Can a person set a bevel on a Norton 4K, or does one need a 1K? Thank you for all responses.
Printable View
Can a person set a bevel on a Norton 4K, or does one need a 1K? Thank you for all responses.
Yes you can set on a 4k without any problem
However restoration and bevel setting are two different things or rather a different degree of the same operation...
IE:
A new Dovo = Bevel set
A thrashed e-baby with an uneven edge = Restoration
Now you can do either with a 4k but it will take 4 times as many laps than a 1k to do the same metal removal...
+1 to what Glen said. I'm mighty glad to have a DMT 1200 for the tough ones. :)
+1 on the very essence of what Glen said...
but not on the notion that 1K is 4 times faster than a 4K. It's considerably faster than that.
particle size of a Norton 1k=14 micron (according to Norton)
particlz size of a Norton 4K=3 micron (also according to Norton)
Since where talking about 3 dimensional particles, we have to calculate in volumes. The 4K particles fit about 4 times in the 1k particles in each axis (x,y and z), hence 4 X 4 X 4= 64. So: while the 4K particles are 4 times smaller in diameter,they are 64 times smaller in volume. Fortunately the scraches they make run the same length, so we only have to bring a 2 dimensional cross section into account. The 3th dimension is actually the length of a scratch, which is obviously constant. But the cross section of that scratch is defined by 2 dimensions of the particle. 4 times smaller X 4 times smaller = 16 times smaller.
This is only true if the scratches run full depth of a particle. Now I don't think honing scratches are the full depth of the particle size, but I believe that the speed difference between a 1K hone and a 4K hone will be closer to 16 times than to 4 times. My point is that dividing the grit numbers does not yield a correct estimate of the speed ratio between 2 hones.
That explains why the speed difference between 1K and, let's say 8K is big enough to keep you honing all week, if you go to the 8k too early.
But yes, bevel correction can be done on a 4K synthetic water hone.
Bevel repair is in an entirely different realm.
Bart.
Onimaru55 made me aware in a PM that Norton used to have different ratings for their hones. I too remember that they rated their 8K as 3 micron, and not the 4K.
Here's where I doublechecked the current micron ratings:
Norton Water Stones at Tools for Working Wood
I think the Norton marketing department decided to follow Shapton, that always rated their 8K finer than 3 micron... This only confirms that these firms can actully say what they want in advertising. The value of truth is reversely correlated to the bank accounts of the stockholders.
Bart.
While a little confusing for those who are not mathematically inclined (like me!), Bart is absolutely correct.:)
On the surface (no pun intended), it is easy to think that 2k has twice as many particles as a 1k, and 4k twice as much as 2k. But it is the math that Bart explained which answers another question on what Glen identifies as restore vs. sharpening/bevel setting earlier on the thread here or just scroll up. (Are you following?:confused:)
At the 4K level, the particle sizes are too small and too shallow to effectively create a new bevel. The 4K can, however, remove just the thinnest layer to expose a "refreshed" layer of the bevel, like taking one layer of skin off an onion. You will not get to the core of the onion on a 4K in this lifetime - you'll most likely get to the core of the 4K if you try, though!
So to expand on Glen's answer, an already well defined bevel that is simply dull and needs to be honed can benefit from starting a 4K.
If the 4K doesn't seem to give results, from an uneven or a rounded bevel from stropping, for example, the one would require a coarser stone to reshape, or reset the bevel (i.e. 1k, 2k) - this should be relatively fast since the existing bevel is basically in place (in theory), and it is just a matter of peeling down the rogue layers of the skin of the onion so that an even layer of skin is exposed.
Restoration is removing whole layers of metal on the blade to get rid of chips, rust, and/or pitting and requires a lot of effort and a maybe even a coarser stone such as a #220.
:D
I respectfully absolutly positively disagree, and I have only this as proof...
Take a 4k Norton and do 1600 laps, going on your assumtions that a 1k is 16 times faster than a 4k...
