Don't get me started:soapbox:. But someone has to ask the question, WILL IT PUT A BETTER EDGE ON MY RAZOR?
Printable View
Glen,
I don't get why you are "now" confused, this was the entire reason I wrote the post. My original post was not to alarm or bring forth any earth shattering (or 16000 glass stone shattering) news. If the shapton company is going to boast of a man engineered product that has a scratch capacity of under a micron, I wanted to know why there were scratches in my bevel that were much bigger than that. In the original post I was not saying you can't get an incredible edge off it, you will. The question is very specific relating to a phenomena that bothered me enough to ask. WHY? Is it contamination? Sorting limitations? Sorry, but the scratches needed to be addressed and Harrelson said what he said and I told you all. Lighten your heart to know that eccentric nuts that frequent this intellectual sharpening medium take the time. Yes most will end up as hot air but in the end you guys working in the field get something once in a while that helps you, because most times you are too busy.
Respectfully,
Michael
Huh???? What???? Where????
Uh.......OK, Sure, Fine, You bet, Yeah whatever works, scratch lines......I though all razors came with perfectly polished edges.......swarf building on water.......displacement in a stroke.......hmmmm.........scientifically speaking I would say that based on empirical data, that I have surmised if not pontificated on the subject predominately over a glass of Vodka with a couple of olives and have come to the conclusion that......where was I, oh yeah.......what????
Lynn
At this time, I would like to ask someone from Shapton who knows the materials to help clear up this mess. I know getting a scratch left out by 16000 has NOTHING to do with the great advice the leading authorities of modern Straight Shaving have given us regarding how to get the best edge. That is why this is Advanced Honing as it entertains this way out stuff that only very few people wuld fing practical or useful. Sometimes these excercises can help clear up questions, but read and respond at your own risk as it can confuse more than help.
Again, if a Shapton rep does not clear up the confusion regarding the material differences of the glass 8000 Jp and the pro8000 I would vote to torch this thread and sorry for the confusion.
Respectfully Yours,
Mike
I spoke with Tom with Jende Industries concerning this issue, and he had this to say:
"If anything, I see the JP stones eventually replacing the Pro stones, not the glass, but there are no signs of Shapton making other JP stones right now.
IMO, the glass stones are too aggressive for Japanese plane blades, which seems to be the JP stone's intended market. Overall, the glass stones (white) are better suited for straight razors."
So, it appears to me that the JP stones are between the Pro and Glass but only come in 4k & 8K options. So, considering that there isn't a complete "system" of them, and we know that Shaptons don't play as well with other systems as other hones, it would seem pretty clear what the course of action is.
Just my $.02
I could have saved 99.98 if I listened as much as I talk.
There is an even more important lesson in all of this than my original question. I forked out 100 bucks on a stone from the advice of a person who is not specialised in straights. I blame no one but myself. If you want the best information on what works do not ask someone who has not worked and specialised in straight razors unless you like to give away your money.:(
I know Lynn and others who are the leaders in the specialty of straights have to be getting a chuckle out of this because they went down this road many years ago. I thank all of you for your patience and understanding and even entertaining a concept that you already knew the answer for. I hope you all don't feel like I wasted your time, but like I said there is an even more valuable lesson here.
Cheers,:beer2:
Michael
PS Kevin, Thanks for that link, 100 dollars does not sound as bad as 9000JpY
Does this mean: I won a free 16K JPgs
Ya_mashi_ta So-sans website has Jp gstones in full spectrum. He also has JP market Pro. maybe the pro varities are the same.
Could you post a link of that website?Quote:
Ya_mashi_ta So-sans website has Jp gstones in full spectrum. He also has JP market Pro. maybe the pro varities are the same.
Thanks!:)
Intrigued by all of this new information, I contacted Shapton USA.
As we've seen from japan-tool.com in AU, they have the full line of JP glass, obviously formulated for the Japanese/carbon steel chisel and plane blade market.
