Originally Posted by
English
It's funny about the spyderco UF.
I tried one before they became fashionable and reviewed on the shaving forums. I was comparing it against my coticule.
I took it back to the shop for a full refund. For me it didn't compare. Maybe they have improved them.
What I didn't like was the lack of feed back, the final edge was not to my liking and for me at least not as sharp as the coticule. It clogged with metal shavings far too quickly for my liking and didn't self clean. At the time it cost $150. All in all, not good at all in my opinion. For the money I didn't think it compared with a coticule and I regarded it as a very expensive polishing hone. I actually got a better polish from a three line Austrian swaty baerbers hone which cost me $5.
The coticule on the other hand has a many advantages.
First and foremost it is a very flexible stone.
Used with slurry from a small rubbing coticule it will cut quickly at about a 6000 to 8000 grit level. Used without a slurry but just clean water it will polish at about a 8000 to 10000 grit level.
It polishes a blade leaving a grippy sharp edge. Not the smoothest but a good balance between grippy and smooth. 50 laps on a leather strop by somebody who knows what they are doing is usually sufficient extra polish to satisfy the most fastidious shaver.
It is also self cleaning and the face refreshes constantly in use. It's easy to lap.
For the last two centuries it has been acknowledged as a superb razor hone.
It has one disadvantage and that is because of its scarcity, it is quite expensive. Mind you so are the spyderco's.
Anything a spyderco might do in the right hands, can be achieved by running the blade across a newspaper or a chromium oxide pasted hone. I just don't see were this ceramic brings a new dimension to razor honing. I also think at the $20 it would be an expensive polishing option.
Just my two pence worth.