Norton 8K vs Shapton 8K

[James White]

Having gotten tired of slimy water stones in stagnant water. I decided to get a set of Shapton stones. I picked up from my local Woodcraft the folowing. 1k,4k,8k glass stone. But now I am thinking since I already have a Norton 8k. I should return the Shapton 8k and put that money toward a Shapton 16K. Or sell the Norton and use that toward the 16k Shapton.

Does the Shapton 8K have anything over the Norton 8K or vise versa?

James

[David Weaver]

It's harder and it stays flat longer. However, the critical stone for flatness is the one that sets up whatever you're sharpening for the finish stone.

I would take back the 8k glass and find a 12k/15k cream professional (same stone, i think, just depends on where it's sold) on the internet and affix it to glass or a wooden base. it is 3 times as much stone, and it makes more sense with what you already have.

I use the 15k straight off of a 1k pro, and did use it off of a 1k glass for a while.

I think the expected lifetime of a 15k pro affixed to something (so you can use the entire stone) is probably indefinite. i have not found the glasstones to wear any slower than the pro stones in use, so you're getting 3 times as much media with the pro stones.

[John Coloccia]

Having gotten tired of slimy water stones in stagnant water. I decided to get a set of Shapton stones. I picked up from my local Woodcraft the folowing. 1k,4k,8k glass stone. But now I am thinking since I already have a Norton 8k. I should return the Shapton 8k and put that money toward a Shapton 16K. Or sell the Norton and use that toward the 16k Shapton.

Does the Shapton 8K have anything over the Norton 8K or vise versa?

James

I wouldn't replace a Norton 8K with a Shapton. There's no reason to. The Norton 8000 only requires a spritz of water, no soaking, so the convenience factor is there.

Personally, for under 8000 I use only diamond plates. They're just more convenient.

[Andrew Gibson]

Not to hijack the thread, but i just ordered 1k, 5k, and 15k, shapton pro stones. Everyone keeps saying to glue them to a piece of glass or the like, my question is... what adhesive is best, I keep thinking 5 min epoxy would do the trick, just wanted to ask.

[John Coloccia]

I don't know why everyone says that. Just to make them look like the other Shaptons? The point of the Glassstones is they're supposed to wear and dish slower, so they can use less material but it needs backing up with glass because of how thin it is. I don't know I'd glue anything to anywhere until it started getting thin enough to matter.

[David Weaver]

Epoxy, any epoxy is fine.

I think the point of the glasstones is to make almost the same stone as the pro stones in effectiveness but to get someone to pay almost as much for 5mm of media as they used to pay for 15mm of media.

The reason to glue the stones to a base is because with hard stones, you get some serious stiction issues, and you'll have a "pucker factor" event sooner or later where the stone sticks to the iron and you have it go somewhere you didn't expect, hopefully just somewhere else on the bench.

I choose dense wood instead of glass, though. It doesn't flex and you can put rubber feet on the bottom (which you could do with glass), but just as importantly, it gives you some room under the iron when you're working, which is nice to have. (and the mass to not have the stone flying all over the place).

I glued my glasstones to a piece of sealed wood, too, to make for more mass and give some elevation to the stone. It just works so much nicer that way. I couldn't stand using the glasstone on a little non-skid mat. It felt like I was trying to sharpen an iron on a playing card.

It'll be interesting to see what schtoo concludes on his tests about the glasstones and consumption rate vs. pros. I have seen several things typed where people have mentioned that they are going through 1k stones, and even some folks selling them basically calling them a consumable that you buy ever few years. I think that's unaccpetable for their cost. I would be surprised if in the end, schtoo comes up with a lot less glasstone consumed than pro stone in his test.

Not trying to stir the pot or anything, just noticed when i started to buy natural stones how much nicer the tall heavy ones are to use than a similar grit and hardness stone that is not as big.

[John Coloccia]

I do think my glassstones appears to wear slower than my Norton. What I DON'T like about them is that they're easy to damage if you dig in with an edge. Of course, the one that doesn't seem to wear at all is my Spyderco ultra-fine. It was flat 6 months ago when I bought it, and it's still flat now.

Who's schtoo?

[James White]

Dave and others,

When it comes the 15k stone. Do you think that stone consumption should be a factor when choosing between the glass and pro. I know the coarser stones get consumed more rapidly (but they cost less to replace). I would think that at the 15k level the wear should not be an issue.

I only ask as. I am fortunate to have a local Woodcraft. Though prices may be higher than some vendors. I like to patronize them when it makes sense. That said if the Pro stone in the 15K model is the better choice for me. I will leave my patronizing of the local shop for other purchases. So if the difference is negligible I would like to get the stone at my local Woodcraft.