The info I got from USA is that they will be carrying the 4K, 8K and 16K JP stones for now. I will be looking into more options from them as I am liking the feel of the 8K JP stone right now....
I sharpened up a Wade and Butcher using the 1,2,&4K white glass, then went to the 8JP, then the 16 &30K white. As I said before, the feel of the 8JP was very similar to the 8pro, which I have always not really liked (feeling-wise, not result-wise), but for some reason, there was something just a little different with the JP that just felt "righter" in this case.
Upon going to the 16K white from the 8JP there was a definite un-uniformity in the feeling that is not there when going from 8K white to 16K white. However, I must agree that 8KJP by itself feels very smooth. I didn't try the 4K JP this time. I now wish I had.... I've still got a few more ebay specials to play with, though.
If the white are specifically for A-2 stainless, and the JP for carbon, then theoretically, we can use both sets for razors - one for stainless, and he JP for carbon - provided it makes a big enough difference. I've written to japan-tool in AU, but he is closed until Sept., so we'll have to wait to see.
The past weeks I've been dying to post on this topic and the scratch marks one. When you combine the two threads together, they make for a very interesting thinking about the approach to razor sharpening. It really got my mind going.....
It's good to be thinking about sharpening again!
Do you look at the beels under magnification? If you can look at the edge and bevel of the 8000Jp and then after the 16000 white and tell me what you see.The 16000 does not refine after the 8000jp. The logical progression would be the 30000 if need or pastes if needed. I shaved of the 8000jp and it was quite remarkable. From me playing with it the Jp 8000 is going to me at it's best for the vintage blades. I have not done enough real hard swedish one to comment yet. The darn thing never get dull. I just did a trio of Challenge blades and they are harder by my accounts and it was good but the stone was not at it's best. It might be this is a 'nitch" stone for the older carbon blades. IMHO it has to be seen to be believed.
Mike
No, I didn't look at them under magnification. I look at the 16K and 30K, usually, but by that point when sharpening progressively, the scratches are pretty smooth and the surface is shiny.
I did that last blade using a pyramid between 8KJP and 16K white, and only looked at the final edge at 16K. There were more scratches than usual because of the pyramid, but they were consistent.
So what you're saying is that the 8K JP leaves scratches that are equivalent, if not equal or "better" than the 16K white? Meaning that those scratches I saw after the 16K were rougher than the 8K JP? Now I need to look into that..... If only Japan-tool would hurry and answer my email......
Picture this Tom. The abrasive particles of the 16000 are harder and more blocky shaped. The 8000 Jp are more like soft pancakes. So on softer carbon steels the scratches are flatter even though bigger and they don't have the bite of the harder abrasive.
When you get the time it would be good to see if my evaluation is sound or if it is way out in lala land. I trust that in time you will get the proper info from the technical people minus proprietary information. I know lots of this stuff is guarded and we are not asking for you to commit industrial crimes:)
Mike
do you mean the very abrasive particles are softer?
As far as I know the GS as well as the Pro use white Al2O3 as abrasive.
Al2O3 is splintered and will always have the same hardness.
Or are you talking about the bonding, that will certainly effect the sharpening sensation
and the depth of scratches :confused:
I thought they were ceramic particles which have a wide variation in hardness. It might be a geometry thing either way. It would be interesting to get to the bottom of it. I think the problem Shapton has that other companies don't is they offer more options and inquiering minds want to know. Too much of the info gets dummied down. If they are not clear and offer more accurate information, they may end up victims of their own success, kind of like the original Lancia car company(before FIAT took over) or like Studebaker.
Mike
I believe the difference is most related to the shape of the particles, with some very likely fine tuning of the binder's releasing properties.
There seems to be a misunderstanding:
Naniwa, Shapton, Norton... they all use the same abrasive!
White Al2O3.
Al2O3 IS a ceramic material. It is THE ceramic material when we speak of hones.
There are others like SiC, but those are uncommon amongst the big brands.
