Editing Talk:Hones - comparison table

This is a snake pit...
I have a DMT-C (350mesh), DMT-F (600mesh), DMT-E (1200mesh), Belgian Blues, Coticules, a Naniwa Chosera 5K, a Naniwa Chosera 10K and a Japanese Nashii Nakayama.

I can exchange some of my Coticules (with use of slurry) with the DMT-E, for bevel correction purposes. None of my Blues come even close to that: they're just way too slow to remove enough steel within a reasonable amount of time.
But they are great to refine an already good bevel, coming off a Coticule with slurry, or the DMT-E, or even the DMT-F. The Chosera 5K does about the same for the keenness of the edge, but faster, while leaving a less smooth edge. The Chosera 10 pushes the sharpness envelope, and leaves an edge smooth enough to shave with, but a Coticule with water makes it smoother. Where '''my''' Nakayama fits in, I haven't figured out yet. I think it compares to the Chosera for boosting keenness. I don't like it as much for smoothness.

How this need to be put in the table without confusing a newbie that seeks information, I have no clue.
When I started out honing, I was misled by the idea that the Blue/Coticule tandem was comparable to 4K/8K (Norton). It caused me many weeks of frustration, till Josh Earl and David Polan finally pointed out that there's hardly any relation between the Belgian combo and the Norton combination hone.
I definitely object to rating the Belgian Blue as a 1K Norton, but then again, I don't own a 1K Norton, so who am I to change the table?

I think it would be better to make 4 categories: (I have indented hones that less ideal for that use, but still doable)
1. BEVEL REPAIR (DMT-C, DMT-F, ''DMT-E, Norton 1K''...)
2. BEVEL CORRECTION (Norton 1K, DMT-E, Fast Coticules/slurry, Shapton 1K,2K, Naniwa 1K, ''Norton 4K'' ...)
3. EDGE REFINEMENT (Norton 4K, Belgian Blue, Naniwa Chosera 5K, Shapton 4K, ''Naniwa Chosera 10K, Nakayama
'',...)
4 EDGE FINISHING (Coticule/water, Esher, Naniwa Chosera 10K, Shapton 16K,...)
--[[User:Bart|Bart]] 23:13, 8 February 2009 (UTC)

== I like Bart's categories ==

# Barring protest on SRP, let's go for Bart's categories.

# We might want to nuke the "similar hones" column, although I personally like it.

# We might want to add a "going rate" column, to give new users the opportunity to quickly (and, roughly!) compare prices. Seems to make the most sense in combination with "similar hones".

Catch 22, anyone?

== okay, so we've got some solutions ==

as far as comparing different aspects of hones i started three tables to compare relative speed, keenness and smoothness. this seems reasonable to me. it needs more data.

the write up currently at the beginning of the article is not well written, but i think it or something like it is important. if anyone wants to rewrite it or change examples please go ahead, i would appreciate it. i may still feel like revising any revisions, but i realize it could use some work.

--[[User:ezpz|ezpz]] April 2nd 2011