Thread: Grit issues, does any one else see a problem here

I have heard of random particles breaking off stones & marring a finish. I have also heard the least likely stone that happens on is the Shapton GS.

Have you done this a number of times to prove it was not a one of ?

Originally Posted by onimaru55

I have heard of random particles breaking off stones & marring a finish. I have also heard the least likely stone that happens on is the Shapton GS.

Have you done this a number of times to prove it was not a one of ?

I'm going to be going through a testing phase and see if it's something I'm doing or if it is the stone (which I doubt, but can't rule it out yet). I'm been in contact since the start of my post with the guy at shapton and he's given me a few ideas to try. One of the reasons he gave me for my observation seems far out but I have to realize that he is the expert and in not.

Did I miss read ? You lapped a Shapton GS 16 with a DMT 325 ?

Originally Posted by 10Pups

Did I miss read ? You lapped a Shapton GS 16 with a DMT 325 ?

No you did not miss read. If there is a better option then I am ignorant to it. I used the DMT325 since the Shapton lapping plate is also 325. But if there is a better option than I will be glad to hear it. Always looking to better myself.

Please don't misinterpret my ignorance for a condescending question. I have since been to the Shapton site and looked around. I still haven't figured out all the numbering. But the shock of it for me was lapping a glass impregnated with diamonds with a metal plate impregnated with diamonds. My common sense (being right or wrong) had me wondering which plate would win that argument. My thought was " No wonder, the 325 diamonds are stuck to your 16k grit plate."

I'll just sit back and shut up now thanks :<0)

No misunderstanding here. I thought you happened to know of a better lapping option for the 16k. But the 16k along with there other glass stones is not diamond but rather synthetic ceramic bonded to glass plate. Now the lapping plate is a diamond plate bonded to a glass plate and is used only for flattening.

Now for the numbers. Instead of a grit size they go by the particle size in microns and have a mesh size that corresponds to there micron system. The mesh sizes is close to the JIS standard though it is slightly different

As said, if you are making comparisons, you have to compare the same area for the comparison to be valid.
And you are not honing to the edge…

It is not just about grit size…PRESSURE

Here is a great demonstration Same chalk… same Sidewalk… different amounts of pressure.

Having seen it several times, that chalk photo is interesting but I'm not sure how valid it is. Chalk and steel are very dissimilar in mechanical properties, and while excess pressure can easily crumble chalk, it's not likely to cause steel to do the same. While hardened steel is certainly not what I'd call malleable, neither is it friable/crumbly like chalk. Now I think I'm going to have to do some scope photos with varying pressure to see exactly what the results look like.

Yes, dissimilar, but at the same time similar. The difference in PRESSURE causes the difference in depth of scratch pattern. With metal you need more pressure to get the same effect as seen on the chalk. It's not the material but the pressure as pointed in previous post. And that hold true in any field. We are always telling new shavers to watch your pressure, watch it on your strop to not dull the blade, watch it on your face to not get irritation, etc, etc, etc.

Oh certainly it's critical to lighten up on pressure when finish honing, but I'm not so sure it has to do with scratch depth so much as preventing the edge apex from being pushed away from the stone, and perhaps chipping on a microscopic level. I will do some testing and compare scratch depths soon, maybe start a new thread.