Thread: Finishing Hone ~ .5 Paste

I prefer a pasted strop or in my case Balsa paddle with chrome ox to final finishing on a stone because I don't think my nervous system is steady enough to do it perfectly, a strop be it leather balsa or felt will have some give to it and produce a more uniform edge. I know my hands have more than .5 micron of jitter especially when honing after a few cups of coffee! So for me it's C12k (PHIG) or Escher, then chrome paddle.

Originally Posted by rodb

I prefer a pasted strop or in my case Balsa paddle with chrome ox to final finishing on a stone because I don't think my nervous system is steady enough to do it perfectly, a strop be it leather balsa or felt will have some give to it and produce a more uniform edge. I know my hands have more than .5 micron of jitter especially when honing after a few cups of coffee! So for me it's C12k (PHIG) or Escher, then chrome paddle.

I on the other hand have an extra cup of coffee. I find the nervous vibration helps
me hone and minimized the development of a burr.

On a more serious note the OP commented that he disliked cleaning
paste from his strops. While this may need to be done it is not
an urgent task. The steel removed by the abrasive in pastes will
oxidize and add to the abrasive character of the strop. i.e. iron oxides
will polish steel as will the micro carbides that most hard steel has.

The accumulation of swarf will also bury abrasive particles such
that less and less is exposed, reducing the scratch depth that
any grain can produce. Further over time the exposed grit will dull
resulting in an activity that is kin to a finer material.

I might note that the grit in a hone will slurry out of the matrix and
a half micron grain will roll on the surface making a half micron scratch.
The same grain on a strop gets pushed into the balsa or leather and
only has a portion is exposed. Buried in a soft strop the grit will get
pushed deeper into the strop material by the steel. The same grain
in a hone is held firm and will cut deeper into the steel than it
would on a soft strop material.

There is also the "bed of nails" effect with any hone or abrasive strop.
As a larger number of nails (grit bits) interacts with the steel the less
pressure individual grains can apply to the steel to deform and cut the
steel. As the grit size decreases the more and more grains of
grit touch the steel reducing the effective pressure and resulting
scratches.

An experiment might involve a scrap sheet of glass a sandbox and
a flat bottom kitchen pan. Place the clean pan on clean glass
and move it. Note the lack of scratches. Place the pan on top of
a pile of sand on the glass and move it about. Note the lack of scratches.
Now clean the pan and glass and place exactly one grain of sand on
the glass and place the pan on top of that grit grain and move the
pan back and forth. Note the deep scratches. Next try a teaspoon
of talc powder and compare with a teaspoon of sand.

We could also explore round objects like marbles and ball bearings.

This grit size, grit composition, grit density and matrix material is the magic
that makes one hone better than another vendor for a specific task.

One closing comment is that a knob of stiff paper can be
used to rub clean the surface and make room for a modest application
of fresh paste/ spray and thus keep a pasted strop (felt, leather or balsa)
live. When that fails a little sand paper can clean the surface.

And that no hard clean hone can hone as fine or polish
as well as a pasted strop at the same grit.

In order to fresh up my razors I use my escher, which is rather thin (30mm) and uncomfortable in my hand. But more and more often I turn to C12k or local russian stone with similar grit. Plus strop.

One thing I think we really need to do is refer to "equivalent" grit when we're talking about naturals--i.e. how fine the edge would be if it came off a synthetic of known grit, rather than trying to actually give it a rating. Coticule garnets are 5-15 um in diameter, but used w/ water, most will leave an edge in the 8-12k range as far as fineness/smoothness goes. THat way we have a sort of reference, since naturals don'w really have anything like a grit rating. THis I think would make for a much easier comparison of finishing properties than trying to "guess" the "grit level", which will vary in naturals.

Actually, hard naturals will sort of do the same "bed of nails" thing too--the particles are deeply imbedded in the stone & will leave very shallow cuts. AS far as pastes being finer than stones of the same grit level, I'm pretty sure that might be an individual thing too.

how fine the edge would be if it came off a synthetic of known grit

I believe there would be a problem as well. Which of the sytnhetic stones has a known grit?
The Norton 8k? DMT 8k? Naniwa 8k?
All of these are of known grit but give different results.

What we do is try to turn discrete data into continous data.
Discrete data is data collected with the senses of a person/operator. The operator has to evaluate the stone and assign it to a category i.e.:

• Sets bevel good/not good
• puts on a shaving edge/not

Continous data is produced with a measuring device that gives a clear value.
The device does not think in categories but in a continous fashion gives you a number
with its corresponding dimension (i.e. 1.500 JIS). It may even be doubted if the data manufactuerers can capture are continous.

The matter of the fact is if a person evaluates a stone with his senses alone,
he will create discrete data and has to think in categories.
The mesh of the categories can be very small i.e. cuts better than Naniwa 5.000 and is finer than Naniwa 2.000, but the smaller the mesh the higher the operators level of skill must be.
Since we learned that grit ratings are not relyable themselfes one should compare
a natural stone with stones from one manufacturer only and specify
wich stone he compared them to.
It wouldn´t make any sense saying something like:
Cuts slower than DMT 8.000 but shaves worse than Naniwa 10.000,
so it must be a 9.000....
The goal should be to assign the stone to a usefull category,
one that I believe is even more usefull than grit ratings.
One that tells you if you can set a bevel with refine it or shave off of it.
Everything else (especially when it comes to shaving) comes down to personal preference anyway


The most simple categories to evaluate a natural stone would look like this

With water:

• Sets a bevel in reasonable time/not
• Shaves arm hair/not
• Pops arm hair/not
• gives HHT/not
• shaves nicely/not

If a category is assigned cross checking with other stones of this category may be done,
but the collected data increasingly becomes unrelyable and biased


Personal preference:

• Sets a bevel quicker than
• Shaves arm hair more smooth than
• Pops arm hair more smooth than
• gives HHT more smooth than
• shaves more smooth than

Originally Posted by Zelenbakh

In order to fresh up my razors I use my escher, which is rather thin (30mm) and uncomfortable in my hand. But more and more often I turn to C12k or local russian stone with similar grit. Plus strop.

If a small hone is uncomfortable in the hand consider making
a stand/ holder for it.

Take a scrap of 2"x4" and some lath. Cut and
glue the lath to the top of the 2x4 to hold the
stone. Then build a bed for the hone. If
a 2x4 is too use what ever fits.

In the old days they would bed/glue a hone
with pitch, today it might be easier to make
a bed with epoxy. But do not glue it to the
bed yet. Wrap the hone with multiple layers
of cling wrap and let the epoxy harden. The
goal is to make a stand that fits the hone well
enough to use. Later if you 'love' the bed varnish
it and glue the hone to it.... Silicon caulk can
also work to make a 'bed' for an uneven based
old hone. Plumbers putty will also make a
"bed", even plaster of paris, drywall patch
and a host of other common materials....
Just do not glue an expensive rock to anything
permanently until you know exactly what you want.