Thread: Water vs slurry

I have been using man made hones and like the predictability and the results. I just ordered a Jnat because I would like to see if it increases the shave comfort. I have watched Mastro Livi, Lynn Abrams, Murrey Carter and Howard Schector hone with natural stones without using slurry just water. My question is, does it really make a difference in the shave and edge using slurry then just water? Some of the best blades makers and hone meisters use just water. I understand the arguments both ways, but being new to this type of honing, I am curious to see what members have found.

It really depends on the individual hone. For a lot of them, the best method is to transition gradually from the cutting capacity of the slurry to the higher polishing capacity of just water. Some hones, like Arkansas and Charnley Forests should not be used with slurry.

Yup, synthetic stones usually aren't used with slurry except perhaps the coarsest stones that you want to speed up - but then afterwards you still want to finish up the work on that stone with plain water before moving on. Certain natural stones must be used with slurry to get any cutting action at all with western steels (that don't have steel/iron cladding like Japanese steels). Otherwise they won't do much but put on a high polish and not remove much of anything at all steel-wise. Natural stones mostly used with slurry (sometimes but not always thinned out to straight water at the end) are JNats, Coticules, certain slates, etc. The very hardest stones are usually oil stones, but for finishing they can often also be used with water.

Originally Posted by Utopian

It really depends on the individual hone. For a lot of them, the best method is to transition gradually from the cutting capacity of the slurry to the higher polishing capacity of just water. Some hones, like Arkansas and Charnley Forests should not be used with slurry.

Hi, Utopian. You make me think about a sucessful technique I use to hone my razors.
I have a nice pike translucent arkansas, both faces lapped flat and a marking on a face just to remember me which one is in use. The "more beautiful" face is completely flawless, and the "less beautiful" have a discoloration that doesn't affect its performance, is just a cosmetic interruption (white dot) of the otherwise homogeneous surface.
I use to build some slurry with a small piece of coticule on this less perfect face to speed up the honing and, after that, I finish the edges on the perfect face with plain water. Can this slurried procedure cause any harm to my workhorse translucent arkansas?

Try it both ways, on Naturals and Synthetics

Sometimes there is "Magic in the Mud"

Originally Posted by Matheus

Hi, Utopian. You make me think about a sucessful technique I use to hone my razors.
I have a nice pike translucent arkansas, both faces lapped flat and a marking on a face just to remember me which one is in use. The "more beautiful" face is completely flawless, and the "less beautiful" have a discoloration that doesn't affect its performance, is just a cosmetic interruption (white dot) of the otherwise homogeneous surface.
I use to build some slurry with a small piece of coticule on this less perfect face to speed up the honing and, after that, I finish the edges on the perfect face with plain water. Can this slurried procedure cause any harm to my workhorse translucent arkansas?

That's a good question. What follows is mere speculation...

The Arkansas is much harder than the coticule. I highly doubt that the slurry or the coticule itself is going to have a significant effect on the Arkansas' surface from a macro consideration. However, given that the Arkansas hones used for finishing work better after they are effectively burnished, I would assume some of that burnishing is diminished when the slurry is used on it. This would reduce the polishing quality of the hone.

Hmm, terminology at play here. The Arkansas stone is usually bound "harder" than the Coticule, but the abrasive in Coticules (garnet) is actually usually harder than that in Arkansas stones (silica).

You'll just have to try your method and see how well it works for you. I would guess that it might not give the best edges compared to a very highly polished Ark, but I've never tried that method. If your coticule slurry is very very fine, it might work just great.

On a jnat, absolutely you should be honing with slurry. You dilute to the finish.

Hi, gents.
I only use one of the faces of the Arkansas to run on slurry, the other one is kept "burnished by steel" to finishing my edges.
I don't like the edge I can attain from coticule until now, I'm able to get a much nicer and smooth edge from the Arkansas. Never stopped honing on slurry phase, always finished on water only on my hones.

I doubt you're doing any damage since you're using one side for slurry, and the other for polish. In fact, that's what I do with my Welsh slates. One side is roughed up and used for slurry/fast (er) cutting. The other is polished and burnished for finishing and used water only.

On topic - as others have said, slurry is more to speed up the cutting action and typically you'll dilute it and finish with just water. You don't 'need' slurry - but depending on your progression/hone it may make things infinitely quicker. My question is, what are you using before you move to the Jnat? If a 10 or 12k synthetic, I can't imagine you would need much slurry if any at all before moving to your finishing stone. If it's a lower grit, slurry will be a must, and how thick will depend on what grit synthetic you're employing.