Thread: What Do You Think About The Shapton 30K

Originally Posted by feltspanky

I know the feeling; This thread has me wanting to purchase a 20K Suehiro for comparison purposes. Does the S.R. cutlery addiction every stop ?

No I don't believe it does lol.

If youre comparing the G20k to other synths, just get it (disclaimer, my synth experience is not great). If you're comparing it to JNat finishers, it does as we'll as some, not as well as others as far as smoothness goes. There's no shortage of sharp with either.

Try it and if you don't like it, it will sell quickly at what you paid for it or very close.

Cheers, Steve

Originally Posted by Steve56

http://www.imcclains.com/productinfo...on%20Chart.pdf

Note the micron scale on the right.

Cheers, Steve

I am by no means an expert at all, what with the 3 razor's I've honed in my entire life, and only having ever used a Norton 4/8, but...

Given that:
1. It's generally accepted that 4k is a sharpening grit, 8k is a polishing grit, and +10k is a finishing grit

and

2. We know it's possible to get a descent shave off a Norton 8k, which is considered a polishing grit

Then I would tend to conclude that particle size is not the only thing that matters. The table provided at the reference above shows that the Norton 8k would be equivalent to a Naniwa 4k if such a stone existed. However, I've never heard of anybody saying they regularly shave from a Naniwa 5k stone, in the same way as many do shave from the Norton 8k.

Is it possible that the Norton 8k is classified at that grit rating because, despite a larger particle size in micron, the stone performs similarly to a Naniwa 8k, possibly due to other factors such as particle hardness, bonding material, etc...? Or does the Norton 8k actually perform much closer to the Naniwa 5k??

I apologize for taking this tread further down the bunny-trail and away from the OP topic, but I think this is fascinating and worth pursuing!

Thanks

ps: The table also lists a Norton 15k. Does this stone exist?

I was into the 30k for a while when I started honing. Now I use Shaptons to remove steel and JNats to finish.

I think JNats give the best combination of ease of use, consistency, sharpness, smoothness and edge durability. I have the SG 20k too and while it's a fine hone, it's not as good as my worst JNat. But opinions are like assholes - everybody has one...

-john

Originally Posted by shallard

I am by no means an expert at all, what with the 3 razor's I've honed in my entire life, and only having ever used a Norton 4/8, but...

Given that:
1. It's generally accepted that 4k is a sharpening grit, 8k is a polishing grit, and +10k is a finishing grit

and

2. We know it's possible to get a descent shave off a Norton 8k, which is considered a polishing grit

Then I would tend to conclude that particle size is not the only thing that matters. The table provided at the reference above shows that the Norton 8k would be equivalent to a Naniwa 4k if such a stone existed. However, I've never heard of anybody saying they regularly shave from a Naniwa 5k stone, in the same way as many do shave from the Norton 8k.

Is it possible that the Norton 8k is classified at that grit rating because, despite a larger particle size in micron, the stone performs similarly to a Naniwa 8k, possibly due to other factors such as particle hardness, bonding material, etc...? Or does the Norton 8k actually perform much closer to the Naniwa 5k??

I apologize for taking this tread further down the bunny-trail and away from the OP topic, but I think this is fascinating and worth pursuing!

Thanks

ps: The table also lists a Norton 15k. Does this stone exist?

The following is opinion ...

No I don't think there's anything special about the Norton matrix but could be wrong of course. What I think is folks don't understand that it is entirely possible to shave off a 5k Naniwa or 8k Norton with good technique! I have shaved off a Naniwa 5k and it also passes HHT stupid easy, but not my favorite, but I've never consciously tried to max out a 5k Naniwa edge. Maybe a task for Jimmy or Glen who have a lot of experience to comment on.

One thing you should try is to shave off each stone/grit you use in your progression after a good stropping, you might be rather surprised! Coticule users developed the unicot and dilucot methods to produce a finer and shallower scratch pattern from a stone that's marginal in fineness using conventional methods - they seem to be using the very tips and edges of faceted round garnet crystals rather than a significant depth of the crystal. I've adapted parts of these techniques to JNat honing and they improve the result. So if you are very careful about pressure in your final finishing routine, I see no reason why you can't get a perfectly serviceable shave off a 5k JIS stone/Norton 8k - in fact it's done all the time as you note. That's why getting a good edge off the Norton 8k is recommended as a learning tool.

But your point about the matrix making a difference is a good one, and I'm not sure anyone outside abrasive company engineers understand, and I'd bet they don't know with respect to razors, except possibly Suehiro.

I've never seen a Norton 15k but they're an old company and made a lot of things over the years.

Cheers, Steve

Originally Posted by Steve56

The following is opinion ...

