Thread: Japanese natural hone help!!!

There don't seem to be any layers now, and definitely nothing is flaking off. Like ominaru55 said, maybe it just wasn't prepared for sharpening or flattened at all lol. I still wont buy one from the seller again as its too risky.

The only part i can sorta feel is that white spot you can see in the dry stone. I think after use and more lapping that will disappear though. I really thought that this was going to be a through away stone though! But i can get a mirror edge off it.

Originally Posted by onimaru55

Brighty, I read the title of this thread & thought OMG the stone I sold him exploded or something but as I read on things became much clearer

The new surface looks much better. If you asked I would have suggested lapping the hell out of it but you already did. Yes they are hard eh
I agree with thebigspendur, it looks 'weathered' to break up like that. Extremes of water & heat are a Jnats worse enemy.

NEVER SOAK JNATS. NEVER PUT THEM IN THE SUN TO DRY & WIPE ANY EXCESS WATER OFF THEM AFTER USE.

If the lines are not chipping the razor they are not 'toxic'.. It is common for some stones eg Okudo Suita, which this one resembles, to have these lines. It is not so common to use them on razors but if they work without damage why not.

I was told in this thread that soaking a hard Jnat is ok to make it release slurry quicker:
http://straightrazorpalace.com/hones...ama-asagi.html

Maksim liked the post...
Now I am reading don't soak them ever?

Originally Posted by Disburden

I was told in this thread that soaking a hard Jnat is ok to make it release slurry quicker:
http://straightrazorpalace.com/hones...ama-asagi.html

Maksim liked the post...
Now I am reading don't soak them ever?

I did never sad that !
I soak all my hard stones and in fact i have 2 in the water constantly 2 year or so and they did not melted yet
I dont know where that myth come from (probebly from people that did not try it ) that you cant soak Naturals, i know many people in JP that do that too and i got it recommendet by miners, but people can choose what they want to do with they stones.
I just dont belive in it becose i did try it and nothing happend !

But if your layer crombels like on stone from OP i will probbebly not soak it. But i never use stones like that anyway.

Sorry for crapy speling writing from the phone

Originally Posted by maxim207

I did never sad that !
I soak all my hard stones and in fact i have 2 in the water constantly 2 year or so and they did not melted yet
I dont know where that myth come from (probebly from people that did not try it ) that you cant soak Naturals, i know many people in JP that do that too and i got it recommendet by miners, but people can choose what they want to do with they stones.
I just dont belive in it becose i did try it and nothing happend !

But if your layer crombels like on stone from OP i will probbebly not soak it. But i never use stones like that anyway.

Sorry for crapy speling writing from the phone

no, you liked a post by the poster, I Didn't mean to say you said that. I just figured if you liked the post you agreed with the soaking and I trust your opinions over most people.

Thanks!

Nop i cant not see that i liked it
Maybe some mistake there
But i like yours now

Look at it this way. If I'm wrong what is the worse case scenario.?
On the other hand. If I'm right ? What is the worse case scenario.?

Thats why you have people like me to test it for you

I haven't soaked my Maruichi Asagi its just very very hard and slow and slurry building takes forever on it even with a hard Ozuku Nagura.

If it is on wooden base i will not soak it ether, they tend to go of the stone when they are in water

Bright
I would like to see a clear photo of the back of the stone if possible and from one side at least. The stones mined around Kyoto for sharpening are sedimentary formations that have been hardened by compression and indirect exposure to volcanic heat. The unique nature of sedimentary stone is this stratification or layering of material, and the miners are well aware of the attributes of following the natural stratified grain when prying out and wedging the distinct layers or strata free. The dozens of distinct stratafied layers within the mine are not blasted out or dug out with a shovel but are instead peeled away from each other with picks, bars and wedges. This is done carefully so that the pieces come out as large as possible and all the while following the grain of the stone and never against it.

Every time the stone gets picked up and handled by the miner it gets smaller, beginning within the mine where it is judged, tapped, sounded. And while any hard skin "kiwa" or softer fleshy stone is knocked off with a type of hatchet the grain is always followed. By the time the stone gets to the mine entrance it is half the size, and the trip down the mountainside finds the stone even more refined, shaped and smaller. Usually no sawing is done on the mountain side, only chisels and picks and hatchets are used.

The stone you have if I am not mistaken was cut on all 6 sides by a saw, and instead of following the natural grain of the stone, it was instead mapped out and cut on the bias of the grain, like at an angle to the grain. Doing this exposes the stratification at its weakest, the end grain. And depending on the angles, the end grain will flake off at all kind of angles in little chips. The chips will look wedge shaped and somewhat flat, again depending on the angle.

Processing a stone in a manner like this is obviously going against the natural geometry, and was probably done in order to fashion and salvage the largest possible finished stone from an odd shaped piece of raw stock. In not taking into account the inherent qualities of the stratification the processor ended up with an inferior large product, where as he/she maybe could have ended up with a smaller superior product if the grain had been followed.

I am suggesting that if your stone was indeed cut on the bias then you will continue to have this flacking problem flare up from time to time. If the stone is cut on the bias the granular consistancy on the working surface of the stone will represent many different layers of compressed material sticking up as end grain, and thereby providing spotty and unpredictable sharpening qualities at best, and flacking at worst.

Su lines are not bad in and of themselves and are usually the result of an intrusion of water borne minerals transported as seepage at some time early in the stones formation. I have some stones in my collection with these tight fine lines that are epic finishers, but when coupled with a bias grain or converging lines these su lines can become liabilities. On the other hand if the stone was cut with the grain in mind then the su would be represented as an intrigual part of the overall homogeneous working surface.

The really great stones are homogeneous from side to side, end to end and front to back. Of course not even e-rays can see the center of the stone regarding granular make-up, core samples are out, but with some training and handling deductions can be made. All the above is in regards to consistancy, cutting qualities are a different matter. The actual cutting qualities of a stone can not be enhanced or mimicked. Someone might suggest that diamond dust or fairy dust from Tinkerbell can make a dynimite stone from a fake. If that is the case then you might just as well use a factory flattened ceramic tile from Home Depot with you magic dust rather than an imported natural no matter from which country.

If the stone was not that expensive you might keep it as a sample and a reminder. good luck. Alx