or Japanese but they charge a considerable fee to do so).

One really interesting thing to note on the detailed table though is the maximum size. 8000 grit can have a few percent 6 micron particles, which can put some dandy scratches in mean 1.2 micron finish. Also the 3% tails are interesting... The 3% below .6 microns is not very important but again it allows 3% to be between 3.5 and 6 microns and still be listed as 8000 grit!

BTW, I discovered that some of you also hang out on knife forums but some of you may not.... you can still find some useful stuff in the useful links sub forum of the kitchen knife forum over there... http://www.knifeforums.com/forums/showtopic.php?tid/759892/
http://www.knifeforums.com/forums/showtopic.php?tid/759541/
for example.

Lots of sources for stones anyway:) Might find some razor discussion in the "kitchen" and "keeping sharp" forums too.

---

The JIS information in this list did originally come from your page first!

I have since referenced most of the information from http://www.metallographiebedarf.de/d...oesse_fepa.pdf
and from another manufacturer, though a firefox crash before I thought to book mark it has kept it out of the references...

But, they both corroborate your figures nicely.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by yuzuha

Hi, it appears that Olivia took the jis tables from one of my pages... I can't give you a reference for the data to proove its accuracy, but I spent about a year with a kanji dictionary and yahoo.co.jp searching before I found a Japanese industrial abrasives manufacturer that had a detailed JIS chart showing both the old and new JIS down to this level of detail in a gif image that copied into text format:
http://members.cox.net/yuzuha/jisgrits.html
(I did not list the old JIS standards to that detail since the sedimentation tube method is obsolete but I did list a partial comparison of the old and new JIS on my Shapton grit page http://members.cox.net/yuzuha/jisgrit1.html The yellow numbers on here are purely theoretical and I calculated them for comparing Shapton's grading system to other stones and micron graded powders etc. )

Alas, I can no longer point you to the original site where I found the JIS information because the PC I had all that on died several years ago.... I also no longer have the complete details of the old JIS standard (you can download the standards from the JIS organization in English or Japanese but they charge a considerable fee to do so).

One really interesting thing to note on the detailed table though is the maximum size. 8000 grit can have a few percent 6 micron particles, which can put some dandy scratches in mean 1.2 micron finish. Also the 3% tails are interesting... The 3% below .6 microns is not very important but again it allows 3% to be between 3.5 and 6 microns and still be listed as 8000 grit!

BTW, I discovered that some of you also hang out on knife forums but some of you may not.... you can still find some useful stuff in the useful links sub forum of the kitchen knife forum over there... http://www.knifeforums.com/forums/showtopic.php?tid/759892/
http://www.knifeforums.com/forums/showtopic.php?tid/759541/
for example.

Lots of sources for stones anyway:) Might find some razor discussion in the "kitchen" and "keeping sharp" forums too.

---

After spending more time digesting this (JIS grit table for Japanese water stones in microns (electrical resistance method)) chart you posted.....

That is quite some variance! With variance numbers like that concerning the 97% rule and the 3% possible maximum.....That kinda sucks!

but, like jendeindustries said, you have answered some questions... Thank You!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Smokintbird

The JIS information in this list did originally come from your page first!

I have since referenced most of the information from http://www.metallographiebedarf.de/d...oesse_fepa.pdf
and from another manufacturer, though a firefox crash before I thought to book mark it has kept it out of the references...

But, they both corroborate your figures nicely.

---

Cool, you've been digging too! I presume you've seen Verhoeven's paper on knife sharpening with the scanning electron micrographs of waterstone edges and the effects of stropping? http://www.bushcraftuk.com/downloads...nifeshexps.pdf
The pictures are very informative and way better than I can get with my light microscope.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 0livia

Certainly not, but your page might be the source for the guy who gave it to me.

---

Oh, no problem. There were just some questions about the validity of your JIS numbers and it was obvious they came from my second grit page so thought I'd better explain where I originally got them and the numbes for the Shapton stones. They are accurate as far as I can tell without spending about $60 to download an English pdf from the JIS organization themselves.

Looks like you've combined stuff from many sources including Abrasive grit sizes of belts, wheels and stones used in knifemaking, sharpening and woodworking which seems very handy, though the print gets a bit tiny (like Steven Wright said... "You can't have everything.... Where would you put it? " :) )

So how did you end up here? Have I seen you on another board somewhere? I know there is another Pam who used to hang out on Shapton USA's board. I got into hones and stones because it is the intersection of my interests in geology, metallurgy and Japanese sword polishing (can't afford to mess with those but Japanese cutlery comes close. Never thought of razors other than that they fit on my microscope a lot better than a deba :rofl2: )

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Smokintbird

After spending more time digesting this (JIS grit table for Japanese water stones in microns (electrical resistance method)) chart you posted.....

