Comparison Sheet for Natural Stones?
I have been kicking around the idea of making a list of natural stones with an effective grit RANGE associated with them and maybe a few defining characteristics for each.....
My biggest problem is the fact that although I LOVE natural stones, I don't own many and I'm a poor judge of a stone's grit...which is why I started researching the grit comparison in the first place!
For example, I have seen the Coticule being listed as similar to an 8K hone, but others say maybe 6K for their particular stone and some say the edge they get is closer to 10K....so I was thinking of going with something like this...
Stone Name/Type - Minimum grit seen - Max grit seen - Water or Oil - Origin
Coticule - 6000 - 10000 - Water - Belgium
Any thoughts on ways to change and improve the list?
How about helping with the grit ranges?
Here are the stones I have on the list so far...
Yellow Coticule
Belgian Blue
Thuringian
Charnley Forest
Cutler's Green
Water of Ayr
Tam O'Shanter
Dalmore Blue
Dalmore Yellow
Welsh Dragon's Tongue
Chinese Guangxi Hone
Queer Creek Stone
Roszutec
BM 6000
Schwedenstein
Silk Stone
Jasper
Chert
Flint
Obsidian
Jade
Wästikivi
Beryl
Soft White Arkansas
Hard White Arkansas
Hard Black Arkansas
Translucent Arkansas
Any suggestions would be appreciated!
Clarification and a new direction!
From the responses so far, I apparently didn't explain myself correctly...:confused:
I have seen at least a dozen different threads from people asking how to fit Natural stones together into a progression for honing....I think it would be a wonderful thing to have a list to go from, and I also would like to know the same thing....BUT, instead of me asking lots of stupid questions that would be extremely hard to follow for the next person who wants to know the same thing, I thought having some type of comparison would be more helpful in the long run.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
khaos
....All that said I think it would be a great idea if instead of grits/micron ratings we made a chart of how the stones are best used in a progression. For example a Thury fits better towards the finishing end....
I am completely open to suggestions on how to put the chart together, but for the sake of starting the process rolling, I posted my idea first...I think this list is a doable thing, and I like your idea, how about maybe making say 6 categories?
Extra Coarse (Probably too coarse for Razors)
Coarse (The beginning stage for Razors)
Medium (Comparable to something like a King 1200)
Fine (Somewhere around the Norton 4000)
Very Fine (Maybe like the Norton 8000)
Polishing (Just for final finishing of the edge)
Does this sound like a more practical way to go at this? ...if not, make a suggestion!
Quote:
Originally Posted by
khaos
......Also, you completely forgot Japanese naturals.....
You are absolutely correct!
I know Bubkis about Japanese Naturals, but that is not to say I don't want to, just that if I don't get much help on this here, I'll probably pursue this on my own as I acquire more hones....But I have vowed to stay clear of the Japanese naturals until I have a complete set of the rest of the world's hones!