Thread: naniwa combo vs norton combo

Both will get you at more or less the same place, the difference is mainly in the feedback. I have both (actually the 1-5-8-12 naniwa) but I don't really use the norton since I've got the naniwas. I don't like the porosity of the norton 4k, and that's pretty much my reason - just a matter of a whim which I can afford to have. The dmtc is nice, I have no regrets about getting it even though it's kind of expensive compared to say sandpaper or the norton lapping plate.

Originally Posted by Gamma

In my honing adventures, the 8k Naniwa and 8k Super Stone did not bring a blade to the same place. In fact I used the 8k Naniwa to finish after the 8k Norton until I got a 12k.
I'm not certain about particle size of either - grit alone doesn't tell the whole story. I compared the 8k Norton to the 5k SS after maxing out the same blade on each a couple of times.

Gamma, is this a typo in the first sentence? Did you mean 8k Norton and a 8k Super Stone (commonly abbreviated SS)? I'll get back to you, Gamma.

Originally Posted by Memorael

I read somewhere that the norton 8k grit size is about 3 micron putting it on the JIIS scale at around 4k just for the record.

and...

Originally Posted by randydance062449

I do not think that is accurate.

Randy and I have had the mentor/disciple dance going for awhile. I've touched his hones and he's touched mine. Heck, we've even arranged to have our identical hones touch each other! (Spyderco ultra-fines... sexy scraping...). So, to say we're on intimate terms isn't an exaggeration...

Originally Posted by Gamma

I compared the 8k Norton to the 5k SS after maxing out the same blade on each a couple of times.

A brief history where I'm coming from. I have two combination Norton stones since early 2008. 220/1000 & 4k/8k, the 4k/8k "hecho in Mexico", and ache-oh it IS-oh: the 4,000 is evil, has micro-pits that swarf lodges in and destroys the fine edge of any razor unfortunate enough to travel on it. So I got a Naniwa SS 5k, then a SS 3k. The Naniwa SS 5k was okay, I guess. I didn't like it as the intermediate before the Norton 8k. So I got the Naniwa 3k to bridge between the Norton 1k and Naniwa 5k. Now that I have used it (Naniwas) longer it helps, and now I do the full progression from 220/1000 to Naniwa SS 3k, 5k, then back to Norton, finishing on Spyderco ultra-fine. I felt the Naniwa 5k was not efficient or appropriate as a bridge between the Norton 1k and 8k.

They are softer and wear away faster, deforming under hard razor steel. They require more frequent lapping then the Nortons. They work good, are "comfier" which I attribute to their gel-like release beyond swarf, is that the binder? I guess that's good for honing fine edges, but it is a different hone set-up. I've read of someone being surprised how nice the edge off a Naniwa SS 5k was from their comparison to a Norton 8k, and under the microscope I can believe it. The grit rating system is not close enough to be equivalent.

Originally Posted by gugi

Both will get you at more or less the same place, the difference is mainly in the feedback. I have both (actually the 1-5-8-12 naniwa) but I don't really use the norton since I've got the naniwas. I don't like the porosity of the norton 4k, and that's pretty much my reason - just a matter of a whim which I can afford to have. The dmtc is nice, I have no regrets about getting it even though it's kind of expensive compared to say sandpaper or the norton lapping plate.

I understand about the thirstiness of the Norton 4k, but the highest layer of my own Norton 4k, which was the only part of it that worked right (before I lapped it off) was a fast metal remover and was the perfect bridge in the Norton system. The Naniwas deserve special treatment in regards to their swelling with water. I give the Naniwa Super Stones special attention and always make pencil grids on them before honing, being sure to spray them with water a few times before the initial lapping, keeping track of time (5-10 minutes) and lapping off pencil marks before honing. If my honing takes them out past one razor (rare for me) I'm sure to keep them constantly lapped due to swelling. That means I have to lap and chamfer them several times during use. Not the best for newbies compared to Nortons. But that's as someone who's used to really nice (to me) edges, maybe a newbie wouldn't be so discerning of the final product (edge).