Let me know how all that works for you :)
For the rest of you people lost in the GritZone please DO NOT do 1600 laps on any stone I'm being sarcastic here...
Originally and for quite some time the Norton 4K was the lowest grit hone I had and I did many a bevel on that hone and it wasn't just a tuning in of the old but a complete bevel job. Its just a matter of technique. Sure the 1K makes it easier but I wouldn't say the 4K took an inordinate amount of time.
This is all mix up.
Why to make so difficult simple stuff?
1k has larger particles then 4 k.
Now when you move your blade against larger particles , they will remove more metal in larger size and will leave larger scratches.
(Now we do assume they are made with same company and join with same glue etc) above statement should be correct.
Now can you set bevel with 4k of course you can i am sure you can set bevel with AN ESCHER but questions is how long it will take and how much stone you will loose.
1k advisable for straight razor because you do remove enough metal which easy set the bevel . Can you use 325 yes but result you are removing unnecessary metal. if you are sharpening axis i am sure i will say please go head use 100 grit stone.
i hope i didn't add more confusion.
Marketing is always a hazy truth :p but its the results that count.Quote:
Originally Posted by Bart
I won't set or restore bevels on any eBay junker with anything finer than 1k.
That would then equal 1000 laps on a 1K.... according to my estimate and 4000 according to yours.Quote:
Originally Posted by gssixgun
I wouldn't do either, an I don't see how taking this into absurdity will proof or disproof anything.
But upon some further thinkering, I didn't bring into account that a 4K actually has more particles than the 1K, as Tom pointed out. That brings my estimate closer to yours, but not all the way.
The bottom line is that we all agree, except about how much the speed difference precisely is.
Best regards,
Bart.
Holy smokes! I now know one thing for sure; I don't know anything. All of you have a ton of knowledge on metallurgy and honing stones; plus you have all your years of experience.
I am just happy reloading and homemade bread making are easy to me. I went ahead and ordered a 1000 grit stone today. I figured one more stone just opened my abilities, what there is to them, one more notch.
Laugh! I thought I would jump into SR shaving,; get a single razor, strop and some stones; and that would be it. Laugh! That was like thinking flying would be easy. Oh well, I concurred the latter, but I think the former will take longer than 45 hours of training.
Thank you all for your answers. Take care.
Things aren't always as complicated as they seem. There's no reason an already honed razor can't be maintained with a strop & an occasional touch up with a fine hone.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bart
Quote:
Originally Posted by jendeindustries
Actually in real life not the "Gritzone" I am going to explain here so there are no more misunderstanding because you guys just confused the heck outta this very simple thread....
I said this a few weeks ago when the grit charts were being quoted, that they don't really correlate to real life...
On average a fast bevel on a Norton 1k takes 20 laps (for me) a slow bevel might take as many as 150... These numbers are only important to me not everybody else, different strokes /different folks etc:
Now what you guys are saying is according to the grit charts and what you read because neither of you actually hone on Nortons that I have ever read about anyway, and please correct me if I am wrong...
Bart says my 20 laps would be closer to 320 laps and Tom says I might not ever get there....
Now on the slow bevel I could take 1600 - 2400 by Bart's calculations and for sure would never get there by Tom's....
OK now here's the problem, some of us learned on Norton 4/8's we actually have honed razors on them, in real life, in fact some of us quite a few razors...
I NEVER did that many laps, ever... Oh yeah I can get a shaving sharp razor on one...
What the point is here, is don't go by what it says, go by what it does....Charts don't tell the whole truth...
No offense intended here guys, but the point needed making and the problem is with the charts and info not you guys...
I have the utmost respect for both of you...
Now back to your regularly scheduled hone zone programing...
Which says yes a Norton 4k will be fine until you start messing with e-bay blades and damaged ones then you might wanna get a 1k...
Glen,
You are correct - I was speaking in terms of the Shapton 4K, but was also assuming that we weren't speaking of a specific stone brand name or manufacturer - just a generic 4k. (it sounds dumb, now!)
