Thread: Arkansas Novaculite vs. Belgian Coticule

Has there been much comparison between the Arkansas Novaculite and the Belgian Coticule?

I see many hones mentioned, but little about the Arkansas Novaculite, which I understand is Latin for razor stone. Yet there is more discussion around the coticule’s and Japanese stones

I would suspect these Arkansas Black and Translucent hard stones’ to have characteristics similar to a Belgian Coticule.

Are the Arkansas stones good 'go-to' stones for razors or should they be left to sharpening chisels and knives?

If Chinese 12k stones are slow, Arkansas stones are glacial. They're extremely hard, don't give up slurry easily, and work better with oil than water. They're okay if you can apply some pressure (like with a chisel), but you can't do that with a razor. Honing a razor on one is sort of like honing on glass.

a coti is light years faster then an ark translucent the coti that i use takes about 50 to 100 round trips to finish a razor my translucent which is a fast cutter for a translucent takes about 200 to 400 round trips to finish and thats just my stones both stones you inquired about are natural stones so results will vary but when its all said and done my coti gives a very comfortable edge my translucent gives a refind edge with the same comfort that my coti gives

If you're interested in whetstones like the Ark, Belgian, among many others go to this link and skim the contents. Much info of interest to be mined from the geological survey of Arkansas circa 1892.

Annual report of the Geological ... - Google Books

Thanks for the replies.

I have my coti, and I found some of my dad's Arkansas hard stones, some were used with oil (dark) and some were used with water (translucent).

I was wondering the sequence, and it sounds like I would use my coti following the dilucot method and finish with one of the Arkansas stones. Since I am using only water with the coti, I feel I should also only use an Arkansas that was only used with water. Not sure if mixing results with a water coti with an oil Arkansas would be 'the best' idea.

Any thoughts/comments?

i use oil with my ark translucent if your worried about the stone darking it wont it not a porous stone its the hardest stone i have and the water will just sit on top of the stone

Arkies are used with oil, Coti's water. You'd be better off starting with the Arkies, and using your Coticule as a finisher, not the other way around, IMO. Arkies are more associated with Tools, Knives, etc...Coti is associated with Razors. I have extensive collections of both. I don't use my Arkansas stones for razors, although some guys do.
I find I get a much smoother shave off a Coticule than any Arkansas stone. Also, I don't follow any specific method, like dilucot. You have to learn your individual coticule, every Coti is different, some fast, some slow...etc....

Save your Arkies for your knives, Use your Coticule for your razor, I think you'll be much happier....

Originally Posted by zib

Save your Arkies for your knives, Use your Coticule for your razor, I think you'll be much happier....

That sounds like good advice. I've been using my coti for a while and love the results; was more curious about others experiences around the Arkies since I just found them and wondered the usefulness. The Ark stones I have were my dad's, and he had used the dark with just oil, and the translucent with just water. I do not believe it was an absorption concern, but rather a quick identifier as to which liquid to use with the stone.

I'll have to try them on a couple of test razors I have for refining my skills.

Thanks

Originally Posted by SkyDiver

I would suspect these Arkansas Black and Translucent hard stones’ to have characteristics similar to a Belgian Coticule.

Why would you suspect this?

Or did you really only mean that they may perhaps leave a similar edge?

To a geologist, there is a world of difference between the 2 - coticules are sedimentary rocks with garnets suspended in fossilised clay; whereas novaculites are much harder, metamorphic type rocks.

As they are harder, they are also much slower cutters/polishers than coticules.

Originally Posted by Scipio

Why would you suspect this?

Or did you really only mean that they may perhaps leave a similar edge?

To a geologist, there is a world of difference between the 2 - coticules are sedimentary rocks with garnets suspended in fossilised clay; whereas novaculites are much harder, metamorphic type rocks.

As they are harder, they are also much slower cutters/polishers than coticules.

My statement alone obviously identifies me as a non-geologist
My reference to similarity was toward their both being natural stones, and both need slurry to be effective at different levels. I understand the cutting speed will also be different at a base level.