Thread: First hone - Spyderco Ultrafine?

Originally Posted by Sticky

If a Fine could be turned into an Ultra-fine by simply lapping it, then you may be certain that Spyderco would not use a different manufacturing process for them. Especially since they already lap the UF in manufacture.

No doubt, but I do wonder what the comparative results would be... For example (and yes, I do understand Spyderco does not use grit size but just for discussion):

Let's say a Medium - unlapped would yield an edge we could compare to one done on a 600 grit hone, a Fine one that would compare to a 2000 grit and a UF to one on 10000 grit

But once lapped the numbers change upward to Med - 800 grit, Fine - 8000 grit and UF - 12000. Now the effective grit of the Fine stone is becoming comparable to the stock UF..... This is all purely conjecture, trying to correlate your findings with the various things Sal has said about these ceramics. I do tend to trust Sal when he speaks of such things (and they are WAY beyond my ability to prove or disprove)

Originally Posted by Sticky

My previous link is to my previous post about how you will get a different finish and cutting rate from those hones when lapped on an identical diamond plate. Tested and repeatable results. Test it yourself.

I read your results. Very interesting. While I am able to lap the Fine stone, I really have no analytical way to evaluate either the surface of the stone nor the edge produced on it. Perhaps this is something Mr. Zowada would want to undertake (in his spare time )??? I would be very interested to see a series of edges on an unlapped Fine compared to those produced on a lapped Fine as, per Sal, I seriously doubt they would be the same. But perhaps they would? Is that your position?

Originally Posted by Sticky

A different density and a different binder and a different firing process does indeed result in a different cutting ability, regardless of surface finish. You could cut 1/8" grooves 1/8" deep across a Fine or an Ultra-fine hone to give them a massive change in surface finish. They would both continue to give a finish identical to one without such a change.

I'm not sure I concur with that but I really can't dispute it either. It seems that such grooves would not impact the surface at all (save to reduce it). I'd consider a surface finish change to be less severe and more pervasive.

Ken

Originally Posted by kbuzbee

No doubt, but I do wonder what the comparative results would be... For example (and yes, I do understand Spyderco does not use grit size but just for discussion):

Let's say a Medium - unlapped would yield an edge we could compare to one done on a 600 grit hone, a Fine one that would compare to a 2000 grit and a UF to one on 10000 grit

But once lapped the numbers change upward to Med - 800 grit, Fine - 8000 grit and UF - 12000. Now the effective grit of the Fine stone is becoming comparable to the stock UF..... This is all purely conjecture, trying to correlate your findings with the various things Sal has said about these ceramics. I do tend to trust Sal when he speaks of such things (and they are WAY beyond my ability to prove or disprove)

It is well w/in your ability to test. Do as I did:

• Lap both
• shave from the Fine, no stropping
• sharpen on the Ultrafine and shave again, no stropping

I read your results. Very interesting. While I am able to lap the Fine stone, I really have no analytical way to evaluate either the surface of the stone nor the edge produced on it. Perhaps this is something Mr. Zowada would want to undertake (in his spare time )??? I would be very interested to see a series of edges on an unlapped Fine compared to those produced on a lapped Fine as, per Sal, I seriously doubt they would be the same. But perhaps they would? Is that your position?

Yes, you have an analytical way to test the edge produced on either hone. Try these tools:

• the TNT (this one takes a fine feel to detect a F vs. UF difference)
• the HHT
• the "mow hair" test
• the TPT
• the shave test

My position is as clearly stated previously. The two stones are distinctly different, lapped or un-lapped. You get a usable progression either way. The only major change is in flatness, on my specimens.

I'm not sure I concur with that but I really can't dispute it either. It seems that such grooves would not impact the surface at all (save to reduce it). I'd consider a surface finish change to be less severe and more pervasive.

Exactly my point, 1/8" grooves are a major change in surface finish. Much more so than a simple lapping will ever be. Based on your last paragraph, we seem to be in agreement that surface finish "would not impact the surface at all".

In the final analysis, don't trust Sal or me. Test it yourself. We all look forward to your test results

Originally Posted by RMC_SS_LDO

...
Again, I hope these do not require lapping. If they do, I will be begging someone here to borrow a DMT to lap them since I would guess sand paper would be useless!
...

JoshEarl does lap barber hones for a fee and he has a XX DMT that he might be willing to use on a Spyderco (might be a one-time thing maybe)...

Originally Posted by Sticky

In the final analysis, don't trust Sal or me. Test it yourself. We all look forward to your test results

I take your point. The next time I'm in the lapping mood I'll take a crack at the Fine and let you know what I see.

Thanks for the input!

Ken