You often clarify the differences between honing and restoration, and I think that you put them in the correct compartments - I was just trying to point that out. IOW, to answer a typical question of "why can't you only use the 12K stone for everything?"
I would like to see a comprehensive list of what you define as regular sharpening, resetting the bevel, and restoration. I think it would help a lot of us in clarifying what we are talking about in the future.....
:rock:
nope 100 laps, you're off by 10Quote:
Originally Posted by BartThat would then equal 1000 laps on a 1K.... according to my estimate and 4000 according to yours.Quote:
Originally Posted by gssixgun
So, I like to do this quick 'back on the envelope' type estimates in my head as well, they work great only if you have to correct model of the process.
So, what is the correct number you ask? I believe it is 4 and that comes just from the depth of the grooves of the removed metal. the length of the groves is he same and as far as the width goes it's the same whether you have 4 times more of them when each is 4 times narrower.
Of course, this only works if the two abrasives work very similartly to each other and the difference is dominated by particle size. Which apparently is true for norton 1k and 4k. But as we all know particle size is only a small component on how a hone cuts and how fast it is.
As mparker pointed recently the various arkansas hones have the same particle sizes yet they cut in a drastically different manner.
Bottom line is the actual experiment trumps any incomplete theory, so when Glen says the comparison is such and such, I take this as the actual true answer from the experimental data.
Hey sarend, don't feel bad. I am as clueless as you say you are on this theory stuff. A friend told me just yesterday that a micron is a millionth of an inch. :eek: I don't know the math but I can hone razors. I don't have a problem with guys who do know what they are talking about expounding on all of the technical stuff, in fact I rather enjoy it.Quote:
Originally Posted by sarend
OTOH, I didn't need to know it to learn how to set a bevel and further refine the edge, strop and shave. Sort of like when I was younger and connected iron on buildings. I wouldn't have known what to do with a slide rule but I could climb a column and take a spud wrench and a 6 pound beater and hang that iron. :beer2:
Not to muddy the water... but unless I've forgotten everything from my Micro classes, a micron is one-millionth of a meter...
I think it is roughly 1/30,000 of an inch... Could be wrong. Will grab a chem/microscopy book and check.
I could have been wrong.... I was wrong once before. :DQuote:
Originally Posted by BKratchmer
I believe that is right - 25 microns = .001"Quote:
Originally Posted by BKratchmer
The true philosophical question here is how many angels (spelling is correct) can we fit onto a 30K abrasive particle?
:popcorn:
I wouldn't trust that friend if I were you, he's off by a factor of roughly 40.Quote:
Originally Posted by JimmyHAD
A micron is short for a micrometer, so it's one millionth of a meter.
1inch = 0.0254meters
BTW you can do math and conversions on Google too. Type
'1micron in inches' or '1micron in meters' or '1meter in microns'
or whatever number you want for that matter.
Since I have a browser with a google bar opened all the time I usually do quick calculations there. It's faster than typing bc -l or octave...
YouTube - Go Get Your Mule (original)Quote:
Originally Posted by gugi
[QUOTE=hi_bud_gl;449552]This is all mix up.
Why to make so difficult simple stuff?
1k has larger particles then 4 k.
Now when you move your blade against larger particles , they will remove more metal in larger size and will leave larger scratches.
(Now we do assume they are made with same company and join with same glue etc) above statement should be correct.
Now can you set bevel with 4k of course you can i am sure you can set bevel with AN ESCHER but questions is how long it will take and how much stone you will loose.
1k advisable for straight razor because you do remove enough metal which easy set the bevel . Can you use 325 yes but result you are removing unnecessary metal. if you are sharpening axis i am sure i will say please go head use 100 grit stone.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
I have been relying on my DMT 8c which is 325 grit marked on the box. It very definitely does remove steel at a good clip. My question to hi_bud_gl is , should I slow down and go with the Norton 1000 or am I OK with the DMT 8c. I try to set the proper bevel before I polish the edge. I always hope that I am not removing too much steel (especially with my Bismarck). It seems that some honesters have a somewhat better handle on this situation than I do. I spent too many years with just a 3 line Swaty hone and a leather strop. All this modern stuff basically confuses me but I keep buying Coticules, Shaptons, Nakayamas and Naniwas just the same.