Anyone please feel free to comment. I know some feel strong about patronizing local shops. But for me I like to do it only when it makes sense.

James

[James White]

Are you not concerned that the moisture content of the wood will change? This could lead to you stone being broken. I know you said you sealed the wood. But If I am not mistaken. There is no amount of sealing that will completely stop a change in MC.

James


Epoxy, any epoxy is fine.

I choose dense wood instead of glass, though. It doesn't flex and you can put rubber feet on the bottom (which you could do with glass), but just as importantly, it gives you some room under the iron when you're working, which is nice to have. (and the mass to not have the stone flying all over the place).

[David Weaver]

I've had about six stones on wood, some of them for four years and no issue. I run them under water freely.

Four four of them are on quartersawn kingwood, which I think is unlikely to move much, one on cocobolo that is close to QS, and one on just a flatsawn piece of walnut. Only the walnut has any finish on it (shellac)

Those were chosen by design. I think any quartersawn wood is fine, and walnut is well behaved with moisture changes.

If there's any question, any piece that is dead quartersawn is fine as any contraction would have effect on the thickness of the wood, but not the flatness.

[Don Dorn]

I wouldn't replace a Norton 8K with a Shapton. There's no reason to. The Norton 8000 only requires a spritz of water, no soaking, so the convenience factor is there.

Personally, for under 8000 I use only diamond plates. They're just more convenient.

That's my method too. I use Cosmans method but my medium stone is a 600 DMT which gives me the first bevel and a burr in a hurry. Then, I just spritz the 8000 and put the tertiary bevel on, wipe the back off and get back to work with a very sharp iron or chisel.

[David Weaver]

John, you are right, all of the shaptons definitely wear slower than any of the clay matrix stones, nortons, kings, whatever. I don't know how a 25mm clay stone compares to a 5mm glasstone in life expectancy.

James - if you have a fine hone (e.g., 300+ grit) to keep the surface of the finish glasstone flat, it should definitely last a long time. How long, I don't know. I am in the camp of the pros, because I couldn't find anything the glasstones cut better, and pros can be found for less than the cost of a glasstone. That, and the fact that they are 3x as thick means they'll last a lot longer. In reality, you'll probably end up with the new whiz-bang finish stone some years down the road and not wear out the polish stones. I'll bet most hobby woodworkers never do (i haven't worn one out yet).

It is a lot more realistic, though, that you'll be buying a new 1k stone. They don't wear as fast as a clay stone, but you'll notice after you flatten a new iron or chisel on one that you have to work a good bit of it to get the "tire marks" off of it.

It's an issue of "more for the same price has to be better" to me.

[James White]

and pros can be found for less than the cost of a glasstone.

Where? The 16k glass is $112 at the moment. But Woodcraft will be having 10% off next weekend.

James

[John Coloccia]

It is a lot more realistic, though, that you'll be buying a new 1k stone. They don't wear as fast as a clay stone, but you'll notice after you flatten a new iron or chisel on one that you have to work a good bit of it to get the "tire marks" off of it.

It's an issue of "more for the same price has to be better" to me.

This is exactly why I'm DMT, Tormek, Worksharp, etc for under 8000k. More than even the soaking issue, which isn't that big of a deal, the lower grit stones wear so quickly that they're very inconvenient to use IMHO. How low do you go with your stones?

[David Weaver]

1000. anything below that is diamonds.

A 1000 grit shapton isn't nearly as big of a nuisance as a 1000 grit baked clay stone, and it still feels like a stone. I do use diamonds (hones and loose) a fair amount at the 1000 grit level, though. I like the way they cut really hard steels.

[Jon van der Linden]

Why keep your stones in water? You're actively causing the problem you don't like (btw, with natural stones they'd disintegrate if you did that and disappear!)

The stones you have sound perfectly good, the only thing to add would be the 16k. There's no reason at all to duplicate unless you're dissatisfied with the results off a particular stone.

[James White]

Because If I want to sharpen. I have to go get fresh water. Add the stones and wait ten minutes. That tends to lead to using tools that are not sharp because, you do not want to go get water and wait for the stones to soak.

James


Why keep your stones in water? You're actively causing the problem you don't like (btw, with natural stones they'd disintegrate if you did that and disappear!)

The stones you have sound perfectly good, the only thing to add would be the 16k. There's no reason at all to duplicate unless you're dissatisfied with the results off a particular stone.

