Thread: Compare Shapton 16k with Spyderco UF?

I was wondering how does the Spyderco UF compare with the Shapton 16k as a finishing stone, I presume that the UF is about 14k , Has anyone both?

The short answer is that they do not compare.

For me personally, and I may be alone in this, I still own and use the Shapton 16k, my Spyderco UF has long since been sold off. It's a personal thing, I just could not get along with the *feel* of the Spyderco. Others who do get along with it are apparently getting great results, one gent that I trust implicitly compares his Spyderco UF favorably to the Shapton 30K which is high praise indeed. You cannot really talk about a grit rating with the Spyderco hone... it's a solid chunk of ceramic, the Shapton in comparison is like a Spyderco hone crushed into micron sized particles and mixed with a resin binder. The Shapton is meant to be resurfaced regularly, the Spyderco is what it is and just needs to be cleaned as it was not meant to be resurfaced though some have done so using a diamond hone (I did, and it was murder on my D8C and didn't improve things as far as I could tell).

So if you ask me, I'll recommend the Shaptons over the Spyderco hones any day but I won't knock the Spyderco hones.

Regards

Christian

The kaptain's got a good point: they don't compare


The UF, the 8x2" version, was the first finisher I bought, and got so and so results from it at first, after reading a post on a another board about how resurfacing the hone would improve it's performance I resurfaced it with a DMT E. Since I didn't have any other finishers to compare the results with I ended up buying a coticule, the Shapton GS 16K and a Nakayama and played with those for a while. Recently I decided to finish some razor on the UF again, and I must say that I'm impressed with the results I got from it, it gives me smoother shaves than the GS 16K and the edges is scary sharp. So my revisit got me thinking that I started to look for other options too soon.

The UF:

- has little/no feedback
- will stay flat because it's a fired ceramic
- is slower than the 16K


The Shapton 16K:

- has good feedback
- fast
- will require lapping



As for the polishing capability of the two hones, Tim Zowada has some pics of a UF polished edge here, and the 16K has a reputation for being a great polisher, but I haven't seen a study witch included the 16K and the UF so it's hard to tell exactly which is the best polisher.


I believe the 16K has the broadest user base here, as the UF can be a little tricky to get to work and the low amount of feedback it gives the user can be frustrating, but once I got the UF resurfaced it works really well.

The posters above are giving good advice. I went from the Chinese 12K to the Spyderco and saw much improvement to the edge plus was much faster than the Chinese 12K. I then went from the Spyderco to the Shapton 16K and seen much improvement in the edge and again it was even faster than the Spyderco. The Chinese 12K and Spyderco will give you an excellent edge but will take much longer than the Shapton 16K.

bj

I have used the Spyderco hones: even with water, they don't give very good feedback compared to naturals if you use as directed (dry). They give one hell of an edge though.

Something folks don't talk about is the fact that they need to be lapped every so often or it slows it's cutting action to a CRAWL.

If you think about it, the sharp edges of a ceramic hone break loose like Shaptons, Nortons, naturals since they are solid matrix. Yes they are very hard ceramic, but it still wears down.

I found that if I lightly dressed it with a DMT like pocket hone, I could whip up a light slurry, expose new, sharp media, and make it super fast at metal removal. I was so excited about my "discovery", I made a thread about it.

http://straightrazorpalace.com/basic...er-slurry.html

If you can find one for cheap, I think it makes an awesome finishing hone. If money is no object, go for one of the high class Eschers, or Coticules, or Nakayama. Better feedback, and more forgiving on the face.

Hell, I don't even use mine anymore... I just can't seem to let it go though. I just imagine there will be a time when I really NEED it, and then it won't be there!

Originally Posted by 2Sharp

The Chinese 12K and Spyderco will give you an excellent edge but will take much longer than the Shapton 16K.

bj

Agree here. Both the Chinese 12K and UF are very slow cutters. I can get more out of 10 strokes on the Shapton Glass 16K than 30-50 strokes on the other two.

So many stones.........So many razors.........I LOVE IT!!!!!

Have fun,

Lynn

Thanks for the help, I'll try a UF first so.

I'm just after deciding to try straights and have sent for a Belgian yellow, Chinese 12k and have a Spyderco Fine already (which I've used for knifes and am amazed at the shap edge it produces). That selection should keep me entertained for a while.

The edge pictures from the Zowada study cited above speak volumes about the UF's finishing capabliity. I have been very pleased by the shaving results from UF edges but am also very curious whether the Shapton produces a superior edge. Since I only hone for personal use time is not a consideration but only whether the edge is superior in terms of closeness and comfort.