I feel inadequate because after all these years I feel I should be more accomplished at honing than I am. I still refuse to be discouraged.
Half of my razors shave great and the other half still need that magic touch. I am turning my attention to multi / micro bevels. In case you never hear from me again, that's where I'll be....
Jerry
~~~
Yes.Quote:
Originally Posted by sarend
No problem.Quote:
Originally Posted by sarend
Just for conversation's sake ...
micron measurement/conversion : 1 µm = 3.937007e-05"
LOL ... Laconic but to the point :rofl2:
Interesting conversations on grit comparisons but in reference to this thread's original question I believe some of you are trying to split an atom.Quote:
Originally Posted by sarend
To reply to the original question: Yes you can set a bevel on the 4k. As Glen mentioned early in this thread setting a new bevel on a new razor will probably take less time than restoring a bevel on a used razor. Your technique, hardness of the steel and width of the bevel will determine the time difference. In reference to your question none of this will really matter. As with most things in life time equals money. You can spend the money to buy a 1k and possibly save some time or you can save your money and take longer on the 4k. As you are apparently relatively new to honing I would suggest using the 4k for several reasons. 1) It will take longer to cause damage to your blade if your technique is off. 2) If you pay attention you will be able to notice where you may stray off course in your technique. 3) The only way to get good at honing is to do a bunch of it. The extra time spent on the 4k will give you experience honing, if you pay attention. I'm sure there are more reasons but this is a good start. I'm sure you will find more as you go along.
Good luck!
p.s. remember to use the marker test as the first step in setting your bevel. Check the WIKI for details if you don't know what I am talking about. It will help you determine if your blade is warped and what stroke to use before removing a lot of metal.
+1 with Joed very very good point...
accidentally dbl posted
Here's the metric scale to the right of the decimal point, used for a ton of stuff. There is a different name for each three 0's to the right of decimal with the exception of the first three where you have deci- (.0) first digit, centi- (.00) second digit and milli- (.000) third digit. you could refer to .056 as 5.6 centi- or 56 milli- or .56 deci-. Most commonly in this example you would see milli, such as 56milliamps or 56mA.
.0 (deci-)
.00 (centi-)
.000 (milli-)
.000000 (micro-)
.000000000 (nano-)
.000000000000 (pico-)
For example 1 micrometer is equal to .000001 meters.
Also 1 millimeter is equal to .001 meters.
On the left side you may be more familiar with...
1,000 (kilo-)
1,000,000 (mega-)
1,000,000,000 (giga-)
1,000,000,000,000 (tera-)
Maybe that helps clear a little up? Micron = micrometer :)
Not everything in life is so simple it can be put in one-liners.Quote:
Originally Posted by gssixgun
I tried to make my point is the clearest way I could.
I also said that I agree with the big picture, only that I think that the speed difference between 1K and 4K is bigger than you seem to think.
Nope. I try to offer an explanation for something I experience in real life. (more about that in a minute) From what I understand of your first post, it was you that were saying that 4K is 4 times slower than 1K. That sounds pretty much like going by the figures. If I'm allowed to translate to 4/8K, than 2 laps on the 8K removes the same amount of steel than 1K lap on the 4K. To calculate even further: 4X 16k= 2X8K = 1X4K. This opens interesting perspectives for saving money spend on hones. If it were true.Quote:
Originally Posted by gssixgun
That is correct. I don't own any Norton hones. I own the DMTs 325, 600 and 1200 grit. I also own the Chosera 5K and 10K. As far as hones with numbers, that's all real life experience I have to offer. Having used them, I always had the distinct impression that the speeds differences are considerably bigger than what a simple division of the numbers would suggest. The Norton hones might behave differently. I'll take your word for it.Quote:
Originally Posted by gssixgun
I don't really get that. Your 20 laps are always 20 laps.Quote:
Originally Posted by gssixgun
I can't put words in Tom's mouth, but that's not what I made from his post.