So I never really understood why some of these stones are called
"ceramic hones". Of course they are ceramic. The abrasive is ceramic.
Itīs always... (except some naturals and exotics)
Al2O3 always comes in splinters, whereas Chromium Oxide, iron oxide and some garnets can appear in round shape.
Diamonds are splinters as well.
There are two things that seperate the shaptons from the naniwas
Its the binder (thatīs what is referred to when it is spoken of "mixtures")
and the purity of particle sizes.
The latter is quite obvious.
There is no way a shapton 16k can consist of 100% particles with 0.92ĩm in diameter.
You will always have like 10% above 1ĩ, 10% below 0.92ĩm and so on
The grade of purity will have impact on the quality of the surface and sharpening results
The binder is what we will actually feel.
If a stone is "hard" itīs not the Al2O3 we are talking about,
itīs the binder.
White Al2O3 will nearly always have the same hardness.
But if these hard particles are bond very very loosely
the sharpening experience as well as the results will be very different
from a stone with a harder binder.
I belive the binder will most certainly have impact on the size, depth and occurance of scratches a stone produces
even with the exact same type of abrasive in it
(wich is the case in naniwa, shapton and norton)
Kingfish I totally understand what your doctor meant,
studying chemistry myself :)
But, it is the nature of the sedimentary selecting process
that prohibits influence on shape, so either the particles will naturally form
round crystalls, or they will be splinter-shaped, I believe
There is no misunderstanding on my part
No offense taken. I don't hink people working in the Ceramic industries today would look at the simplistic notion that all Al2O3s are the same. I am not in that industry and don't claim to be an expert in it but can understand it if explained. Ceramics from each company are not all the same. The diffences could be in the starting point of the ore to the addition of lighter metals during processing. Are we not talking about the modern ceramic industry? Is it that simple?
As far as x-tal shape not to get into a pis*&^ng contest are there not eight major x-tal systems and many many variations of each? The slightest introduction of any adulterant in processing is going to change the crystal lattice.
Mike
Thatīs a good point Mike,
you are right. There will be differences in the very abrasives.
But because these particles are oddly shaped,
even in one stone you will not find two matching particles.
You could however take the same ceramic abrasive from naniwa,
put it into the shapton binder and get a shapton stone,
not a completely different one.
There will be tiny differences but nobody would notice.
Ceramic industry is a huge field.
And of course there are several kinds of Al2O3 (ruby is one!)
but we use synthetic alpha-corundum only
Corundum - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
or
Aluminium oxide - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
What you get at the end of the bauxite process would be white powder of Al2O3
IDK if there is some kind of grinding or refining process,
where those powders will be broken down more,
but all they get is splinters, I think.
Those splinters now will be taken into a sedimentary process.
Big particles sink, small particles float.
The big, sunk particles will be taken away
and you can make a stone out of them.
The rest will get more time and smaller particles will sink.
You take them, and make a stone... and so on.
I had to do something similar during my studies,
and it sucks.
All that matters is the right timing
and making sure you only get the desired particles to sink or float.
This is why stones always have tolerances
and these should be taken into consideration.
So there is not much for Shapton or Naniwa to do
except for the binder.
Donīt get me wrong, this makes a huge difference
and will have impact on sharpening and polishing results
greetings,
Benny
Benny
Are you so sure on this? I don't know and you could be totally right. If sorting and binders are the only differences it makes you wonder why companies like Norton have not expanded their line by now. I will say, I don't know but would very much like to find out. I was not under this impression at all but I am not at the cutting edge of the ceramic industry.
M
Mike
The binder is something that is quite hard to get right.
There are many things to be taken into consideration.
The first question is:
What binder do I use? The most common one is resin.
Resin is very easy to be used, you just mix in the abrasive, add the hardener,
maybe heat it up and voilá. You can even do this yourself!
(I did, unsuccesfully I might add)
Resin is just a word to describe a liquid that will harden under certain circumstances. It can have properties that are widely spread.