That is quite some variance! With variance numbers like that concerning the 97% rule and the 3% possible maximum.....That kinda sucks!

but, like jendeindustries said, you have answered some questions... Thank You!

---

Yeah, that does explain a lot but some makers seem to grade tigther than the specifications which is nice... Shapton seems fairly consistant an Naniwa even more so, at least in their Snow White 8k and ceramic SuperStone series.... haven't tried their new Chosera stones yet though I hear they are the cat's meow. Alas, I already have half a dozen different 8k stones alone or I'd order a set of them! (BTW, I've admired the stone ponds Tom has over on Jende's page for years too, though have never managed to talk myself into one :confused:)

Anyway, while on the subject of hones,
I ran into someone over on Blade forums about 4 years ago and we were talking about a company in Moravia Iowa that made "Frictionite" razor hones in the early 1900's.

Anyone know if anyone has ever duplicated these (I know they sold the recipe but the original buyer was unable to duplicate them) or found anything that works like them? I've always wondered how they would compare to a natural Japanese stone.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by yuzuha

.....Looks like you've combined stuff from many sources including Abrasive grit sizes of belts, wheels and stones used in knifemaking, sharpening and woodworking......

---

I first started this spreadsheet as a result of seeing an earlier version of that list, I even borrowed the formatting from it, but you will notice that not all of the information on that page correlates to mine.....I found many inaccuracies (or typos), lots of things didn't jive with other lists I found....which is why I started making sure that I could reference all of the information I provided in mine....

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by yuzuha

....Anyway, while on the subject of hones,
I ran into someone over on Blade forums about 4 years ago and we were talking about a company in Moravia Iowa that made "Frictionite" razor hones in the early 1900's.

Anyone know if anyone has ever duplicated these (I know they sold the recipe but the original buyer was unable to duplicate them) or found anything that works like them? I've always wondered how they would compare to a natural Japanese stone.

---

http://straightrazorpalace.com/advan...different.html

Pages 5 and 6 mention the same hones and might have some info you don't have on the Frictionite hones.....I know nothing, just remembered seeing the name.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Smokintbird

I first started this spreadsheet as a result of seeing an earlier version of that list, I even borrowed the formatting from it, but you will notice that not all of the information on that page correlates to mine.....I found many inaccuracies (or typos), lots of things didn't jive with other lists I found....which is why I started making sure that I could reference all of the information I provided in mine....

---

good idea... I've seen a lot of lists that don't jive too. especially with micro-abrasive powders (lapidary places generally list diamond powder by mesh but is that the same thing as grit? Doesn't seem like it half the time)

Other times I wonder how you measure the size of a needle of silicon carbide... by the thin dimension or the long dimension or the average of both, or do they estimate its volume and figure the radius of a sphere with the same volume (or is it the diameter... does Norton list the diameter rather than the radius so list numbers twice what they should be, or do they really use larger grit than they should but their binder makes up for it, since I hear that their 8k actually does not polish as well as a true 8k but better than than another stone of the same micron size).... enough to drive you a bit bonkers some days :rant:

Frictionite is a good barber hone but it is not on par with a Nakayama or with a Shapton Pro or Naniwa IME. They are around 4"x2" and have one side finer than the other. Good to refresh a razor but I wouldn't try sharpening a Japanese sword with one. :)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by gssixgun

OK let me see if I have this correct here,,,,

My GS 8k is a way higher grit then my Norton 8k????

My GS 4k is too high a grit to sharpen a razor I have to drop to my GS 2k????

My Norton 8k is almost the same as shaving off my GS 4k????

Did I sum that up correctly????

OK unfortunately this GS is calling BS at this point in time...

oh wait I found the line I was looking for in the small print....

It is impossible to make

exact comparisons between all the different abrasives because different standards are used for average, minimum and maximum size, the percentage allowed outside

those limits, and the distribution of sizes within those limits, but this list is the closest comparison available since all entries are compared to microns by their respective manufacturers.


Don't forget the how does it feel factor here, Shaving is what really separates the men from the boys so to speak when it come to honing..
This also does not take into account the tricks of the trade...

I am really just having a very hard time swallowing that a Norton 8k is closer to a GS 4k then a GS 8k
I guess I am going to have to try a shave off the GS 4k... I will post back soonest....if it shaves anywhere near as good as a Norton 8k I will stand corrected....

---

Update:

Ya know I was going to do a ton of writing at this point...
Lets just say I did some testing, and I'll just say that you should too....
Your face can be the judge....

I have used the Naniwa super stones with a 3/5 pyramid and shave tested. The results appear to me to be equal to a Norton 4/8. I have done this with two ebay razors so far. I have further refined the edge with the 8k and gotten a slightly smoother somewhat keener edge. This is with the Naniwa superstones.

