who said I made these comparisons in one day? ;)
Like I said, I almost went through all possible setups available in europe
(that is Shapton Pro 2k, 5k, 8k, 12k; Naniwa Super 1k, 2k, 3k, 5k, 8k, 10k; Naniwa Chosera 1k, 5k, 10k; Cerax/Suehiro 1k, 3k, 6k, 8k (gold); [King 1k, 6k];
and several naturals, mostly finishers.)
Quickness, here you are right, is a tricky thing to compare.
It can be described as the time a stone of one specific setup takes to erase the scratches (or teeth)
of the nexp coarse stone from the same set.
I would call this relative speed.
But this does not necessary indicate cutting power!
Cutting power is either the time it takes to set a complete bevel (and/or erase a microbevel),
or for finer stones the time it takes a stone in the polishing ~8k range to erase one specific scratch pattern.
I chose the hardest scratch pattern so far, the Chosera 5k.
The naniwa super 8k is capable of erasing the scratch makrs completely but it takes quite a few circles.
The Shapton GS HC 8k was not capable of doing so.
Therefore I think it lacks a bit of absolute cutting power.
This is important if one wants to compare or mix stones from different companies.
Maybe, and thatīs what I am hoping for, the HC turn out to be a quick system, where each stone is able to erease the sets previous ones scratches.
That would make it a quick system.
But be aware, I am in no way taking this as finalized and determined,
neither should you! This is just my way of examination for sharpening systems and stones in search for the set of stones
that will give nice feedback, polish brightly and give keen edges.
And note I donīt have thousands of razors, just a couple of old ones and new ones.
So I wonīt comment on differences in hardnes. But I think I got some quite hard buggers, like Wacker, Thiers Issard,
and some of those "softer" vintage ones. Although these have slight impact on the cutting power of a stone,
I think this impact would be on all stones, so they would be comparable, again.
I donīt quite understand the coticule slurry question.
If I set a bevel with heavy or normal slurry (not diluting)
I get a very matte bevel. Under the loupe I can see chaotic scratches like a wire mesh.
Under microscopic magnification a scratch pattern becomes evident.
(if diluting the slurry, the scratch pattern becomes more chaotic, and scratches stay shorter)
For illustration a picture from this
blog:
http://hocktools.files.wordpress.com...2/500x2-up.jpg
If I jump to the Naniwa 8k for several circles,
the overall polish improves dramatically.
With the naked eye one could see a bright 3d luster.
Under a loupe some single scratches are still left,
that under the microscope turn out to be leftovers from the bevel setting.
What I think happens is that the SS8k is capable of removing the shorter, unoriented scratches quickliy,
but lacks the cutting power to remove deeper scratches instantly.
But if I stay on the ss8K it will eventually be able to remove even those.
The shapton HC 8k does not give a deep dark luster after the cuticule with slurry.
It removes superficial scratches and leaves a good finish, that is dissorted with a chaotic scratch pattern, leftovers from the cutting action of the coticule.
You can see under the microscope the HC 8k was trysing to polish the surface, and did so on spots were the sratches were shallow,
but failed to remove deeper scratches.
What does it say about the HC 8k?
Not much. What I think is a.) Naniwa Super 8k has more cutting power, and leaves a comparable finish b.) a coticule with heavy to medium slurry should not necessarily be used before a finisher c.) the absolute cutting power of the HC 8k might be compensated, if it plays more nicely with its team mates HC4k and so on.