It can be very hard, soft, brittle, elastic... anything you want.
You just have to choose the right resin.
But you have to make sure you have the means to make sure the abrasives will be evenly spread in the resin.
Things like decomposition come into mind.
So you will be forced to choose very carefully.
Another question is;
what type of stone should it be, generally?
Should the stone be porous or should he be "closed".
Should the sharpening particles be surrounded by the binder
(at the sharpening surface) or should the particles stick out?
Next thing will be adding the abrasive,
that already has a tolerance
How much abrasive will I put into these stones.
If it is too much, the stone will crumble and break.
If itīs too little, well it wonīt cut right.
There will be experiments made on how the amount of abrasive per cmē
affects the result on a given object and with given binder properties.
This takes a lot of time.
As far as I know the cutting edge of ceramic industry are cermic fibres.
Those are really nice. I just had to do a test about special ceramics.
I will explain this on TiO2 because it is more simple,
if you wish to know. If you donīt, just overread it =)
You take TiCl4 wich is a water solvant salt and put it into water.
You drench some cellulose fibres in this solution.
The water TiCl4 mixture will get caught in the fibrilles.
You heat up the stuff and the salt will turn into itīs oxide form,
being trapped inside the fibres.
You heat up a bit more and the fibres will burn into carbon wich will turn into CO2 and disappear.
What stays is the TiO2 wich now has the appearance of a fibre.
Those fibres, wich can be produced out of Al2O3, are being used in very,
very expensive honing device in automobile industries.
These are literally cutting fibres.
The reason I explained this is to show, Al2O3 like any crystall can follow a givin form.
But normaly you can not change the way a crystall will grow,
unless you change things like temperature or pressure
during the crystallisation process.
Adding tensides or silicone (thats a patent) and many tiny seed crystals will make the particles
smaller but still, oddly shaped with a given hardnes of Mohs 9.0
(unless you have undesired polycrystalls)
I may, as always, be wrong :)
Benny
Ok Benny,
We are living in an age where ceramics xtals are turning motion into electricity and vice versa and you are clearly saying that a binder seperates the new generation of water stones? And of course we know that many water stone have no binder at all.
We can keep this discussion without much of the jargon because it is not needed unless we know or want to know the answer to the specific question. Not that I don't like that, I do but not here and now. You cited WIKI sources earlier, do you think Shapton is going to post proprietary information to make what cost them 100s of millions of yuen?
I think the simple question remains, are all of the xtals following some basic hexagonal silicate theme only differing in how assembled and sorted, meaning they are all the same or are they more advanced on the nano level and clearly have developed different morphs of xtals with different physical properties.
Mike
Mike I understand what you are saying.
Thatīs exactly what I meant to sayQuote:
and you are clearly saying that a binder seperates the new generation of water stones?
(except for the tolerances in micron sizes)
I would say defenitely yesQuote:
are all of the xtals following some basic hexagonal silicate theme only differing in how assembled and sorted, meaning they are all the same
I would say defenitely not.Quote:
are they more advanced on the nano level and clearly have developed different morphs of xtals with different physical properties.
I am not goint to tell about nanotechnology, or colloidal chemistry
this would be way too time consuming.
Simple Al2O3 xtals have been used in sandpaper and sharpening stones
since the beginning of these :shrug:
Of course shapton will not tell their "secrets" but
you can go and buy loose Al2O3 sharpening particles
from 3M or whoever and bind them yourself.
If you get the binder right, you will have an excellent sharpening stone.
The secrets lie in the binder not the particle itself.
There is no nanotechnology involved to produce xtals of certain shape.
This would be way out of proportion
Shapton, Naniwa... they all do great deals in putting together nice hones.
And most if not all work is done with the mixtures.
The relation of sharpening particles and binder (and maybe something that has no effect on the sharpening process but impacts the feeling)
And the sort of binder used.
