Getting beyond the Norton and Chinese 12K Hone

[treydampier]

Here is the link to a hone I am considering purchasing to test. .PINNACLE SURGICAL BLACK SHARPING STONE, BRAND NEW!! - eBay (item 110376416205 end time May-12-09 20:25:50 PDT)

I currently hone starting with a Norton 220/1K, 4K/8K and then finish with a chinese 12K. I am looking to take my blades to the next level. I am considering a coticule, but the grit size scientifically is not as fine as the 12K, and they are certainly more expensive. I am also looking into the shapton 16K, or perhaps an arkansas stone like the one in this link. I am curious about what the honemeisters think. I have even looked at the Japanese synthetics but their grit is no higher than the 12K.
I am sure this has been beaten to death, but I am also considering the Spyderco extrafine as well because they make an 8x3 and I have read they compare to the Shapton 16K. I would love to hear your thoughts.

[0livia]

That is a nice size and a great price for the surgical black.
I like the naturals anyway, so I'd take it.
This is a hone that you will probably have forever.
Read here.

On the other hand I don't know Shapton 16 k and the like.

[Utopian]

This is a currently active thread about the novaculite hones.

Regarding the coticule and the science of grit size, you cannot compare the honing characteristics of two hones with the same grit size because the character of that grit will differ. For example, a coticule continually releases grit during honing and the slurry is a critical component of its use as a hone. Such a hone cannot, or should not, be considered comparable to another hone with approximately the same grit size. A Spyderco is not going to be similar in function just because its grit size is close to the coticule.

There is no comparison between a coticule and the Chinese hone.

As another example, the Norton 8K and the Naniwa superstone 8k are supposedly similar in grit, but they don't feel the same. They don't perform the same. Though the grit is likely the same size, the grit may be made of different materials, the stringency of sorting the grit may differ, the binding agent is almost certainly different, and microscopically the Norton appears to be much more heterogenous in composition. They have the same grit but they are very different stones.

[treydampier]

Thanks for the clarification.
I read that thread and hence when I looked at this stone I wanted an opinion. Now, I can buy a 2 piece set of 6x2 coticule (blue and yellow) plus a slurry stone for each for $129 on ebay. I can buy this arkansas stone for $39 plus shipping. Since you and others have more experience, would you buy the cheaper stone, the coticule, Naniwa, or all or none (ie. buy a shapton). The spyderco I know produces a good scratch pattern, and is cheap, but it seems too hard, and the last one I had was extremely difficult to lap. The Naniwa comes in sizes I like and to me are reasonably priced, but I want the best finishing hone for right now. As time goes on I will buy all of them, but the coticules are going fast and are getting pricey, but I keep reading that they are really great and versatile.

Not to split hairs, but which one would YOU pick? I mean this question for everyone reading the forum as well as Utopian. I only ask because I don't want to waste $45 on the arkansas, when it won't be better than what I have. I hear about the coticules all the time and if that is what I need to improve from the 12K then that is what I will buy. I get great shaves on what I have, but since I am selling some razors, they need to be better than what I would use for myself because they are paying a lot of money and should get the best I can offer.
Thanks for taking the time to respond.

[chee16]

i am no expert (seriously i'm not ) but i was under the impression that the black surgical arkansas stones were supposed to perform around the 6k grit, and very slowly at that ( i have one, and it is slow). so if you are thinking that it will be a finishing hone you might want to double check, though i may be wrong. i think you would be more looking for a translucent arkansas as they are supposed to be the finest ( and still slow). i am not sure if they perform finer then the 12k chinese.

at one point i did a lot of searching around to try and find more info on the arkansas stones but again i might be wrong.

[Neil Miller]

I have used a chinese 12K after two coticules, and I believe it gets the edge a little bit keener. The translucent white arkansas stones give a slightly finer edge (in my opinion) than the surgical black, but are quite slow in use - very little metal removing power. Both the black and translucent are classified as "Ultra Fine" and the git size (a misnomer in this context) is often quoted as just 1200+. This means nothing though - its how densely packed together the grains are - the denser the stone the finer the edge it produces. Black and translucent are at the top of the density table for novaculite stones.

Currently I am using a Naniwa 10K superstone and I love it - it works really well and quickly.

Regards,
Neil

[JimmyHAD]

I currently hone starting with a Norton 220/1K, 4K/8K and then finish with a chinese 12K. I am looking to take my blades to the next level.

I would opt for the Shapton 16K.

[Sticky]

I think the Spyderco UF wouldn't give you much more than the Chinese 12k does. I think the UF cuts a bit faster.

Considering your current equipment; I would buy a Shapton 16k, some 0.5 chrome oxide, or maybe 0.3-or-so honing film. The oxide from Hand American is only around 12 to 14 dollars and many people like pastes a lot.

edit: one source for oxide: http://www.japaneseknifesharpeningst...lts.asp?Cat=27