[Sam Takeuchi]

If anything, Norton 8000 stone is a 3 micron stone while Shapton Pro is a 1.84 micron stone. Shaptons don't need to be soaked either, so whatever works for you. If you are happy with Norton, I don't think you need to switch anything especially if you are following it up with finer stone.

[James White]

Sam,

I would have to say. That the Norton takes me almost to were I want to be. I can tell there is room for improvement on the edge I get. If what you say below is correct the 8000 Shapton may be just the ticket.

I am not sure though. I don't come over to the Neander forum enough to know. How many of you take your planes and chisels over the 8k mark? Is there a definite difference? Or is it like $5,000 speaker cables. Were only those with a "golden ear" can tell the difference?


If anything, Norton 8000 stone is a 3 micron stone while Shapton Pro is a 1.84 micron stone. Shaptons don't need to be soaked either, so whatever works for you. If you are happy with Norton, I don't think you need to switch anything especially if you are following it up with finer stone.

[Sam Takeuchi]

Most of retailers and sites list Norton 8000 waterstone as 3 micron stone, so far, the only exception is Tools for Working Wood which list Norton 8000 stone as 1.2 micron here (http://www.toolsforworkingwood.com/Merchant/merchant.mvc?Screen=PROD&Store_Code=toolshop&Product_Code=NO-WAT.XX&Category_Code=&Search=norton). At the same time, TFWW has a chart (http://www.toolsforworkingwood.com/blogimg/OilStoneWaterstone%20Sharpening%20Systems%20Flyer. pdf) saying otherwise. So I don't know if they have a different Norton 8000 or not.

As for Shaptons, Pro and Glass should have about the same grit size for the comparable grit number. This file (http://www.shapton.co.jp/GlassSeries_2008_07_01_ver1.pdf) is in Japanese, but it doesn't really matter. Go to page 3, those two stones in the middle with number 8000 on them, that's Glass 8000 stones (but different formulations) and right below it, 1.84 is the grit size in micron.

Shapton Pro 8000 stone is fine for the most part. There are some steels they don't get along with, one being M2 steel blades and other 'gummy' blades. At least in my experience anyway. For high carbon steel blades, including A2, they work fine. Shapton Pro 8000 produces perfectly usable edge, but one of the characteristics of Shapton Pro stones is that they leave visible scratches. They don't cause problems, though, but if you are particular about how blade shouldn't have scratches, it might bother you. In my experience, there is no premature edge failure or dulling from it, so consider it a cosmetic issue.

[James White]

Sam,

Thank you for the information. I found an explanation for the two different grit sizes on the TFWW site.

http://www.toolsforworkingwood.com/Merchant/merchant.mvc?Screen=NEXT&StoreCode=toolstore&nextpage=/extra/blogpage.html&BlogID=263

James

[Sam Takeuchi]

My highest stone is Shapton Pro 12000 (I think it's the same stone marketed in the US as 15000). Compare to 8000, difference is there, but it's a lot more subtle than the difference between 5000 and 8000 stones. Whether it's worth it going over the 8000 stone, I don't know. I think it's more of comfort issue, because I know 8000 stone will be perfectly adequate and even produce satisfactory wood surface, I feel more satisfied finishing up blades on my 12000 stone. Many people are perfectly happy with 8000, so it's really up to you. I don't think you'll be disappointed either way.

[Sam Takeuchi]

Good find. I didn't see that entry (I only had a link to the file). I can understand particles breaking down and so on, but I don't know where 1.2 micron grit size come from, though. I would be interested to know. I do like data when claims are made.

But if you feel that Norton 8000 isn't getting you the edge you think you should be getting from 8000 stone, then probably you should look into other stones. I do recommend Shaptons since they are predictably consistent and simply good stones (doesn't mean they are the best, though). I use them and get great result from them, too. But like I said, if you are going to use finer stone, I don't think you need to be too concerned here. Alternatively you can get 0.5 micron honing compound and strop instead of using a 16000 stone. You can get a stick of green honing compound for as little as $7 ~ 10, that should serve you just as well.

[Stuart Tierney]

Sam,

I would have to say. That the Norton takes me almost to were I want to be. I can tell there is room for improvement on the edge I get. If what you say below is correct the 8000 Shapton may be just the ticket.

I am not sure though. I don't come over to the Neander forum enough to know. How many of you take your planes and chisels over the 8k mark? Is there a definite difference? Or is it like $5,000 speaker cables. Were only those with a "golden ear" can tell the difference?

I don't use Shapton, I have my reasons and you prolly don't want to hear them here.


I take chisels to #6000 for actually using, #13000 if I need to put someone in their place. Plane irons, #10000 or #13000 depending on whether the steel is compatible and whether the work is compatible.