That is completely mutual, Glen. Somehow I have the feeling that you read what I said in my first post as a public encouragement to do more laps. But it's the reverse actually. I am not shy of doing many laps myself. Sometimes I'm just too lazy to stand up and get a coarser hone. But there are tasks that simply cannot be done without the proper hone, that offers the required abrasive speed and power. I think we agree on that one.Quote:
Originally Posted by gssixgun
+1Quote:
Originally Posted by gssixgun
I stand corrected. It was running late yesterday.Quote:
Originally Posted by gugi
At first sight, a sound theory. Basically, an army of spikes plows through the steel. 1K spikes in theory being 4 times larger in diameter than 4K spikes would make 4 laps on 4K remove the same amount of steel as 1 lap on 1K. That was my reasoning a few years back, but it doesn't hold up in reality.Quote:
Originally Posted by gugi
When I woke up today, I took my DMT 325 - 600 combination stone. I placed a small piece of aluminum T-bar upside down on the 325 and honed till the entire top surface of the T had 325 scratches in one direction. Next I changed the honing direction 90 degrees. It took 2 full length strokes on the 325 to completely replace the previous scratch pattern with one running in the new direction. Then I flipped the hone over to the 600 side. (Note that my 325 doubles as a lapping plate for Coticules and that is has considerably more wear than the 600) Still, it took me 20 full length laps to replace the 325 grit scratches with 600 grit scratches. (I made the new scratches perpendicular to the 325 ones) To finish this humble experiment, I replaced the 600 grit scratch pattern with a new one running in perpendicular direction. That took 4 laps.
I could run the same experiment on my Choseras 5K and 10K, but do I really need to? I already know that the two 10K-laps don't equal one 5K laps. Not even close.
Best regards and no disrespect intended,
Bart.
To Jerry
Please this is only for this person.
My opinion is this .Jerry you are killing your blades. 325 grit dmt you will need use only there is a big chips on the blade i mean really big. over then that 325 is very good for lapping other stones.
Now if you are setting bevel razor bought from ebay i would agree with you go head use 1k.
if you are sharpening your daily used razor until your drop that blade and mess up the edge you don't need 1k hone . mostly 4k will do the job.
I hope dmt 8c you have used has been brake in already.
Please don't use it dmt 8c anymore this is how it looks like after dmt8c edge of the blade approximation
VVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVV
after this you will need to take saw tooth out and that is loosing steel.
i hope i am clear enough . if you have a question please send pm. i will gladly answer.
GL
[QUOTE=mrsell63;449726]Quote:
Originally Posted by hi_bud_gl
Reading what Jerry said prompts me to say that along with buying a bunch of hones getting a bunch of razors is essential too. If a person wants to learn to hone the only way is to hone a lot of razors. Study the info in the SRP Wiki and in the forum archives, watch the videos and try to apply what you've learned from them.
To me each razor is a potential challenge. Some come sharp easy and some are a struggle. I called Lynn on the phone yesterday and asked his opinion on what approach to use on a particularly recalcitrant blade. Going to an expert for advice personally or on the forum is always beneficial IME.
I've only used a 325 to remove a large chip and once on a bad frown. Both ebay razors. On any that I hone I check the existing bevel and decide whether a 1k is the best bet or if it isn't bad if a 4k would be better and go from there. What to use to set the bevel ain't carved in stone. Each razor is an individual case and should be approached as such.
On some of them I will use the 1200 diamond plate. If I find the edge is getting chippy with the diamonds, which I sometimes run into, I will switch to a Shapton pro or a Naniwa. I examine the edge under magnification as I go and determine what will work the best for a given razor. If it is a 4k that is where I start or a 1k if that is what I think it needs.
