Thread: Apache Black Gila

Originally Posted by DaveW

I don't know who Keith V is or if he's a member on this forum, if he is, I guess I'll burn a few bridges.

I am a member of this forum actually, and you had no bridge to burn.

Your perceptions are not based in reality - which isn't a new thing I suppose.
We didn't have a long drawn out discussion on YT.

What we had on YT was you sticking your unsolicited opinons on a topic that had nothing to do with the video.
Apparently, your self-inflated ego drives you to pontificate endlessly in an attempt rid the world of terms/thoughts/ideas that your massive ignorance precludes you from digesting, interpreting or understanding.

Those off-topic comments were subsequently deleted.
Factually, that particular SB Ark is special, and as a result the quarry termed it 'Surgical Black'.
Having handled a boatload of Arks, yes - it's quite special - it's a top flight stone that anyone would be hard pressed to produce a finer example of. Even the so called 'vintage Trans Arks' are, at best - only equal.

Learning how to read and comprehend what others are trying to say is a critical concern.

Factually - none of that storyline has anything to do with the Gila, just like the amateurish trolling on YT had nothing to do with the video I posted.
But - the point that failed there - speaks to this topic here; it failed because it's based on a platform based entirely on misconceptions and an obvious lack of understanding; i.e. ignorance.

Translucent Arkansas is a marketing term. So is Surgical Black Arkansas, Lily White Washita, Nakayama Maruka, Extra Fine Coticule, Yellow Green Escher - and so on.
That doesn't mean those terms have no ponit of refernce for an end user to rely on. They can, and do mean something.

In a purely objective sense - just about anything any quarry has referenced their whestone as - is a marketing term. The term Celebrated Water Stone is marketing. Would we be using Eschers, or would they sell for big $$ if they were simply called 'slate'. Maybe, but probably not.

History does not infer quality. It only means that someone long ago put marketing terms on a stone and from that point on people have associated the marketing with performance. While some stone do have scientific references to quality - such as Arks - the truth is that adherence to those 'stystems' is lacking and flawed. Hard Arks are now, vey possibly, so very close to a soft Ark that it's ridiculous. Long ago - such was not the case. And so on..

Now we're sorta back on topic.

The Gila I own is a good stone, I don't see it being at all like an Escher and I wouldn't discuss the two at the same time. One is a slate, the other is more of a Jasper/Agate type of thing. Not reading it as Novaculite-ish but I could be wrong - it does have a similar density and lustre that reminds of of some Arks but it did not chip like an Ark. It's finishing performance is very good, it has a unique look that I enjoy, the feel or feedback is very similar to the densest Arks but I'd say its a lot faster in my hands.

As for unique finishing traits - or the absence of them - experience is what it is, and so is ignorance.
No one understands a stone until they try it - someone may find that a Gila peforms identically to their Sugical Black Ark (see what I did there?), and someone else may not see it that way. This is life, and it's to be expected.

Same goes for Eschers vs Unknown Slates. Are we viewing someone that spent 500 on a D/B Escher as a fool because they could have bought the unlabeled Thuri that performs just as well instead? No - we're not. And the reverse position is just as ludicrous - paying 200 (or whatever Terry is asking) for a chance to handle a limited-run stone (or whatever the availability alludes to) is not less-wise than buying an $50 garden variety Ark from whoever, Halls, David, Dans, eBay, etc.

If someone wants to try a Gila, they buy one - if not, they don't. That's pretty much how it goes in this biz.
If someone thinks it's foolish to buy one, or someone thinks it's a great idea - whatever...the end-user gets to make that decision, not the high lords of the imaginary honing universe.

It's impossible to equate dollars spent on a stone as an absolute qualifier of intelligence, or practicality or performance.
Someone might not like the idea of a $600 Escher just as much as they don't like the idea of a $200 Gila.
Thus far - edges from the Gila have been inherently 'sharper' than any Thuri is capable of - sharpness isn't the bottom line and it can be somewhat subjective - but, and this depends on my mood more than anything - if faced with having to decide on using a Gila or an Escher, I might just grab the Gila. Faced with the same type of decision of the Gila Vs a Trans Ark - probably the Gila since it seems faster to me.

Pricing, value, 'what's it worth' - whatever. People drop a lot more on all kinds of stones and they're happy - no one has the right to say they're right or wrong to do so. I like my Gila - honestly, I probably would not have paid for one AT THIS POINT IN TIME though, Nelson gifted it to me and while I'm digging it I just didn't have a burning desire to 'try something new' in that type of stone. I just got done testing a slab of chalchedony and I only have but so much time to spare; there are a lot of stones qued up that I need to get in to.
FWIW - the Gila hammered the Chalcedony into submission easily. Edges off the Gila have been very good for me and while the feedback is a little Ark-ish, it seems to be much faster than most Arks I've experienced. And I've handled many.

For a natural stone that's quarried here, by one man in the desert - a stone that peforms well, has a unique look and feel - it's worth at least a serious consideration to the right person but perhaps not everyone.

I love that attitude. I hate pretentious honing professors that make honing seem like alchemy. It isnt.

Nelson's edges are my benchmark. I also send a lot of stuff his way to test since we are both in the city. It's a huge help sometimes. Did anyone here buy that last one that was available? It sold so I am curious. I think it came from the same mother stone as mine and cris', so it should be something to look forward to.