Thread: Finishing Hone ~ .5 Paste

oops i understand now thanks for the math lesson yeah i was reading it as 92. micron insted of .92 how i got off track is looking at the bottle it said 0.5-60,000 now i just dont see how that could be if the shapton is 30,000 and thats ,49 -30,000

I´m glad we figured that out

Did you read my PDF file?
If it´s too complicated I would be glad to help you, but I am (of course) asking you to try and understand it first

yes i read it i guess that would explain the bottle different grit ratings

I agree that you cant really compare a paste to a hone. An Escher is about 14k grit but the edge it gives is waaay better than paste IMHO. Coticules are 8-10k and I prefer a coticule edge to paste as well.

Its really down to trying a load of stuff out and seeing what you prefer really! If I was going to use a paste it would be 0.5 CrOx and for finishing hones I'd use either my Nakayama Maruichi or Thuringian/Escher. I think its an Escher but its lost all but a tiny bit of the label so I have no idea! I like to tell myself that it is..!

Originally Posted by sebell

The Shapton GS 30k purports to be 0.49 microns, but the
results (and use) is different from 0.5 CrO, which I assume
is also different than 0.5 diamond. I'd wager that you'll get
different results from 0.5 diamond pastes vs. spray as well

Pastes are much more affordable than the 30k stone...

- Scott

Then there is the whole issue of monocrystalline vs polycrystalline diamonds.

Originally Posted by PonderingTurtle

Then there is the whole issue of monocrystalline vs polycrystalline diamonds.

Once again proof that if you pry the lid off a can of worms the only thing that will contain those worms is a larger can.

And there is always the possibility that the bottle of Chromium Oxide pictured is mis-labled and should actually indicate .5 micron at 30,000 grit........

Originally Posted by Lynn

And there is always the possibility that the bottle of Chromium Oxide pictured is mis-labled and should actually indicate .5 micron at 30,000 grit........

And then there is the issue of what does .5 micron mean. Is that a mean particle size or a max particle size. What is the distribution of particle sizes as well away from a mean number.

With out assumptions made by what shapton means by their size it is hard to directly compare it to anything else.

And that shapton uses a completely different grit rating system.
Listen, it´s very simple. The grit rating system numbers do not compare and do not indicate what the stones gonna be like.
It is like the 5 megapixel camera included in my HTC Desire HD. 5 megapixel sounds great, but the pictures are shitty.
What do we learn from that? Our affinity to simple numbers that tell us buy or no buy, or good or no good, make us vulnerable to misconceptions and misguidance.
It is advisable to learn what system lies behind these numbers to fully understand (or understand that you can not fully understand it).

On the bright side, it seems not to make a huge difference.
The 30.000 Shapton (or 12.000 Naniwa) and a 50.000 diamond paste both are excellent for finishing,
regalrdless of wich ones finer, or what the number really means

Originally Posted by Lesslemming

Listen, it´s very simple. The grit rating system numbers do not compare and do not indicate what the stones gonna be like.

That needs to be said again and again and maybe one more time again...

The grit numbers for the Shaptons compare to the Shaptons of that series...
The grit numbers for the Naniwas compare to the Naniwas in that series you cant even compare a Naniwa SS 1k to a Naniwa Chosera 1k or both the 10k's
The Nortons compare to the Nortons and the Kings to the Kings

The Naturals when compared to a stone from the same mine 3 feet away can be different..
Barber's Hones Compare to nothing I have seen yet..

Basically the only use I have found for the numbers on the hones is, when I am making a run up the hones in that series, it helps me keep them in order...

Now toss in all the variables with each paste and it pretty much becomes a joke...

I know you don't want to hear this again but as many of you are so fond of saying "Honing ain't Rocket Science" so why are you trying to make it so

Here is something I have learned over the last few years I think maybe from that Lynn guy, he knows a thing or two

"The more razors you hone the better you get" "The more you hone the more things you try, and the more things you try, the more you learn"