Thread: Belgium vs Norton

Ok. I now have a question about honing.

I see that the blue corticule stone equates to the Norton 4000
and the yellow to the 8000 or maybe 12000.

Well the norton is noticably cheaper so why should I spend the extra $$$$. What am I missing here? The 3x8 Norton combo 4k/8k goes for $75 while the Belgium Corticule Yellow (3x8) go for about $175 Blue (3x8) go for about $70.
Now I know the expression "You get what you pay for" might apply but $75 vs. $245.
Any thoughts??

I have no clue how long a norton lasts, but the belgian stones seem to hold for "ages". Although that will not make up the difference, the fact that the belgian ones are a natural stone, only quarried from 1 place in the world, makes it a collectible. A bit like between a Harley and an Indian bike (for those weird 2-wheelers amongst us). It is all supply and demand (if not the name).....

Hoekie

I think Lynn uses his coticule as a finisher after the Norton.

X

According to the quarry you should NEVER use the stone dry!

http://www.ardennes-coticule.com/engels.htm
click "use" on the left, top of the page will say: "THE STONE MUST BE USED WITH WATER,NEVER USE IT DRY!"

Hoekie

The main difference (aside from the obvious economics=supply V. demand) is the way the two hones cut.
The nortons are a man made abrasive (probably a variation on Alu. Ox.) that has it's own properties and charictoristics (i.e. cutting action)
The Coticule hones have garnet in them that does the cutting. The multi-facited garnet has completly different cutting action. For those who havent bothered to check out the belgischer brocken site; here is a shot of the garntes under X1600 power:


Think of it like Arkansas compaired to Ceramic compaired to diamond particle and compaired to the Norton water hones, all in similar abrasive properties. They all do the same work (the cut and hone the steel) but they do it at different rates, to a different degree and with different mentality.... dare I say "personality".

The Belgians do cut differently and I use (and sell) both. Water really should be used, and I think what may have been meant was they do not need to be soaked as they are not porous. Splash water on them and that is it.

There was some debate in another thread over how the garnets cut. The quarries own website explains the same info I passed along, 15micron (average) garnet crystals with many facets that only penetrate the steel about 2 microns. I researched a little more and also remembered something I learned about sandpaper years ago when I started woodworking......garnet paper keeps cutting longer than other paper becuase the garnets do fracture and expose new, fresh cutting egdes (Randy Tuttle, you were correct). This likely happens as well on the Coticule so the ever decreasing partical size and the odd crystal shape (about 32 sides) both seem to contribute to the fine cutting action.

Both Thiers-Issard and Dovo use these as the final hand step before stropping but I know that TI does not use water, but naptha instead. I am told that it is not what we call naptha though. In Europe naptha may actually be kerosene (paraffin in the UK). There thought being the kersosene disperses the fine crystals better so swarf does not build up under the fine edge of a TI razor and possibly deflect it. So it looks like they clearly do not buy the slurry approach. I am told that Dovo uses oil (kerosene again?) with their Coticule stones.

They are pricey stones and much of the appeal is the natural aspect. They only come from one place and every splinter is saved and used. Most yellow is backed with slate to strengthen it but occasionally a natural yellow/blue combo can be found so you get a 2 in 1 stone. The stones rarely achieve any great size and a 3x8 is really near the upper limit on the yellow.

I still think the Norton is a great and fast cutting stone but choose to finish with a Belgian simply for the natural aspect.

Best,
Tony
(I will be posting a few older stones on my website along with the new ones this weekend)

This is odd... I was just getting on here to post some info on the Belgian stones when this came up.

After I got a lot of advice from here, I got some info from Howard over at http://www.theperfectedge.com and a lot of old timers too. [BTW, thanks for the tip on Howard. I gave you guys credit for sending me!] - But I am starting to see a group consensus about stones like the Norton’s VS the naturals, esp. the Belgians and that being - the naturals with the naturally embedded garnets cut much faster than the Norton’s.
The next question after that, logically, is "Okay, so its a little faster, is worth the money and is it "that" noticeable".
The answers I got were yes it IS noticeable and in addition, a lot of the older guys who are really into this said that the natural stones [get this] "tend to remove a lot less steel to get the edge" as compared to the man made stones that require more steel to be removed.

One 80+ year old guy I talked to, said that [its] like the difference between giving a knife to a 6 year old to carve a turkey as to a 40 year old...
Both will get the job done, but the older "carver" will cut less, waste less, and do a much better job. Hence the difference between the man made and the higher-grade stones like the Belgians. No one had an opinion on the Shapton Pros.
I suppose that this is where the added price justifies the stones. If you are removing less steel to put an edge on your $200.00 Dovo, thus making it last longer, well... herein lies the justification.
Plus, too, hands down, all tell you that the naturals are a once in a lifetime purchase. In addition, you will be "willing" them to very happy son and possible HIS child too!

