Thread: How do you test an unknown natural stone?

Of course there will be no naming names, who want to be caught a stone licker!

Anyone got an educated guess about the black rock in my pics?

If someone doesn't lick a stone or two, or get his hands dirty (with slurry) he is not a true a rockhound. I'm not talking about a new disorder that involves licking stones whenever you get a chance, but it doesn't hurt to test a stone or two, although it doesn't help for comparisons between finishers.
Lemur, sorry, no idea about your stone, except, it looks like slate.

What I do is, take a razor you can test with, mine is a blade with a ¼ inch chip missing from the edge & tip.

Hone one half with an 8K synthetic flip over and hone opposite half with a 12K. Or whatever known, high grit stones you have.

Now hone the other unhoned half of each side with the mystery stone slightly overlapping the known grits.

Get the highest magnification you have and bingo, instant Stereo Microscope. The stria is either finer or courser than the know grit. You just want to see the stria you don’t have to bevel set it.

Mark the know grit ends for the nest find. Great Question and responces.

I never heard of the lick test.

Originally Posted by Vasilis

If someone doesn't lick a stone or two, or get his hands dirty (with slurry) he is not a true a rockhound. I'm not talking about a new disorder that involves licking stones whenever you get a chance, but it doesn't hurt to test a stone or two, although it doesn't help for comparisons between finishers.
Lemur, sorry, no idea about your stone, except, it looks like slate.

O.K.,
I will to put all jokes aside on the topic of hone licking on this thread & any further threads, if members who lick their hone/stone would explain why, how , when this is a benefit, Please.

Please explain how a lick test validates a stone in any way, Please.

Vasilis, I get my hands dirty constantly when honing, whether it be from slurry, metal transfer or whatever.

What is your definition of a rockhound, Please?

Ok, it's a finisher! The stone improved the razor's smoothness and sharpness from the 8k. The Henkel out of the 8k was smooth and sharp and gave a very decent 3 pass shave, about 87-90% BBS. After the suspected "Turingian", it gave not as smooth, but sharper for a 3 pass 90-93%.

So today I took it back to the stone and kept at it a bit longer (water only), shaved and the smoothness (from the first shaved off the "Turingian") and sharpness improved for a 3 pass 95-97% BBS. However the smoothness was not as smooth as out of the 8k???? Not bad but not as smooth.

The funny thing is that the Waterville that came out of the 8k not as sharp and smooth as the Henkel, came out of the Zulu smoother and as sharp as the Henkel that was stellar out of the 8k. I did take the Waterville back to the 8k for some more laps, but didn't shave afterwards, then went to the 16k and then my regular Zulu progression (light slury to almost water).

So I'll experiment with the slury, to see if it improves the smoothness.

Yes, I licked all my finishers and they all felt the same. I may have gotten intimate with one of them, I think the Zulu. I couldn't resist the smoothness! Double O

Originally Posted by Suile

I never heard of the lick test.

I've post something about it in the past and I'm think to be the father of this theory.

Licking stones is my usual way to determinate the roughness or fineness of one unknown stone.

Originally Posted by Double0757

Yes, I licked all my finishers and they all felt the same. I may have gotten intimate with one of them, I think the Zulu. I couldn't resist the smoothness! Double O

o boy , this thread is gonna get shut down , you keep talking like that ...

Originally Posted by Hirlau

O.K.,
I will to put all jokes aside on the topic of hone licking on this thread & any further threads, if members who lick their hone/stone would explain why, how , when this is a benefit, Please.

Please explain how a lick test validates a stone in any way, Please.

Vasilis, I get my hands dirty constantly when honing, whether it be from slurry, metal transfer or whatever.

What is your definition of a rockhound, Please?

There is no definition of rockhound. But, in the pursuit of the greatest finisher, any test that could help even a little, wouldn't be a waste not to try it? As I said, it is not very helpful for comparing finishers, but you can feel the difference between a 4k and a 10k stone. And, this test is not new. 100 years ago it was a classic test for comparing stones. The reason it works is, our tongue is very sensitive, you can feel the texture of the surface with a lot more detail than any other test.

Alright , fair enough, I'll take that; but I don't need my tongue to tell me the difference between a 4k & a 10k. I don't believe you do either. Maybe your test would help with a comparison of 10k & 16k.