Thread: 8K Norton is not enough.

Originally Posted by dickerydee

I'm deeply offended by your snap judgements. Terrible of you.

Just because I'm new here doesn't mean I'm knew to sharpening stuff or have an appreciation for how to make dull things sharp. I get what a progression is; I learned to count ya know.

How are sharpness and keeness subjective?

Define, "snap" judgement? What makes it a snap, rather than a "quick" judgement? Really?

Seems to me there are two different arguments going on here:

- The OP was new to honing and not getting a satisfactory edge from an 8K - Utopian's response was to suggest he acquires a 1k stone - i.e. ensure the bevel is set because a 4/8k progression will not help if the bevel is not set. (At lease that's what I think was intended.)

- Other people have then converted this into saying that you should not consider a higher grit stone unless you can get a decent shave off the 8k stone. I think this is where the arguments start - they appear to be missing the point that no-one is arguing that the bevel set is the starting point - whilst the shave may be acceptable from an 8k stone, I would say the majority of us would go higher in terms of comfort.

And of course we all know that the bevel must be set before any higher grir stone will make a practical difference.

Originally Posted by Hirlau

Post # 56 by Utopian pretty much states how many of the members here see the role of the 8k Norton hone.
Maybe you should read the post again.

When I see someone fire off a reply that includes facts, such as established units of measure like microns; then finish their post with subjective terms such as "sharpness & Keenness" ,,, then I know I'm being baffled with bull $&(!.

Hirlau - whether it's bullshine or not, it's not Dickerydee's bullshine. The comments come from a well reasearched and presented paper/blog that was featured on the site a few days ago. I can't find the link but it is well worth reading and you will like it because it has fantastic close-up images.

I can cherry pick too. Each of my sources are cited.

Originally Posted by dickerydee

Not sure where this magic 8k number keeps coming from.

Asked.

Originally Posted by dickerydee

Where did this 8k level ever come from?

Asked.

Originally Posted by Straightandproud

I consider myself a competent straight razor shaver, but much less than that with a hone. A few months ago I purchased a Norton 4K/8K hone and struggled just getting a usable edge. I have since obtained a usable edge but it is only "usable". My professionally honed edge is superior. It seems obvious that the next step in the evolution of my learning curve is to move into a finer grit stone. I am looking to invest in that stone but the options are not only spendy, but confusing. So here is the question:

What is the best bang for my buck in regards to my next purchase towards my quest for the perfect edge?

This was the ORIGINAL ask by the guy who started the thread. He was the guy we were trying to help. Also, he's the guy who bought the Norton hones. That is why we are discussing them. If you read his question again, you may understand why the 8k is the primary focus.

Originally Posted by dickerydee

What are you saying about the Norton 8k that I'm not understanding?

Asked.

Originally Posted by Utopian

If you cannot get a comfortable shave off of the 8k, no higher grit hone is going to fix it. It will only thin your wallet.

Answered.

Originally Posted by UKRob

Seems to me there are two different arguments going on here:

- The OP was new to honing and not getting a satisfactory edge from an 8K - Utopian's response was to suggest he acquires a 1k stone - i.e. ensure the bevel is set because a 4/8k progression will not help if the bevel is not set. (At lease that's what I think was intended.)

- Other people have then converted this into saying that you should not consider a higher grit stone unless you can get a decent shave off the 8k stone. I think this is where the arguments start - they appear to be missing the point that no-one is arguing that the bevel set is the starting point - whilst the shave may be acceptable from an 8k stone, I would say the majority of us would go higher in terms of comfort.

And of course we all know that the bevel must be set before any higher grir stone will make a practical difference.

Actually if you read post 2, you will see that I created both arguments.

Originally Posted by DireStraights

How is it useless? Are you saying binders or the amount/size of abrasive make them unique? I think if they leave a similar scratch pattern then the shaves will be similar as well.

Shaving off my 5k JIS is close enough in grit range as if I had the norton 8k and wanted to try that. The cutting speed and binders are not going to make one shave poorly and the other shave well. I can get HHT results off my 5k, and i'm sure the norton can do the same.

They are both higher mid range stones and I highly doubt if you did a blind shave test you could pick out the norton over my masamoto or any similar grit stone.

That's just my opinion, based on conjecture.

But for the record, my 5K shave technically isn't a comparison as I don't own a norton or have a razor that was finished on one. My shaving off the 5k would be for the sake of my own knowledge and experimentation. There is no "comparison" happening at all, just testing of the qualities of a single stone in relation to my face.

I think you are very confused on how hones work. It is not only about the grit rating or the particle size. It is also about binder, how the matrix is formed, how the grit particles release while honing, how had the grit particles are, do the break while honing on them. Then there is the razor, steel, hardness, grind. Then you have stropping .

Originally Posted by UKRob

Hirlau - whether it's bullshine or not, it's not Dickerydee's bullshine. The comments come from a well reasearched and presented paper/blog that was featured on the site a few days ago. I can't find the link but it is well worth reading and you will like it because it has fantastic close-up images.

Thanks Rob,, I saw it & even commented about the who was the author,,,,,

Originally Posted by UKRob

Hirlau - whether it's bullshine or not, it's not Dickerydee's bullshine. The comments come from a well reasearched and presented paper/blog that was featured on the site a few days ago. I can't find the link but it is well worth reading and you will like it because it has fantastic close-up images.

I agree about the linked blog--it was very informative. However, it did not support the argument/discussion here.

,,,,,Correct

Originally Posted by Utopian

I can cherry pick too. Each of my sources are cited.


Asked.



Asked.



This was the ORIGINAL ask by the guy who started the thread. He was the guy we were trying to help. Also, he's the guy who bought the Norton hones. That is why we are discussing them. If you read his question again, you may understand why the 8k is the primary focus.



Asked.



Answered.

I disagree with extreme prejudice that if you can't get comfy off 8k that a higher grit stone will only thin your wallet. That's the koolaid at it's best right there. Claims like these have no place in the world of sharpening.