I just remembered why I logged on, I have a question... Rich, you quoted Howard's price on the 3" inch thick stone... I ordered the 2". Is there a reason why I should get a 3" or do I need to call Howard back and change my order? AND ONE OTHER TOO... I plan on hitting this stone with a few very nice tactical knives... Should "you" reserve a stone for your straight, and straight ONLY?

While you can get the job done with a smaller stone, a larger stone will give the new honer enough space to fit the whole blade on the stone which can sure help a lot at getting an even honing.

X

Originally Posted by jmorehead

But I am starting to see a group consensus about stones like the Norton’s VS the naturals, esp. the Belgians and that being - the naturals with the naturally embedded garnets cut much faster than the Norton’s.

I don't know if this is true. I've heard the blues are very slow. Plus if the coticule is a 12K like Lynn says, it's not likely to be faster than a fast 8K, like the Norton. But I think it's all besides the point. As I see it the main reason for using the coticule is to get a finer abrasive than the 8K, so it has to be slower, and we expect it.

The answers I got were yes it IS noticeable and in addition, a lot of the older guys who are really into this said that the natural stones [get this] "tend to remove a lot less steel to get the edge" as compared to the man made stones that require more steel to be removed.

I have to take this with a big grain of salt. First of all, how do they know they're removing less metal at the level of fineness of a 12K? You couldn't even tell in a microscope at 200-400x. In fact, if you look in a microscope at a lot higher magnification, every 12K stone will produce 12K scratch lines about 1 micron in depth. The scratch lines are where the material is removed. So, how could two stones with the same scratch pattern remove different amounts of material? A coticule (1 micron grit) will remove a lot less material than an 8K norton (3 micron grit) only because of the difference in scratch size. But if you could get a 12K Norton (or Shapton) they would be the same.

I suppose that this is where the added price justifies the stones. If you are removing less steel to put an edge on your $200.00 Dovo, thus making it last longer, well... herein lies the justification.

Assuming the metal removal were less, It would make no difference for all the guys here who use pyramids and wear down their razors unnecessarily at 4K and 8K.

Let's face it, any 12K barber hone or 1 micron paste will do the same thing. This is just another one of those luxuries that we allow ourselves (me included).

Originally Posted by Joe Lerch

...every 12K stone will produce 12K scratch lines about 1 micron in depth. The scratch lines are where the material is removed. So, how could two stones with the same scratch pattern remove different amounts of material? A coticule (1 micron grit) will remove a lot less material than an 8K norton (3 micron grit) only because of the difference in scratch size. But if you could get a 12K Norton (or Shapton) they would be the same.

This is not exactly correct,
The identifying characteristic in hones that give them their unique personality is the type, shape and size of abrasive imbedded in the hone. The size, geometry, hardness and foundation (the bedding compound) of the abrasive is what will determine the amount of steel removed during the honing process. This is why some hones like the coticule, and even the Spyderco Ceramic have a larger particle size (the Ultra fine Spyderco uses an abrasive that’s about 3microns in size) but can still offer a finer than expected finish.
Think of a child’s sets Jacks... the Jacks are star shaped with 4 long points and two shorter points (forget about the fact that the long points are blunted the shape is what we're going for), the long points of the jack is approx one half the over all diameter of the jack it's self...
Now assume that jack is embedded in concrete... if one arm of the jack was sticking out of the concrete it could conceivably produce a scratch patter of a full half micron, because the jack would not give or roll as the blade passed over it. There we have the extreme example of size and bedding compound.

Now lets take a facetted bead... same over all diameter, however it has a far less dramatic geometry. They are almost spherical, aside from sharp corners and edges connecting the corners. So already we have the same particle size, 1 micron, and a far less dramatic "cut" in the steel.
Now bed that bead in some clay. The bead is fast, until it comes into contact with the blade. Once the blade "jars" it free, it will roll around in the "slurry" continuously cutting.. but still not as deep as the previous Jack would if it were bedded in the clay. The Jack would still move around in the slurry but will cut much deeper than the bead.
That is how one stone of one grit can be considered "fast" and another stone of the same relative grit can be considered "slow". There is no international standardization of honing grits... if there was we wouldn’t have the variation between man made and natural hones, or between U.S. water hones and Japanese water hones... ceramics Vs. clay binders.. and the such.. You cant say hone "A" with an advertised grit of XXXX will be identical to hone "B" because hone "B" also is advertised as the same grit. If you want a good example of this compare the Norton 8K (3mic) with the Spyderco Ultra fine (also 3mic) with the coticule which is stated on the Belgischer Brocken site as 3-12microns... The largest particle size, here the coticule, produces the finest cut.
All particles are not created equal