I like that the Naniwa 3k & 5k Super Stones keep water on their surface well, but I don't think they fit into the Norton system as well as Norton's own 4k. I am not a collector of hones, I'd have preferred to just have a functionally complete Norton setup and finish with the Naniwa 12k (don't have one, never used one) or my Spyderco Ultra-Fine. I think Naniwas are trickier for inexperienced honers due to swelling with water, which outweighs the benefit of water on the surface.

Now I like them all, because I've developed an individual relationship to each hone and have in hand a water sprayer, pencil, DMT 8x3 coarse, and chamfer edges with a Spyderco fine on higher-grit hones (as well as smoothing out past lapping with the DMT). But I think Norton-Naniwa differences merit special attention and descriptions and advice in the wiki and discussion (esp. for beginners).

It's hard enough for beginners just getting their honing technique down!

P.S. I don't want an established honing mentor like Randy to be associated too closely with me, I am my own person and can make mistakes and have my own preferences. Don't judge Randy based on my unscrupulous and vile behavior!

Heh... yeah, a typo, sorry 'bout that. Fixed now.

Originally Posted by AxelH

I think Naniwas are trickier for inexperienced honers due to swelling with water, which outweighs the benefit of water on the surface.

I don't agree. My naniwas tend not to be perfectly flat between honings, when they dry out, and I only lap them every now and then, say every 5 honings primarily to get rid of any swarf glazing, just because I'm too lazy for the extra 20 seconds with the DMTC. I haven't really noticed a difference to the resulting edges.
May be you're exaggerating the effect of 'swelling', or may be I'm not inexperienced enough.

I think it's a well established truism that staying with the same line of hones throughout the honing progression works better than mixing different types of hones.

Originally Posted by gugi

I don't agree. My naniwas tend not to be perfectly flat between honings, when they dry out, and I only lap them every now and then, say every 5 honings primarily to get rid of any swarf glazing, just because I'm too lazy for the extra 20 seconds with the DMTC. I haven't really noticed a difference to the resulting edges.
May be you're exaggerating the effect of 'swelling', or may be I'm not inexperienced enough.

I think it's a well established truism that staying with the same line of hones throughout the honing progression works better than mixing different types of hones.

What I'm saying is that I've made a habit of making pencil grids on the naniwas before lapping just before use. If I lap them without water, or just the water during lapping with a DMT 8C, I can see the grid removed that suggests a concavity, lengthwise. If I lap them after 5-10 minutes of water on the surface that concavity (from the graphite removed early in the lapping process) is reduced, or if it was soaked long enough it looks like I've removed a convex surface, lengthwise. Obviously having a slightly convex hone is better than a concave hone, for its effect on the razor's edge. If one is honing a taped razor this may be a benefit as the end of the x pattern strokes helps remove what may be a messy top end of the bevel (other side from the edge) which may be scratchier to a strop if the secondary bevel was made on a coarser hone.

All I'm saying is that I've noticed the difference. You know how it is, personally owning and using a handful of razors and not under the urgency of using the razor being honed, just observing the hone's surface removal, however slight, with a moderate amount of pressure with the tried and true DMT 8C lapper.

Just as the concept went, the longer the duration of use with a Naniwa super stone, despite diligent lapping during use (to keep the hone as flat as possible during that honing session) the greater the degree of "concavity" was perceived through the diagnostic tool in graphite (pencil) grids with a freshly moistened surface.

If someone has a solid methodology to their honing and remains true to that pattern and the edges are good, than great. I've just noticed that the Naniwas do differ from the Nortons in their tendency to swell more dynamically, from discussions on these forums I was led to scrutinize the Naniwas more and use the pencil grids to monitor their level of deformation. I certainly respect both honing systems and I can see the advantage of these 21st century synthetic waterstones for the slow release of binder along with their own slurry for the purpose of honing something as demanding as the edges we shave our faces with.

