Thread: La Luna stone?

Originally Posted by doorsch

Well they were sold to be used with razors and i wouldnt say there not usable for that. You know there are a good amount of guys around loving ultra sharp edges experimenting with CBN, Diamondspray, Nano Cloth and all the other stuff....so iam sure there people around who like the shaving sensation of those...

I never liked any result of synthethic stones (8k King, 10k or 12k Naniwa), so i mostly prefer naturals. Even if the shave was very good and close...i just didnt like the extreme sharp/harsh esges.

Do you know where I can get a purple one?

Originally Posted by doorsch

There are differences between the two variants, the blue metallic ones, or the one you bought are interesting and very fast and effective cutting stones. I also find them scary sharp resulting in a harsh feeling...

The purple ones are those i mostly would recommend, just because the results and the feeling of the shave is much better in my point of view. They give a close and quite smooth shave, a very balanced shaving result in the end.

OK, I did manage to buy a 4" X 2" labeled purple La Lune from my guy in France and yes it is much less aggressive. Under magnification the sparkles are far less numerous and they appear to be smaller in size. How do you recommend using it? All my razors are hone sharp and I do not want to dull one to fool around although I did run one over for about 10 laps and I will try it later today. Any advice will be appreciated. Tx, Dan

Experiment with slurry, much like a coticule or Jnat, go from thickish/ cream like, to thin, finish on a thin water slurry. Experiment with the number of laps.

A drop or two of Smiths honing solution or Ballistol is nice for finish or added to slurry.

I like it off a solid 8k edge.

The stones were recommended to be used with oil, thats what FGBC wrote in their Bulletin of Guarantee.

I also prefer to use oil or water glycerine to finish on those stones. Progress to 10k or 12k and proceed with several laps of oil on the stone....

Actually as you read Euclids posts, there is no right or wrong. Feel free to try out both or more procedures and report back here what suited you best.

Originally Posted by doorsch

The stones were recommended to be used with oil, thats what FGBC wrote in their Bulletin of Guarantee.

I also prefer to use oil or water glycerine to finish on those stones. Progress to 10k or 12k and proceed with several laps of oil on the stone....

Actually as you read Euclids posts, there is no right or wrong. Feel free to try out both or more procedures and report back here what suited you best.

Is Smith's more or less the same as glycerine and water?

It is a water-soluble oil, thinner than glycerin, like the water soluble cutting oil used on CNC machines, which is what it might be.

Ballistol is also easy to find and performs the same adding just a bit of slickness and washes off clean.

A bottle of Smith’s sells for about $6.

Originally Posted by Euclid440

It is a water-soluble oil, thinner than glycerin, like the water soluble cutting oil used on CNC machines, which is what it might be.

Ballistol is also easy to find and performs the same adding just a bit of slickness and washes off clean.

A bottle of Smith’s sells for about $6.

I don't recall where I heard it, on a forum, or word of mouth, but someone told me it is mainly mineral oil ? Referring to Smith's. IIRC same with Ballistol ?

Actually the Smith's honing solution is mostly water. Over 80% IIRC. It also contains a small percentage of triethanolamine - an emulsifier (emulsifiers help make some oils more soluble in water) and some form of lubricant. (Not mineral oil - they make a point of it being a non-petroleum lubricant right on the label). IIRC Ballistol on the other hand is composed partly of mineral oil.

Originally Posted by eKretz

Actually the Smith's honing solution is mostly water. Over 80% IIRC. It also contains a small percentage of triethanolamine - an emulsifier (emulsifiers help make some oils more soluble in water) and some form of lubricant. (Not mineral oil - they make a point of it being a non-petroleum lubricant right on the label). IIRC Ballistol on the other hand is composed partly of mineral oil.

I agree that it mostly contains water, and isn't petroleum based, there is the faint smell of some volatile organic compound, it reminds me of something. Triethanolamine is a strong base though, and strong bases tend to rust steel like acids. Containing an emulsifier is a good idea.
By the way, I just tasted it, it has no taste it does not remind oil (I guess you can't use it to fry stuff as an alternative ) and does not appear to be a base either. I'll try the paper pH meter thingies to check, but it must be neutral since it protects from corrosion and all that.

pH is 8 IIRC. It's a very small amount of TEA, something like 2%.