Ron has my Shapton pros and is going to try pyramiding the 2/5 (they don't make a 3k). So if my suspicion is correct with the pros the 2/5 will yield similar results. I know that with the pros when I set a bevel on the 1k I used to really like to follow with the 2k. I really liked the performance and feel of the 2k.

Following that I would do pyramids on the 5/8 and it seemed to take longer than it would have with the Nortons. Had I been using the 2/5 instead I think I would have been pleased with the results. I think that would have been the way to go with those based on the grit charts.

Whatever the label is on a hone be it 4k or 8k the size of the microns would determine the performance ....... wouldn't it ? I know Tom (jendeindustries) mentioned the shape having an impact and I am sure that it does. All we can do is try them and see what works. I am completely open minded to that.

Well, I just got off the phone with Hirohisa Ogawa at Naniwa (Lynn and Don, if you read this, he sends his regards:rofl2:) and he sent me an information sheet about their standards for abrasive size (specifically for silicon wafer cutting--an odd coincidence, as I work at a company that does just that). It would appear that they use the standard JIS regulations. He said that this is the same for all their products, including the Super Stones, so I guess there it is.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JimR

Well, I just got off the phone with Hirohisa Ogawa at Naniwa (Lynn and Don, if you read this, he sends his regards:rofl2:) and he sent me an information sheet about their standards for abrasive size (specifically for silicon wafer cutting--an odd coincidence, as I work at a company that does just that). It would appear that they use the standard JIS regulations. He said that this is the same for all their products, including the Super Stones, so I guess there it is.

---

Great! Thanks for posting that as it confirms the figures I'd posted earlier.

Wonder what stones Naniwa uses green carbide in besides the green lobster 120 grit?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by yuzuha

Great! Thanks for posting that as it confirms the figures I'd posted earlier.

Wonder what stones Naniwa uses green carbide in besides the green lobster 120 grit?

---

That's an interesting question, as they list it up to 8K... I'm still in contact with him (trying to get some samples of the Silicon cutting slurry to see if it might be any good for anything) so I'll ask him.

What I wonder is, if they use WA for most of their hones (regular stones, Supers and Cho-Cera), then the binder must make the big difference, right? So, WHY does it make so much difference?

JimR - I can't tell you how much I appreciate you posting that sheet!

That not only confirms the JIS variance information, but it also tells us that all Naniwa Stones and powders will rate those levels with those variances....Great info!

I have added that sheet to my list and also a couple other minor additions to help clarify a couple things....like how a micron compares to an inch (I had wondered about that and decided I ought to add it)

Christopher you are the bomb man ! You have no idea how much I appreciate your chart. I already thanked JimR for adding that important piece of the puzzle. :bow

It was my pleasure guys, I was very curious myself.

Well, it looks like it'll be a while before we find out about the Green Carbide hones, they went on vacation till next week (it's a big holiday here).

I will be getting some of the slurry, though, so we'll see what's up with that.

Great chart, thanks very much

I would love to know where the swatty and Lithide barber hones fit on that chart though. Any ideas?

I have a sun tiger 8000 and have been finishing on a Lithide. From what I have read today, the lithide may be coarser than the 8000, especially if the japanese stones are a finer grit when compared to a Norton and other stones.

I've just bought myself a chinese 12K so will be testing that in a few days time when invisible edge sends it to me :) I gues that raises another question. How does the Chinese stone compare to the Japanese or Nortons?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bobbo

.....I would love to know where the swatty and Lithide barber hones fit on that chart though. Any ideas?.....

---

I think it would be great to know where a bunch of them fit in, but to tell you the truth, I doubt they would ever make it into this list....Since none of those old barber hones are being made anymore, I doubt we'll get any solid info we can trust.

However, I am intending to make a couple other lists that might be useful if I can get the help to fill them in.....I'm going to start a new thread on them in a day or so. :)

After seeing this post (http://straightrazorpalace.com/basic...rit-stone.html) in the basic honing section, I have revised the list a bit to remove the theoretical numbering from the Shapton stones and leave only the stones I KNOW to be available for purchase....a few other small changes also, but not much.

Great work Christopher and much appreciated. I am wondering if it would be possible to add a column for the Naniwa superstones ? Or alternatively intersperse them within the Shapton column or even replace the Trizact column with the Naniwas ?

They are now a mainstream waterstone carried by many of the razor vendors worldwide and seem to be developing at least as large a following as the Shapton glass. The 3M Trizact isn't ....IMO... as important in the razor honing scheme of things.

While it is true that JimR's connection with the man at Naniwa revealed that they are the same as Shaptons there are grits within the Naniwa SS series that are not represented in the Shapton line. For instance the 3k and 10k.