Editing Hones - comparison table

Jump to: navigation, search

Warning: You are not logged in. Your IP address will be publicly visible if you make any edits. If you log in or create an account, your edits will be attributed to your username, along with other benefits.

The edit can be undone. Please check the comparison below to verify that this is what you want to do, and then save the changes below to finish undoing the edit.

This page supports semantic in-text annotations (e.g. "[[Is specified as::World Heritage Site]]") to build structured and queryable content provided by Semantic MediaWiki. For a comprehensive description on how to use annotations or the #ask parser function, please have a look at the getting started, in-text annotation, or inline queries help pages.

Latest revision Your text
Line 3: Line 3:
 
It should be noted that since natural rocks of the same kind can vary widely between one another (unlike synthetic hones), it is difficult to assign [[Formulae For Converting Between Grit and Microns|grit ratings]] to them in whole groups. Also, different synthetics (brands, makes) of a given grit rating should not be expected to have precisely the same distribution/range of particle sizes, as they may be made or graded to [[Formulae For Converting Between Grit and Microns|differing standards.]] In addition to differences in size, abrasive particles will cut differently depending on their material and shape and the matrix in which they are embedded, or surface to which they are applied.  
 
It should be noted that since natural rocks of the same kind can vary widely between one another (unlike synthetic hones), it is difficult to assign [[Formulae For Converting Between Grit and Microns|grit ratings]] to them in whole groups. Also, different synthetics (brands, makes) of a given grit rating should not be expected to have precisely the same distribution/range of particle sizes, as they may be made or graded to [[Formulae For Converting Between Grit and Microns|differing standards.]] In addition to differences in size, abrasive particles will cut differently depending on their material and shape and the matrix in which they are embedded, or surface to which they are applied.  
  
For an extreme example with stropping rather than honing, it has been said that stropping with 50 micron Chromium Oxide, which is more coarse than 500 grit, can still produce an acceptable edge, although not necessarily desirable. Diamond is commonly one micron or less micron for maintenance stropping. Diamond pastes of 6 and 3 micron are available but would rarely be used to '''''finish''''' an edge. For comparison 50 micron diamond would not be suitable to finish a razors edge. <sup>[reference needed]</sup>  
+
For an extreme example with stropping rather than honing, it has been said that stropping with 50 micron Chromium Oxide, which is more coarse than 500 grit, can still produce an acceptable edge, although not necessarily desirable. Diamond is commonly one micron or less micron for maintenance stropping. Diamond pastes of 6 and 3 micron are available but would rarely be used to '''''finish''''' an edge. For comparison 50 micron diamond would not be suitable to finish a razors edge. <sup>[reference needed]</sup>
  
 
Grit rating is often considered a ballpark for how a synthetic hone may perform or a ballpark for how a natural stone may perform in comparison to other synthetics. Each stone (or brand and make) must be compared to another to determine its differences or similarities.  
 
Grit rating is often considered a ballpark for how a synthetic hone may perform or a ballpark for how a natural stone may perform in comparison to other synthetics. Each stone (or brand and make) must be compared to another to determine its differences or similarities.  
Line 161: Line 161:
 
| up to 30k  
 
| up to 30k  
 
| repair/bevel setting/finishing/polishing  
 
| repair/bevel setting/finishing/polishing  
| ceramic abrasives in a resin binder.quite hard need less flattening. cuts fast. no soak needed just a bit water on the surface.work without slurry.known for their finer edge. however the pro series has a reputation for too fast wearing for their stones 1k and under. also the 15k pro (rated 12K on their domestic Japanese version) compared to the 16k glass is more expensive and gives less feedback. also the finish achieved is somewhat matte compared to the more traditional waterstones  
+
| ceramic abrasives in a resin binder.quite hard need less flattening. cuts fast. no soak needed just a bit water on the surface.work without slurry.known for their finer edge. however the pro series has a reputation for too fast wearing for their stones 1k and under. also the 15k pro compared to the 16k glass is more expensive and gives less feedback. also the finish achieved is somewhat matte compared to the more traditional waterstones  
 
|  
 
|  
 
|-
 
|-

Please note that all contributions to Shave Library may be edited, altered, or removed by other contributors. If you do not want your writing to be edited mercilessly, then do not submit it here.
You are also promising us that you wrote this yourself, or copied it from a public domain or similar free resource (see Shave Library:Copyrights for details). Do not submit copyrighted work without permission!

Cancel | Editing help (opens in new window)