Thread: Sealing synthetic waterstones

they honed smooth with the crazing still there I haven't tried to lap it out,, there was a disscusion on this a while back the only issue was it just wasn't pretty enough for some, the performance was not affected. as was said, I don't see the benefit of sealing these stones. it seems quite a bit of sealing is done for purposes of retaining the provenance of the stone, not protection,, I mean hell, naturals were subjected to a lot more torture than we give them and synthetics,, I,m sorry but most people use both sides, so sealing would lose some stone in my mind.

But hey , I say do what you want with your property. just know that I haven't had any issues nor has any of the guys I deal with or know in this honing world. Tc

myself I wouldn't permasoak the naniwas,, King yes naniwa no

The crazing on my Chosera 5k was bad enough to occasionally need lapping. Otherwise, as Bluesman pointed out, sometimes the edge of one of the regions would stick up high enough to catch a blade slightly.

TLDR: Yes, I am aware of how much of a waste of time this all is, arguably. No need to harp on it. *shrug* That said...

***

After an extra week's worth of curing time, my Naniwa dressing stone has now been submerged for half again as long. The spar urethane has only held up very satisfactorily in areas where the coats went on thin and drip-free.
Here's a couple of [poor quality] pictures of how it's looking:


This (#4) is the best side, it was brushed on while vertical but with thin coats so there were no big drips. Except for the bright white line (which was at the bottom originally) where it sagged all around, and never fully hardened before soaking, presumably because of excessive thickness.

This side (#2) has some drips which have turned white after the soak, it also has the same white line.


This (#5) was the top of the stone when I applied the urethane. Before soaking, it was the nicest looking side, but most of it has turned milky now. I believe that coating it while flat allowed too thick of a layer to be built up, which didn't cure as well as the sides; at least not with the curing time I was allowing between applications, based on the directions on the can.


Once saturated, the stone only very slightly absorbs extra water added to it. A few drops of water can stay on top for several minutes; this picture is taken after 5 minutes have elapsed. It does eventually soak in after 10 or so minutes. This stone's usual behavior with regards to water intake is similar to my King Deluxes, so there definitely is a marked difference.

***

I have taken a few measurements throughout, mainly as a reference point for other stones which I plan on messing with later...

I measured the dry, coated stone as:
L:2.660" x W:1.334" x H:1.948", 225g

After 12 hours soak, I measured:
L:2.664" x W:1.335" x H:1.945", 259g

After 8 days soak, I measured:
L:2.659" x W:1.334" x H:1.945", 258g

The length measurements are as close to being unchanging as my limited accuracy can vouch for. In fact, I am somewhat surprised that my readings came out so closely grouped. The weight measurement is practically identical between the two later measurements, the difference almost certainly being due to manipulation.

***

I am concluding from this that there is a decent chance for improving my results with the spar urethane if I apply thinner coats and make sure to avoid drips and sagging -- no big surprise there, really. I am pleasantly surprised at how well the sealant appears to be holding up in areas where the application was luckily better executed. I am also satisfied that this yields an exterior layer of sealant which does appear to function as a water tight shell. Finally, the measurements look to set a baseline for how much, or how little a stone expands when thoroughly soaked.

Now, moving on to my King Deluxe 1000...

Gents I've read your input and while I understand your views, I would NOT seal my synthetic water stones. Bruno has stated one very important reason. Mould! I have sealed my natural stones but prefer to leave the synths naked. So far that choice has worked out well.

Originally Posted by BanjoTom

Gents I've read your input and while I understand your views, I would NOT seal my synthetic water stones. Bruno has stated one very important reason. Mould! I have sealed my natural stones but prefer to leave the synths naked. So far that choice has worked out well.

It isn't a completely irrational consideration. Does anyone have experience of a sealed synthetic become moldier than it otherwise might've? Is it a common problem with naturals?

Or is this just a purely hypothetical problem which could just as easily be solved with a cap-full of hypothetical bleach?

I’m less than a year into honing, so excuse me if this dumb question. My concern about sealing a synthetic is — what if I want to use the other side some day?

I’ve already done that with my 1k for when I’ve breadknifed a blade, hone a Gold Dollar, or otherwise need to treat the stone roughly. Then flipped it to the primary side for final bevel set.

Or, suppose I chip an edge or corner on the primary side.

Originally Posted by MrHouston

My concern about sealing a synthetic is — what if I want to use the other side some day? .

Your going to lap the new side anyway before you use it. I predict the sealing medium to be gone in 3-2-1____

Originally Posted by MrHouston

[...] what if I want to use the other side some day?

Wanting to use the other side is a consideration, but given that I usually only hone on a flat surface, I don't miss having a second side because it would just mean letting two sides go out of flat before lapping. But that's just how I use mine.

I suppose that if I maintained more convex grinds, I could want to have one curved side, and one flat. Or if I purposefully groomed one side of a high-grit stone to have deeper scratch patterns than the other, more refined side -- that too, I guess. And maybe if I kept one side rigorously flat for razors, chisels and plane irons, and used the other, irregular side for knives and rough work, somewhat like you describe. etc... Honestly, my own main reservation is that once in a blue moon I use a 1 inch-wide side on some thicker hones for something; that wouldn't work with having 5 sides sealed either...

Still, I have several thick 1000-ish King stones which I could use; so I won't miss being able to turn one on its side if this works.

More importantly, as concerns the more "delicate" magnesia-based synthetics like the high-grit Choseras and the Snow White, which really are the main impetus for this pursuit, I reckon that I would prefer those be attached to bases to prevent breakage as much as possible anyway. In which case not being able to use the other sides due to sealing is moot.

Regardless, I'm not too bullish about defending this as practical... Hopefully I'll learn something and my hones won't be any worse for the wear. Anything beyond I'll just call gravy and be happy.