Thread: New Article - Hone Comparison Table

Originally Posted by Sticky

Anything rated coarser than 1,000? I wouldn't even try to make a list of all available hones coarser than 1,000. I think Bart's chart would also be useful, but going into that much detail is difficult when the data is so subjective. I think that very level of detail is why so few questionnaires were returned... If you make the chart too detailed then many new users might refuse to even read the chart legend. Having just a "smoothness" scale is going to be difficult because such a scale (read unit-of-measure) doesn't exist, as far as I know. [e.g.: electrical resistance has Ohms. Smoothness, outside of a surface tester's units...difficult to impossible to relate to shaving smoothness anyway.] Then there's also the question of "Sharpness vs. Smoothness".

True. But maybe we are approaching the problem from different directions. I never thought the list should be exhaustive and collective. I was thinking of new users looking for a useful combination of hones, and an explanation of their respective uses. There appears to be a number of such combinations (i.e. Norton 4/8k + finisher, or Belgian blue/yellow).

We can, of course, kill this discussion by simply going into too much detail. No problem with that. After all, the chart was just an idea. However, the questions will remain the same, and the amount of spurious, superfluous, and contradicting information in the forum will grow even further. I wonder whether that is useful.

Originally Posted by Sticky

The progressive guide in your link is the wiki version, I don't maintain that one; never did.

Originally Posted by Sticky

In the original guide posting, including the very first version (it's now at v2.1), you will find specific hones mentioned alongside their recommended uses (near the end of the thread's first post, under the "//Hone Specifics" category). I made the decision to keep the usage recommendations broad because so much of it has a high degree of broad overlap. The list I made is way too short to serve as a substitute for a chart on the scale that we're talking about here. Especially so since I make no attempt to include such high level of detail. I'd rather see the chart.

As you may remember, I sent you a notification of your guide being transferred (for lack of a better word) to the Wiki. Unfortunately, I never received a direct response. If you are unhappy with your post being in the Wiki, just let me know, and it will be killed as quickly as heavyduty's - no problem whatsoever. One idea behind the Wiki is to collect knowledge that is scattered across the forums, and compile it into one easily accessible article. Not least because an article can be maintained - unlike a forum post, which cannot be edited by mere mortals after, I believe, 24 hours. I can see only advantages in this approach, but am open to counter arguments.

Originally Posted by Sticky

"what hone(s) do I need" sounds like a good thing to have, to me; as does a list of hones that might fit. I'm just saying that attempting to pin each hone down to very specific purposes having such high detail level is going to be rather difficult. If the questionnaire was simplified and (maybe) not put in excel format, you might get more replies. Obviously, no one owns all the hones that might be put into the chart (except maybe Randy...); so responses to questionnaires are pretty much needed.

I cannot quite see why Excel should be a problem, but I am sure Bart could provide an RTF file with a simple table in it, too...

Originally Posted by Sticky

The only other option is to go by hearsay and existing posts. Another option that might get more responses is to start a thread that has multiple choice answers in a poll. (I am assuming that a poll thread would allow the needed number of questions and reply choices.)

If the questionnaire/poll gets simplified, I'll fill one out regarding the hones I've tried.

Incidentally, I had thought about the same thing. Can we do multiple questions in one post?

I really thought this would be simpler, by the way...

Originally Posted by BeBerlin

...
After all, the chart was just an idea. However, the questions will remain the same, and the amount of spurious, superfluous, and contradicting information in the forum will grow even further. I wonder whether that is useful.

I still think a chart is a good idea.

As you may remember, I sent you a notification of your guide being transferred (for lack of a better word) to the Wiki. Unfortunately, I never received a direct response. If you are unhappy with your post being in the Wiki, just let me know, and it will be killed as quickly as heavyduty's - no problem whatsoever...

I was off of the forum for some weeks when you sent a notification. You received a direct response on the same day that I returned to the forum. Since I am continuing to update and support the original post (the last update was on 2008.12.27), I accept your offer to delete the redundant wiki version. (Edit: it's easier for me to update just one location) I had no problem editing the original post; it is easy for any moderator to do at OP request, as was done in December.

I cannot quite see why Excel should be a problem, but I am sure Bart could provide an RTF file with a simple table in it, too...

Some users have an excel reader, but no app to edit an excel spreadsheet. Everyone has a text editor.

I really thought this would be simpler, by the way...

Don't give up too fast, I still think a graphical chart is a great way to make fast relative comparisons. Speaking strictly as a professional engineer (retired), it is well known that a graph/chart is a great way to spot trends and relationships that go completely unnoticed on a "data list". Even if very few questionnaires get returned, enough hone data already exists to get a basic graph constructed. Info on additional hones can be easily added later as it becomes available, once the basic graph format is up and running.

BTW: People are reading this thread.
I think the whole concept is very interesting, but I can't really imagine how it would look like in the end.I guess there are a lot of people like me: Just getting the hang of honing, but so far away in experience from you guys that they/I much rather read what you post, than actually contribute with the little knowledge gained.



Kristoffer

This:



is what I've always wanted to see to be able to understand where the different hones fit in the sharpening progression, how fast they cut and what sort of edge they produce, etc., but I was unable to express the wish not knowing what and how I wanted it exactly. You must have read my mind and then used your experience, intelligence and, err... Microsoft Excel to come up with this graph

Thanks you so much!

Originally Posted by Cornelius

This is what I've always wanted to see to be able to understand where the different hones fit in the sharpening progression, how fast they cut and what sort of edge they produce, etc., but I was unable to express the wish not knowing what and how I wanted it exactly.

It's for you, and all future aspiring honers, we're trying to make this work.
Thanks for the encouragement.

(On a side note: Excel has nothing to do with the graph. All my graphs are done in Coreldraw. Doing illustrative work happens to be part of how I earn my living.)

Bart.

Originally Posted by Bart

(On a side note: Excel has nothing to do with the graph. All my graphs are done in Coreldraw.

Yeah, I figured it wasnt done in Excel after I posted. Also noticed a spelling mistake in my message... but I'm lazy

So where does the DMT 8 EE fit in here?

Originally Posted by Cornelius

Yeah, I figured it wasnt done in Excel after I posted. Also noticed a spelling mistake in my message... but I'm lazy

So where does the DMT 8 EE fit in here?

Very fast cutting 8k. Although whether or not the edge quality it leaves is truly 8k is debatable. It cuts so fast that alot of guys use it instead of a 4k.

Originally Posted by Cornelius

Yeah, I figured it wasnt done in Excel after I posted. Also noticed a spelling mistake in my message... but I'm lazy

So where does the DMT 8 EE fit in here?

In Shapton Glassstone terms, 3 micron is ≈5,000 grit. DMT calls it's 3 micron an 8,000 mesh. I believe the Japanese JIS scale calls 3 micron a 6,000: Grit, mesh, JIS, sheesh... This is a fine example of how useful a chart would/could be.