But, grits aint grits...

When I say #6000 here, it's more like an #8000 Shapton. #10000 is more like what the #12000/15000 is like and the #13000 is equivalent to a Shapton #20000, but only in grit. In actual use, what I use is generally more friendly and a ship load more economical. I expect that I might eventually need to replace some of these stones, but I won't have any dark hair left (I'm keeping hair, but going grey!) and by that time, there may be something different to use.


In theory, yes there's a difference. In practise, maybe. As far as 'sharp'...

You know the 'shave hair off yer arm' test? A good white steel chisel taken all the way with the 13K doesn't actually do that well in that test. It starts taking away the upper layer of skin as well, but does not leave red welts in the process. It's so far beyond 'hair popping' it's nuts, and for a chisel pointless, nay, dangerous.

If what you're getting edge wise is doing what you want it to do and you have no desire to 'make it better', then leave it the heck alone and be happy.


I think I'm buying myself more work than I have time for again with this grit stuff...

[James White]

Stuart,

Thank you for sharing your experience. I find it very interesting. Especialy regarding the different treatment of chisels and plane irons. I must admit it is with the plane irons that I seek improvement. Especially regarding tear out and edge life.

"I don't use Shapton, I have my reasons and you prolly don't want to hear them here."

I don't know about others. But I would like to hear anything you would like to say. As long as you are polite. I should see no reason why you should hold back your opinion.

James

[Stuart Tierney]

Stuart,

"I don't use Shapton, I have my reasons and you prolly don't want to hear them here."

I don't know about others. But I would like to hear anything you would like to say. As long as you are polite. I should see no reason why you should hold back your opinion.

James

Hi James,

It's complicated.

One day I'll point out all the reasons why I am universally unimpressed with Shapton stones as a user, but at the same time have no qualms at all selling as many as I can as quickly as I can.

But not right now. I have too many things going on as it is, than to start a brushfire there as well.


And I'm waiting for the right time...

Stu.

[James White]

Hi James,

It's complicated.

One day I'll point out all the reasons why I am universally unimpressed with Shapton stones as a user, but at the same time have no qualms at all selling as many as I can as quickly as I can.

But not right now. I have too many things going on as it is, than to start a brushfire there as well.


And I'm waiting for the right time...

Stu.

I understand. Thank you.

James

[Tri Hoang]

Grit size of the Norton 8K is theoretically smaller than the Shapton 8K's. There is little difference in the end result except the Shapton cuts a little faster. I'm using Shapton Pro 1.5K, 5K and 12K and have been happy with them. I think after most 8K stones, the curve of diminishing return is pretty steep and techniques become more important.

[john brenton]

16k? Isn't that a bit of overkill though? I don't think that anything beyond 8k and a clean leather stropping really makes that much sense. It's just my opinion and I don't mean to contradict anyone...but if you reaaaaaaaally wanted that higher polish a balsa strop (or leather...whatever) with some high mesh diamond paste would be a much more sensible option.

[David Weaver]

The 16k stone more or less takes the place of a strop.

Stu may not like the shaptons a whole lot, but I like them .... a whole lot. the only thing they don't do well on is steels beyond A2, but I would rather put those high speed steels to a belt grinder and a powered compound impregnated wheel or belt than sharpen them by hand, anyway. HSS off of a chromium oxide powered hard strop is ...well, as sharp as HSS gets.

Someone's got to make a better no-soak stone before I go away from the shaptons. I just spent the morning going through my super blue and special cutting steel planes, and the shaptons blitzed through all of them. No flattening (well, you shouldn't have to do much of that sharpening japanese plane irons, anyway). I don't know how the special blue steels compare to A2, but they feel like a slightly harder version of the same - they make my natural stones huff a little. They're certainly tougher to sharpen than inukubi steel.

if you're using a lot of high carbon steel and A2, the shaptons are great. It pays to shop around, though - it pays a lot. There are japan market 12ks floating around for $79-$85, compared to the cheapest pro 15k (same stone I think) I saw in the us for $141. It's a bit disappointing to see shapton allow those prices to be charged for us pro stones. I guess they want to sell the glasstones in the US.

[David Weaver]

john, I think for HSS, the cheapest route to go is some strip steel and $20 worth of 100,000 grit diamonds. Some ruler trick action and a honing guide to make a microbevel, and you'd have an alarmingly sharp edge.

I still like power better, it takes less than a minute to bring a cambered HSS iron from highly worn to alarming. And that cambered iron can do the initial preparation of a several dirty rough sawn boards before you have to go back and do the same 30 second routine again.