While increasing the frequency of lapping with the DMT 8C I've been leaving the slurry from the stones and inadvertently diluting them with a few sprays from the water bottle when honing enough on the same stone to experience that. I just get the work done on the first Norton combo stone (220/1000) until the bevel is properly set, utilizing the slurry as best I can (they are thirsty!) to increase the speed of metal removal. The reason I spend more time than I know is really needed on the mid-level hones (which my Naniwa SS 3k & 5k function as) is because I like to remove the scratch pattern and circumvent the need for stepping back down the grits to remove natural dips in the edge.

What I should explain is that these differences are seen very early on in the initial stage of lapping the Naniwa SSs, I make the effort to monitor it for my own understanding. Since these stones are relatively soft and easy to work with (lappability) they are easily trued before use, I'm quite sure you experienced honers give them a thorough enough lapping without resorting to anal retentive grid marking and monitoring as I have done in this thread. Just something I've noted. Of course, due to the sensitivity of the grid marks it is an easy diagnostic tool, a good beginner may very well remove more of the surface than is needed! Which was another reason why I was making the grid marks.

Mountains out of mole hills, hope not to dissuade any beginners from purchasing Naniwas. What Onimaru said about the Spyderco ultra-fine worries me, but what I recently experienced with a Wapienica in gradually improving an edge off a Norton 8k with the Spyderco UF makes me wonder how it is such a good finisher... 2k from any system couldn't possibly give me the quality of shave I'm experiencing from that hone.

I'm going to experiment with slurries on the non-porous Spydercos from a BBW/coticule combo bout and a barber hone bout and a Chinese 12k bout (PHIG) and look at that with a microscope or two thanks to help from some kind souls in these forums. I'm going to school now and have more important things to do with my time (already got shavers) but this is a personal project.

I don't bother with pencil grid - the swarf on the surface does the exact same thing. They cut quite fast and my jumps between grits are big enough that even one or two razors leave enough metal on the surface to make visible difference.
I think so far I've honed may be 200 razors on mine (from chipped edges, so that's a lot of work on the 1k) and for the last 100 I have lapped as I said roughly every 5 razors. The 12k though gets typically only 5-20 laps per razor, the 5k and the 1k get significantly more. There's no appreciable wear on any of the hones, either.

I'm absolutely certain that perfectly flat hones are ideal for perfectly straight and perfectly ground razors, honed with perfectly even strokes. Perfection has been fairly elusive though, and in my experience the dominating problems have been from the razors, and my strokes automatically compensate for that and I suppose for any problems with the less than perfectly flat hone surface as well.

Originally Posted by AxelH

What Onimaru said about the Spyderco ultra-fine worries me, but what I recently experienced with a Wapienica in gradually improving an edge off a Norton 8k with the Spyderco UF makes me wonder how it is such a good finisher... 2k from any system couldn't possibly give me the quality of shave I'm experiencing from that hone.

The Spydie UF is a baked ceramic & a different animal. It is not equal to 2k waterstones. It is more like a barber hone & as such its surface finish & pressure used is crucial. Particle sizes of Coticules are also quite large yet are also classed as finishers.

Originally Posted by AxelH

...snip...
I think Naniwas are trickier for inexperienced honers due to swelling with water, which outweighs the benefit of water on the surface
....snip...

good point... yet.

Not too tricky if you know the trick.

Wet your DMT run some figure eights (2 or 3)
on the Naniwa. Then hone the razor diluting the slurry
to clear water as you go. In the one min that
this takes for one razor swelling is not an issue.

Do let the hone dry slowly between use. I now wrap mine
in parchment paper (kitchen stuff) to keep rubbish
off the surface. Plastic keeps them too wet for too long.
Reserve plastic for those folk that use them day in and day out.

For a touchup I have no problem with
using a Naniwa 12k dry and occasionally
rubbing it clean under running water when
done. In fact using a Na12k as a weekly/ fortnightly
five or six stroke dry barber hone like touchup hone
does work very well.

My "trick" is not the only one. It works for me.

I never had problems with Super Stones swelling or not being flat enough.

I have the Naniwa lapping stone and superstone 3k, 5k, 8K and 12k. I get a great honing on them without worrying about roughing up the spines. I also have no issues with swelling or them not being flat. I lap them about every 5 honings.

Pabster