Thread: Messing With A Mystery

Looks like this might give me an excuse to get a Naniwa 12k. I really don't want another stone, but I do. Just like a don't want to get anymore razors, but for some reason I always end up with new ones.

Originally Posted by eKretz

When following a JNat with another very fine stone it can be difficult to see the result as the JNat leaves a microscopically pitted surface, so until almost all of those pits are gone it really doesn't look like much is happening to the finish unless you have pretty high magnification. Best way to test new finishing stones in my experience is to take them up to 10k or 12k via synthetic progression then go to your test stone. This way you have a very smooth uniform finish/edge to start with and any change to the finish or edge caused by the test stone will be very evident.

I have never had any problems using a non Jnat stone after a Jnat, and, the non Jnat did it's job just like it would if I haven't used a Jnat before. And I've been messing a lot with Japanese-nats and nanban-nats.
I also haven't noticed any microscopically pitted surface from Jnats. Just scratches on steel, like any stone, that it's primarily purpose is to scratch steel.
Gentlemen, shaving is more important than microscopic images, and, the finishing properties of a stone is just a fraction of its potential as a hone. You don't need a new, very fine synthetic to find out the "secrets" of the unknown natural stone you already have. Just water, steel, and elbow grease.

It could be a completely nonclassified stone . In one mountain walk , i found a slate stone , very homogenous and fine . It was very soft and fine , so i decide to give it a try . Now , after lapping it is a perfect finisher , gives an Esher like smoothnes , but it is lot more softer and faster . It release slury by himself at vigorous honing . It is very fast , coticule like , but it looks the same way as Eshers .It is compose by many thin layers that open cracs when soaked with water , and it splits easily . I glue the sides of the stone with the epoxi resin , and now it is one of my finest finishers .
It is some kind of mudstone , or mudslate i think. I read i understand that the mountain where i founf it ( OLd mountain in owr language ) is a part of mega mountain chain structure , from the devonian era . This old chain begins from the Ardenes, pases trought Europe and ends into the largest and oldest manganese deposits at the Black sea cost , here in Bulgaria .
So the point is that this hon could be a home made hone , not colected from the famous quaeries , that dont belong to any nown kind of hone rock categorie .

Originally Posted by Vasilis

I have never had any problems using a non Jnat stone after a Jnat, and, the non Jnat did it's job just like it would if I haven't used a Jnat before. And I've been messing a lot with Japanese-nats and nanban-nats.
I also haven't noticed any microscopically pitted surface from Jnats. Just scratches on steel, like any stone, that it's primarily purpose is to scratch steel.
Gentlemen, shaving is more important than microscopic images, and, the finishing properties of a stone is just a fraction of its potential as a hone. You don't need a new, very fine synthetic to find out the "secrets" of the unknown natural stone you already have. Just water, steel, and elbow grease.

You misunderstand my post. I was not saying that following a JNat with a fine stone will not work. I was saying that the micro-pitted surface (and yes, it is there, that's why you get a hazy mirror, i.e. "sandblasted finish " with a JNat, BTW) tends to obscure any visual finish change by a very fine stone until those microscopic pits are gone, or at least very nearly so. You may belittle/trivialize magnification all you like, but it is a useful tool. Some guys care only about the finished result when honing, and some guys like to know what is happening and why. I don't belittle or trivialize the opinions/thoughts of those folks who don't care what's happening with different abrasion mechanisms during the honing process, so please don't do so to those who do take an interest.

Originally Posted by eKretz

You misunderstand my post. I was not saying that following a JNat with a fine stone will not work. I was saying that the micro-pitted surface (and yes, it is there, that's why you get a hazy mirror, i.e. "sandblasted finish " with a JNat, BTW) tends to obscure any visual finish change by a very fine stone until those microscopic pits are gone, or at least very nearly so. You may belittle/trivialize magnification all you like, but it is a useful tool. Some guys care only about the finished result when honing, and some guys like to know what is happening and why. I don't belittle or trivialize the opinions/thoughts of those folks who don't care what's happening with different abrasion mechanisms during the honing process, so please don't do so to those who do take an interest.

First of all, I mean no offense, we are having a serious discussion here.
I'm extremely interested in the process of what is happening to steel when we abrade it, and I'm also interested in microscopic images of the process. But, edges from those images don't exactly feel on our skin as they should, or as good as they look, and the other way around.