All of this is extremely complicated work and takes millions to figure out
As for the non-bond pure ceramic hones,
I am not sure what they actually are.
Idk if it is possible to grow one single white corundum crystall this big.
I think spyderco hones consist of many Al2O3 crystalls
that formed a polycrystall.
Nevertheless those are excotics and would make the discussion
too complicated.
The initial question has been:
Is it possible to produce softer Corundum particles.
I would answer with defenitely no.
Monoxtals of Alumoxide will always be around 9.0 Mohs.
The second question that came up was
Is it possible to create Al2O3 crystalls of certain shape.
I would answer genrally spoken with no.
Those crystalls are being formed by evapourating a Aluminiumhydroxide solution,
like we all grew Salt-xtals by solving salt in water, adding seed crystal and let the water evaporate a bit.
Efforts have succesfully been made to make sure you will get more small particles.
But still they will be splintered and more or less oddly shaped.
But of course I have to make clear that I do not know.
I know what it takes to make these Stones theoretically
but I donīt know how they do it exactly.
If they use nanotechnology to influence the shape and size of their crystals I am wrong :beer1:
benny,
You are well spoken and thank you for reminding me how Al2O3 is refined from principle ores. I am saying that Al2O3 is a starting point and these new stone have more to them. I could be wrong.
M
Mike, don't feel bad. I was wrong once myself. :) Kidding aside, I just was reading the latest in this thread and what comes to mind is that these hone mfgs take their business seriously. The old saw,"build a better mousetrap and the world will beat a path to your door."
Shapton already had success with the M- Series and the Professionals and developed the GlassStones. Now they have gone a step further with the gray glass variation. Naniwa has the Chosera and SuperStones. They keep pushing the envelope and that is really cool.
Benny,
Are you in this industry? If so I will say no more in hopes of rescue from technical minds in that industry. I know I should not hold my breath:rant:
M
Oh no, no :beer2:Quote:
Are you in this industry
I know exactly what you are talking about,Quote:
married 26 years to the same woman this week. I really no how to be wrong, in that field I am expert
being a youngster I only have 4 years from tomorrow!
but still....
we all know the question:
If a tree falls and noone hears it, well did it fall then?
I found out this much more true question:
If a man talks and no woman hears it,
is he still be wrong then? :hmmm:
Benny,
You learned that in short order. Very prodigious.:)
M
I did not have time to read the entirety of this thread. I read the first 4 pages and there was a couple things I wanted to comment on.
First, I use the shapton glass series, and I love the stones. Many people have noted (and I think they were talking about the glass series not the pro) that they raise a slurry quickly. I have not found that to be the case though. They do cut EXTREMELY quickly, so often the 'slurry' type build up you are getting is a high metal shaving content and shouldn't be treated like a beneficial slurry. The microscopic metal content can cause chipping and scratches if you let it get out of control. You are essentially dragging metal shavings across your metal, which as you can imagine is not a good thing.
The scratches that people are talking about the the 16k leaving can be caused by this, but having used the 16k extensively, and having more than one of them, it is a phenomenon of the stone. IMO its a result of the positioning of a random abrasive partical or perhaps its a renegade grit size. I think the fact that its so visible is a combination of what I just said and the fact that overall the bevel is becoming more polished so any inconsistencies will start to become more visible.
The stone material that does 'release' from the stone as you sharpen does not respond like a natural stones will. Partical sizes are pretty uniform and don't break down as easily. IMO with the glass series you will achieve much better results by frequent cleaning and rewetting as you go along. I can pretty much guarantee it. That's just how this stone behaves. Everyone has their personal preference, this won't be everyone's cup of tea, but the stone is awesome at what it does IMO. I think a problem a lot of people could run into is that if you are accustomed to a different type of stone, you may not be used to the speed with which the these cut, so you could spend too much time on the stone. Combine that with the idea that the slurry from these stones is beneficial, like from a nakayama for example, and you could be causing more harm than good.