No I don't think there's anything special about the Norton matrix but could be wrong of course. What I think is folks don't understand that it is entirely possible to shave off a 5k Naniwa or 8k Norton with good technique! I have shaved off a Naniwa 5k and it also passes HHT stupid easy, but not my favorite, but I've never consciously tried to max out a 5k Naniwa edge. Maybe a task for Jimmy or Glen who have a lot of experience to comment on.

One thing you should try is to shave off each stone/grit you use in your progression after a good stropping, you might be rather surprised! Coticule users developed the unicot and dilucot methods to produce a finer and shallower scratch pattern from a stone that's marginal in fineness using conventional methods - they seem to be using the very tips and edges of faceted round garnet crystals rather than a significant depth of the crystal. I've adapted parts of these techniques to JNat honing and they improve the result. So if you are very careful about pressure in your final finishing routine, I see no reason why you can't get a perfectly serviceable shave off a 5k JIS stone/Norton 8k - in fact it's done all the time as you note. That's why getting a good edge off the Norton 8k is recommended as a learning tool.

But your point about the matrix making a difference is a good one, and I'm not sure anyone outside abrasive company engineers understand, and I'd bet they don't know with respect to razors, except possibly Suehiro.

I've never seen a Norton 15k but they're an old company and made a lot of things over the years.

Cheers, Steve

+1 ... I think the 5K Superstone edge is a shave ready edge as well, although I've never actually shaved off the edge, and a proper bevel will easily 'tree-top' hair off the 5K. My progression (with synthetics) is usually the 1K, 3K, and 5K Naniwa Superstone. I follow with the 8K and the 12k used strictly as polishers/scratch eliminators with a very light touch. Always delivers a very, very nice edge.

With Sheffields I'll very often go right from the 5k to a very fine Coticule with water only and then my Barber's Gem' Escher (water only) and end up with what I personally describe as simply 'delicious edges'...

* IMO*

I have shapton gs 4,8,16,30k
For Swedish steel I go the whole range and a very few light strokes on the 30k the results are as I like them.
For old Sheffields and other worse steel I end after 8k and a natural finisher

Here is a thread from 2009 with what at first glance appears to be the same chart. The most up to date being in post #33 with some interesting banter in that thread.

Back then, going by the info in the chart, I began using naniwa superstones in a 3/5 pyramid, which, if I understood the chart correctly is the equivalent of a Norton 4/8. So when I shaved off the naniwa 5k, it was as if I was shaving off the USA equivalent norton 8k. If I wanted to go further I'd hit the naniwa 8k, which was that much higher, according to the Japanese grit chart.

I have never heard of a Norton 15k waterstone, and I wonder if it isn't a typo ?

I cannot remember who, maybe bill3152, but someone did get the 15k Suehiro along with the 20k. I'm interested in that too, but ........ can't have 'em all ......

From the videos I have seen and discussion here, it seems to me that using .50 micron spray on a felt strop is the equivalent of using a 30K Shapton stone. And a whole lot less expensive.

I have 500, 1k, 4k, 8k, 16k Shaptons and finish up with the sprayed strop.

Because I have already gone down this rabbit hole over and over and over you have fun searching all this out,,, Hint : all the info is here on SRP

You need to realize those Charts are NOT accurate, haven't found one, not one that doesn't have errors

The Norton 8k is rated on the Japanese scale

Natural stones and Barber's hones don't have grit ratings, and then ones that have been attributed to them have steadily gone higher over the last 7+ years I have been reading about them

Differences in Binders and Grit are more important then many think

Grit Numbers are useless except within the same series of hones, you can't even compare the Naniwa Super Stone 1k to the Naniwa Chosera 1k

You might want to listen to what the guy in the Shapton vids says, "Used in sequence, on the right steel"

Using Lynn's famous sig

Now "Have Fun" searching out all that, it really is all quite obvious and is all found right here on SRP

Thanks Glen, interesting!

Nothing like going to the source for the numbers. Here's a link to the draft 2015 Norton catalog, see page 52:

http://www.nortonindustrial.com/uplo...Bookmarked.pdf

This Norton page lists the 4k as 6 micron and the 8k at 3 micron, so that agrees with the table. They are listed as JIS ratings, but they don't seem to align with those attributed to Naniwa's based on the micron scale. But I think we can safely say Norton thinks they're 6 and 3 micron respectively. Now to try and understand the discrepancy...

I'm not sure if they're listing products or grits in the 4th "waterstones" column, and they do list 15K!

Naniwa's official material has been more ... sparse or at least more difficult to ferret out in a manner that can be relied upon. lots of info on Naniwa out there, but not from a source that's reliable IMO. Anyone got Naniwa micron info that isn't forum-based or an obvious rehash of the common tables?

I've been looking for JIS documents but I imagine they're like ANSI, you have to pay (a lot) for them.

Cheers, Steve