I don't know how you came to think that Jnats cause some kind of pitting on the surface of steel (if you read it somewhere, please share the link), but there are plenty of (natural or not) stones, in a variety of grits including finishers, that can give that hazy almost mirror like finish. There are no natural stones that offer the absolute mirror finish, because there is always a way to make it look even more mirror-like.
And the cutting particles of the hones quarried around Kyoto don't possess some unique special ability. They are darn fine, and, faster than most other fine naturals, but that has, pretty much, nothing to do with the mineral and its cutting properties.

The hazy finish I have noticed from multiple natural stones always came from when I used slurry and would go back to that mirrorish finish when worked with just water long enough. Some stones will get rid of the hazy finish faster than others. I was only stating that this stone seems to want to switch from slow to fast depending on the razors or the mood of the stone I guess. Seems to be temperamental and will do whatever it wants. I just figured since the razor was originally honed really fast I didn't think it would take that long to get rid of the hazy finish considering the fast nature of the stone on the previous two razors. Even my extremely slow Cnat usually doesn't take that much longer to remove the haziness. As for being an unclassified it could very well be. Looking at it closely with a loupe and microscope you can see the layered look like a slate, but the layers look like they are made up of flakes like how graphite or coal looks.

Looking at it closely with a loupe and microscope you can see the layered look like a slate, but the layers look like they are made up of flakes like how graphite or coal looks

yes mine looks the same way , graphite like layers, with very fine shiney flakes .It is a some kind of a mudstone , works realy well .
the only problem ,is that is soft and it digs it self quickly , but the stone works fantastic .
I dont have a microscope 1000 magnification , only my beard , sory .

Originally Posted by Vasilis

First of all, I mean no offense, we are having a serious discussion here.
I'm extremely interested in the process of what is happening to steel when we abrade it, and I'm also interested in microscopic images of the process. But, edges from those images don't exactly feel on our skin as they should, or as good as they look, and the other way around.

I don't know how you came to think that Jnats cause some kind of pitting on the surface of steel (if you read it somewhere, please share the link), but there are plenty of (natural or not) stones, in a variety of grits including finishers, that can give that hazy almost mirror like finish. There are no natural stones that offer the absolute mirror finish, because there is always a way to make it look even more mirror-like.
And the cutting particles of the hones quarried around Kyoto don't possess some unique special ability. They are darn fine, and, faster than most other fine naturals, but that has, pretty much, nothing to do with the mineral and its cutting properties.

I did not come to think it, all loose grit abrasives dig little "pits" out of what they are abrading. And make no mistake, honing with a slurry (on any stone, this is not exclusive to JNats, I have no idea why you are going on about them having special properties) is the same as lapping with a loose grit abrasive. The abrasive particles roll between the surfaces and as the sharp edges come around, they dig those little pits or trenches. I probably did read about it somewhere, but that doesn't matter, I can see it with my own eyes under magnification. If you want to learn about it go ahead and Google it, as it's clear you don't believe me.

Originally Posted by eKretz

I did not come to think it, all loose grit abrasives dig little "pits" out of what they are abrading. And make no mistake, honing with a slurry (on any stone, this is not exclusive to JNats, I have no idea why you are going on about them having special properties) is the same as lapping with a loose grit abrasive. The abrasive particles roll between the surfaces and as the sharp edges come around, they dig those little pits or trenches. I probably did read about it somewhere, but that doesn't matter, I can see it with my own eyes under magnification. If you want to learn about it go ahead and Google it, as it's clear you don't believe me.

Well, of course particles are not absolutely round, and on every scratch line, from here to there, there is a variation of few nanometers. Nothing strange here. That's what the sharp corners do, and those corners get smoother the more you use the same slurry, with a variation from type to type. They don't dig holes or pits. They scratch as they roll, with a tiny variation in the depth as they perform a complete cycle.

OK, I think you should probably Google "loose grit abrasive lapping." The particles do not roll uniformly, and at times do no abrading at all. When they do cut, they do indeed dig a trench, or pit, on a microscopic level. If you wish to call it a scratch that is fine. The fact remains that compared to a fixed abrasive "scratch" the loose grit one is shorter and deeper, often resembling a pitted surface with a series of more conventional scratches surrounding the pits. This is due to some of the particles rolling and some sliding. Harder steels will have very small pits, softer steels will have larger ones.