I recall I was doing a bevel on an ebay special and did a TNT. It dug in nicely for the length of the blade. I took it to the 30x microscope and even though it felt good on the TNT it needed a lot more work on the 1k. If I hadn't had the magnification I would've moved up in grit too soon. As a buddy of mine told me a long time ago,"the whole is the sum of it's parts." IOW, all of this stuff works together to reach the goal and neglecting any part affects that outcome. End of ramble.:beer2:
(I never said anything about 8k stones but just for S&G yes you can do the exact same one stone trick as you do with a Coti with the 8k Norton, bevel set to shaving sharp)Quote:
Originally Posted by Bart
See this is where the problem started, as I wasn't going by numbers (as in multiplying 4 by 1) I was going by actual experience on the actual hones that the OP was asking about ...
But that wasn't actually good enough you, had to confuse the issue by bringing in facts and figures which were totally meaningless to the actual discussion that was talking place....
Let me reiterate for you
THE OP:
"I have a 4k NORTON can I set the bevel on razors with it or do I need a 1K NORTON"...
Not DMT, not Shapton, not Chosera, not any other stone or question...
Very simple straight forward answer, YES you can, however it will take about 4 times as many strokes as the 1K to set the bevel.. (ACTUAL NUMBERS NOT A THEORY)
Now for some reason we had to expound on that very simple answer ??????? and 20 plus posts later we are still at the same place YES A 4k Norton can set bevels...
And I will be very, very, clear here, IME it is about 4 times slower then the 1k Norton....
Quote:
Originally Posted by gssixgun
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bart
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bart
I don't think we disagree. It surprises me that the Norton 1K and 4K relate to eachother in that way. I would have suspected the 1K to be much faster than that, based upon experience with other hones and how the speed difference seems more on a logaritmical scale than on a linear one.Quote:
Originally Posted by Bart
We can easily agree to disagree on these details, if that's how you feel. It was a nice discussion and I have learned a thing or two about the Norton hones. Whether it confused the original poster, I can't really tell, but in that case, I apologize. Would this thread have appeared in the newby section, I would have started a new one here.
:OT that is great news Glen. Imo, internet forums are always a bit inclined to develop gear fetishism. For straight razor users who are not into collecting hones and razors, I acclaim every option that allows great results with nominal equipment. It would be great to see the Unicot method translated to hones like the Shapton 16K or the Naniwa 12K. I've been trying it myself with a Nakayama and with a Chosera 10K, but I had problems getting a decent bevel on razors that were a bit off. Once the bevel is there, produced by a DMT1200 for instance, using the secondary bevel procedure to jump straight to one of both these fine finishers works like a charm.Quote:
Originally Posted by gssixgun
Without even owning them, I don't doubt that for the thrifty among us, buying a Naniwa1K, a Naniwa12K and a roll of tape is one of the most economical ways to get a razor from very dull to wickedly sharp. Set bevel on 1K, apply one layer of tape to the spine, refine and finish the edge on 12K. Strop without tape. When in need of a touch up: 12K with tape.
I know the above strays away from the original question, but in case this thread was inspired by searching cost-effective honing options, I feel it's worth mentioning.
Best regards,
Bart.
:OTOr maybe it isn't off topic ? Since honing a few razors with them I can say that the Naniwa SuperStones 1k, 3k, 5k produce a shave worthy edge comparable to my results with my Norton 1k, 4k, 8k. Adding the Naniwa 8k into the mix and it is of course smoother and more refined but I could do just fine if all I had was the 1, 3 , and 5k or the Norton set. This is based on my particular beard and all of the usual qualifiers. IOW, YMMV.Quote:
Originally Posted by Bart
I wrote the following this morning but got distracted at the last moment and just found the window and submitted it...
So whatever you find, you still have the problem with transferability to Norton 1k/Norton 4k? I think depending on the hone and the way it's used the cutting process can scale as anything from sublinear to cubic with the particle size. Just consider your experiments with belgian hones.Quote:
Originally Posted by Bart
Quote:
Originally Posted by JimmyHAD
What a great movie. Funny post.